Whole Blood Versus Conventional Blood Component Massive Transfusion Protocol Therapy in Civilian Trauma Patients

Abstract

Background Military data demonstrating an improved survival rate with whole blood (WB) have led to a shift toward the use of WB in civilian trauma. The purpose of this study is to compare a low-titer group O WB (LTOWB) massive transfusion protocol (MTP) to conventional blood component therapy (BCT) MTP in civilian trauma patients. Methods Trauma patients 15 years or older who had MTP activations from February 2019 to December 2020 were included. Patients with a LTOWB MTP activation were compared to BCT MTP patients from a historic cohort. Results 299 patients were identified, 169 received LTOWB and 130 received BCT. There were no differences in age, gender, or injury type. The Injury Severity Score was higher in the BCT group (27 vs 25, P = .006). The LTOWB group had a longer transport time (33 min vs 26 min, P < .001) and a lower arrival temperature (35.8 vs 36.1, P < .001). Other hemodynamic parameters were similar between the groups. The LTOWB group had a lower in-hospital mortality rate compared to the BCT group (19.5% vs 30.0%, P = .035). There were no differences in total transfusion volumes at 4 hours and 24 hours. No differences were seen in transfusion reactions or hospital complications. Multivariable logistic regression identified ISS, age, and 24-hour transfusion volume as predictors of mortality. Discussion Resuscitating severely injured trauma patient with LTOWB is safe and may be associated with an improved survival.