Massive transfusion triggers in severe trauma
Scoping review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2574.3102Keywords:
Blood Coagulation Disorders, Wounds and Injuries, Blood Transfusion, Resuscitation, Emergency Medical ServiceAbstract
Objective: to identify the predictive variables or the massive transfusion triggers in severely traumatized patients through the existing scales. Method: a review of the literature was carried out using the Scoping Review method across the electronic databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, LILACS, the Cochrane and IBECS libraries, and the Google Scholar search tool. Results: in total, 578 articles were identified in the search and the 36 articles published in the last ten years were included, of which 29 were original articles and 7 review articles. From the analysis, scales for massive transfusion and their predictive triggers were examined. Conclusion: the absence of universal criteria regarding the massive transfusion triggers in traumatized patients has led to the development of different scales, and the studies on their validation are considered relevant for the studies about when to initiate this strategy.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
