Author
Listed:
- Tilendra Choudhary
- Geoffrey Smith
- John D Roback
- Ravi M Patel
- Cassandra D Josephson
- Rishikesan Kamaleswaran
Abstract
Identifying critically ill patients who are likely to improve their respiratory physiology following RBC transfusion is dynamic and difficult. Current decision tools are over-reliant on hemoglobin transfusion thresholds, without considering respiratory measures that may reflect physiologic effects of anemia and functional responses to RBC transfusion. Further, routine clinical measures to determine transfusion efficacy beyond hemoglobin increment are lacking to identify patients as responders or non-responders. We present a two-center retrospective cohort study aiming to determine a potential biomarker to assess the physiologic response of RBC transfusion for non-traumatic ICU patients. The study was performed with 13,274 eligible patients at the first center. Another 3,757 from the second center were used as a validation population. We introduced a comparative analysis of two respiratory measures, SpO2 and SpO2/FiO2 (SF) ratio, in addition to hemoglobin, to assess individual patient responses to RBC transfusion. A statistical study was performed to compare these markers before and after the transfusion interval. Based on quantitative statistical analyses, we found SF ratio to be a more effective biomarker than hemoglobin alone for revealing RBC transfusion efficacy. There existed an inverse correlation between pre-transfusion SF and transfusion efficacy. The results were consistent across both centers, revealing generalizability. With the SF data from both the centers, we also developed a random forest-based regression model that significantly evaluated the level of transfusion effectiveness (p
Suggested Citation
Tilendra Choudhary & Geoffrey Smith & John D Roback & Ravi M Patel & Cassandra D Josephson & Rishikesan Kamaleswaran, 2025.
"SpO2/FiO2 ratio as a better metric for assessment of RBC transfusion effectiveness in non-traumatic critically ill patients with physiologic derangements,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(7), pages 1-12, July.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0327537
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0327537
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0327537. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.