Prehospital whole blood transfusion in traumatic hemorrhagic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

InjurySep 23, 2026 (epub)

Marcelo Augusto Fontenelle Ribeiro Junior, Rafael Dib Possiedi, Leticia Stefani Pacheco et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared prehospital whole blood (WB) with standard care in adults with traumatic hemorrhagic shock, pooling three randomised trials and three comparative cohort studies. Across 4040 patients, WB was not associated with lower 24-hour mortality (RR 1.00; P = 0.98) or 28/30-day mortality (RR 1.09; P = 0.30); no differences were found in 6-hour or in-hospital mortality. WB was associated with fewer red blood cell transfusions within 24 hours of hospital arrival, but this secondary result was not robust in sensitivity analysis. Evidence certainty ranged from very low to moderate.

Key findings

  • Across 4040 patients, 24-hour mortality did not differ significantly with WB versus standard care (RR 1.00; P = 0.98).
  • There was no significant difference in 28/30-day mortality (RR 1.09; P = 0.30), 6-hour mortality, or in-hospital mortality.
  • WB was associated with reduced red blood cell requirements within 24 h of hospital arrival (MD -0.97; P = 0.03), but this signal lost significance in sensitivity analysis.
  • No significant differences were found in ARDS, stroke, or thrombotic events; estimates for rare events were imprecise.

Why it matters

Prehospital WB is intended to support resuscitation before hospital arrival, but this synthesis found no evidence of improved short- or longer-term survival compared with standard care. The possible reduction in subsequent red blood cell use may be relevant to transfusion planning, yet its sensitivity to study weighting and reliance on observational cohorts make that finding uncertain.

What to keep in mind

Evidence certainty ranged from very low to moderate. The red blood cell transfusion finding was sensitive to individual study weight and driven primarily by observational cohorts at serious risk of bias; estimates for rare safety events were imprecise.

Source

Published in Injury. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Emergency Medicine

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.