↓ Skip to main content

Blood transfusions increase circulating plasma free hemoglobin levels and plasma nitric oxide consumption: a prospective observational pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Blood transfusions increase circulating plasma free hemoglobin levels and plasma nitric oxide consumption: a prospective observational pilot study
Published in
Critical Care, May 2012
DOI 10.1186/cc11359
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iris C Vermeulen Windsant, Norbert CJ de Wit, Jonas TC Sertorio, Erik AM Beckers, Jose E Tanus-Santos, Michael J Jacobs, Wim A Buurman

Abstract

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: The increasing number of reports on the relation between transfusion of stored red blood cells (RBCs) and adverse patient outcome has sparked an intense debate on the benefits and risks of blood transfusions. Meanwhile, the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying this postulated relation remain unclear. The development of hemolysis during storage might contribute to this mechanism by release of free hemoglobin (fHb), a potent nitric oxide (NO) scavenger, which may impair vasodilation and microcirculatory perfusion after transfusion. The objective of this prospective observational pilot study was to establish whether RBC transfusion results in increased circulating fHb levels and plasma NO consumption. In addition, the relation between increased fHb values and circulating haptoglobin, its natural scavenger, was studied. METHODS: Thirty patients electively received 1 stored packed RBC unit (n = 8) or 2 stored packed RBC units (n = 22). Blood samples were drawn to analyze plasma levels of fHb, haptoglobin, and NO consumption prior to transfusion, and 15, 30, 60 and 120 minutes and 24 hours after transfusion. Differences were compared using Pearson's chi-square test or Fisher's exact test for dichotomous variables, or an independent-sample t test or Mann-Whitney U test for continuous data. Continuous, multiple-timepoint data were analyzed using repeated one-way analysis of variance or the Kruskall-Wallis test. Correlations were analyzed using Spearman or Pearson correlation. RESULTS: Storage duration correlated significantly with fHb concentrations and NO consumption within the storage medium (r = 0.51, P < 0.001 and r = 0.62, P = 0.002). fHb also significantly correlated with NO consumption directly (r = 0.61, P = 0.002). Transfusion of 2 RBC units significantly increased circulating fHb and NO consumption in the recipient (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively), in contrast to transfusion of 1 stored RBC unit. Storage duration of the blood products did not correlate with changes in fHb and NO consumption in the recipient. In contrast, pre-transfusion recipient plasma haptoglobin levels inversely influenced post-transfusion fHb concentrations. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that RBC transfusion can significantly increase post-transfusion plasma fHb levels and plasma NO consumption in the recipient. This finding may contribute to the potential pathophysiological mechanism underlying the much-discussed adverse relation between blood transfusions and patient outcome. This observation may be of particular importance for patients with substantial transfusion requirements.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
France 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 69 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Master 11 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Other 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 49%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 13 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2015.
All research outputs
#7,355,485
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,041
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,688
of 178,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#31
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 178,354 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.