Prediction of massive transfusion with the Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT) score at Canadian level I trauma centers. Issue 1 (January 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: D'Souza, Karan; Norman, Mathew; Greene, Adam; Finney, Colby J.F.; Yan, Matthew T.S.; Trudeau, Jacqueline D.; Wong, Michelle P.; Shih, Andrew; Dawe, Philip
• Is Part Of: Injury. Volume 54:Issue 1(2023)
• Page Start: 19
• Page End: 24
• Publication Date: 2023-01
• Subjects: Massive transfusion -- Hemorrhage -- Trauma -- Wound and injuries -- Predictive score; Wounds and injuries -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Accidents -- Periodicals; Wounds and Injuries -- surgery -- Periodicals; Lésions et blessures -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 617.1
• DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.09.022
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-1383

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Early damage control resuscitation and massive transfusion (MT) protocol activations improve outcomes in trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock, where scores to guide MT prediction are used including: the Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC), Shock Index (SI), and Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT) scores. Our aim was to validate the RABT score in patients from two level I trauma centers in Canada. Methods: A retrospective review of adult patients meeting trauma team activation criteria receiving >1 unit of red blood cells (RBCs) within 24 h of admission, from 2015 to 2020, was conducted. A RABT score ≥ 2, ABC score ≥ 2, and Shock Index (SI) ≥ 1 was used to predict MT using both research (≥10 RBCs in 24 h) and clinical (≥3 RBCs in 3 h) definitions. Scores were assessed and compared using sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC). Results: We analyzed 514 patients with a mean age of 44.4 (19.2) years and a median injury severity score of 29 [18–38]. For both MT definitions, the RABT score trended towards higher sensitivity and lower specificity compared to ABC score and SI. For both research and clinical definitions of MT, the AUROC for the RABT score was not significantly higher (Research - RABT: 0.673 [0.610–0.735], ABC: 0.642 [0.551–0.734], SI 0.691 [0.625–0.757]; Clinical - RABT: 0.653 [0.608–0.698], ABC: 0.646 [0.600–0.691], SI 0.610 [0.559–0.660]). Conclusion: The RABT score is a valid tool for predicting the need for MTPs, performing similarly with a trend towards higher sensitivity when compared to the ABC score and SI.