Neuroanesthesia & neurocritical care
Restrictive transfusion in acute brain injury: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Pooled result · Unfavorable neurological outcomeResult — go to the resultRelative risk 1.09 95 % CI 0.99–1.19Authors' conclusion
Restrictive transfusion may be resource-efficient, but current evidence does not confirm superiority over liberal strategies.
Study context
- Population
- Critically ill patients with acute brain injury
- Participants
- 2,598 patients · 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
- Comparison
- Restrictive vs liberal transfusion strategies
- Restrictiven = 1,307
- Outcome
- Neurological outcomes (unfavorable neurological outcome)
Methodological detailsrandom-effects model
- Random-effects model
Pooled result
Unfavorable neurological outcome
Relative risk
1.09
95 % CI 0.99–1.19
Restrictive vs Liberal
RR 1.09 (95 % CI 0.99–1.19)
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95 % CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| All-cause mortality | 1.021 (0.890–1.172) | |
| 0.512Relative risk (log scale) |
| Outcome | MD (95 % CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| RBC transfusions (units per patient)Significantly reduced with restrictive strategy | −2.202 ([−2.998]-[−1.406]) | |
| −4−202Difference (linear scale) |
Parts of this Brief are withheld: the automatic checks could not confirm them against the abstract.
Original publication
Restrictive transfusion in acute brain injury: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Crit Care. Published 16 October 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →