The necessary and the unnecessary transfusion: a critical review of reported appropriateness rates and criteria for red cell transfusions

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the criteria for assessing the appropriateness of red cell transfusions. The data were obtained by a computer search of all English-language literature from 1966 to October 1992. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Nine studies were selected, which dated from 1986 to 1989 and employed explicit criteria evaluating the appropriateness of red cell transfusion in adults. The following data were abstracted from all studies: study design, timing, location, criteria for evaluating appropriateness, and rate of appropriate or inappropriate transfusions. RESULTS: Five studies evaluated transfusion appropriateness. Appropriateness rates ranged from 88 to 99 percent in three studies, and inappropriateness rates ranged from 0.3 to 57.3 percent in two studies. Four studies evaluated transfusion inappropriateness and reported inappropriateness rates of 18 to 55 percent. Substantial variation was found in the criteria for an appropriate or an inappropriate transfusion. Appropriateness rates did not depend upon characteristics of the study design, location, or timing of data collection. Restrictiveness in the criteria used to determine appropriateness and the use of additional implicit evaluation after an initial explicit review affected appropriateness rates. CONCLUSION: In the 1980s, high rates of inappropriate transfusion and low rates of appropriate transfusion were still reported. Appropriateness rates varied widely, in part because of marked variation in the criteria for an appropriate transfusion. Newly derived standards for an appropriate red cell transfusion, published in 1992, appear to provide a simple and objective means of evaluating the appropriateness of a transfusion. Appropriateness rates resulting from the application of these new standards have not yet been determined.     

Treatment of AL Amyloidosis: Mayo Stratification of Myeloma and Risk-Adapted Therapy (mSMART) Consensus Statement 2020 Update

Immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a clonal plasma cell disorder leading to progressive and life-threatening organ failure. The heart and the kidneys are the most commonly involved organs, but almost any organ can be involved. Because of the nonspecific presentation, diagnosis delay is common, and many patients are diagnosed with advanced organ failure. In the era of effective therapies and improved outcomes for patients with AL amyloidosis, the importance of early recognition is further enhanced as the ability to reverse organ dysfunction is limited in those with a profound organ failure. As AL amyloidosis is an uncommon disorder and given patients’ frailty and high early death rate, management of this complex condition is challenging. The treatment of AL amyloidosis is based on various anti–plasma cell therapies. These therapies are borrowed and customized from the treatment of multiple myeloma, a more common disorder. However, a growing number of phase 2/3 studies dedicated to the AL amyloidosis population are being performed, making treatment decisions more evidence-based. Supportive care is an integral part of management of AL amyloidosis because of the inherent organ dysfunction, limiting the delivery of effective therapy. This extensive review brings an updated summary on the management of AL amyloidosis, sectioned into the 3 pillars for survival improvement: early disease recognition, anti–plasma cell therapy, and supportive care.