Published in

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Anesthesiology, 3(116), p. 716-728, 2012

DOI: 10.1097/aln.0b013e318245c47b

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Survey of Anesthesiology, 5(56), p. 215-216, 2012

DOI: 10.1097/01.sa.0000418861.72271.97

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Prevalence of Survivor Bias in Observational Studies on Fresh Frozen Plasma

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Observational studies on transfusion in trauma comparing high versus low plasma:erythrocyte ratio were prone to survivor bias because plasma administration typically started later than erythrocytes. Therefore, early deaths were categorized in the low plasma:erythrocyte group, whereas early survivors had a higher chance of receiving a higher ratio. When early deaths were excluded, however, a bias against higher ratio can be created. Survivor bias could be reduced by performing before-and-after studies or treating the plasma:erythrocyte ratio as a time-dependent covariate.We reviewed 26 studies on blood ratios in trauma. Fifteen of the studies were survivor bias-unlikely or biased against higher ratio; among them, 10 showed an association between higher ratio and improved survival, and five did not. Eleven studies that were judged survivor bias-prone favoring higher ratio suggested that a higher ratio was superior.Without randomized controlled trials controlling for survivor bias, the current available evidence supporting higher plasma:erythrocyte resuscitation is inconclusive.