A liberal blood transfusion strategy is safe in patients with myocardial infarction, anemia, and heart failure: lessons from MINT

Abstract Background In patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) and anemia, the Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion (MINT) trial found a trend toward increased 30-day death or recurrent MI with a restrictive compared with a liberal blood transfusion strategy. Patients with and without heart failure (HF) may respond differently to blood transfusion. Purpose To characterize the effects of restrictive vs. liberal transfusion strategies on clinical outcomes in patients with MI and anemia with and without baseline HF. Methods In the MINT trial, 3504 patients with MI and hemoglobin <10 g/dL were randomized to restrictive (7-8 g/dL) or liberal (10 g/dL) transfusion thresholds. We compared outcomes between patients with and without baseline HF, defined as any history of HF, acute HF, or baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <45%. Outcomes included death or incident HF, death or recurrent MI, death, and incident HF, all at 30 days. Results Compared with patients without baseline HF (n=1633), patients with baseline HF (overall n=1871 (history of HF n=1066, acute HF n=780, LVEF <45% n= 1099) were older, more frequently male and Black, and had higher rates of prior PCI, diabetes, and hypertension. In the restrictive strategy, patients with and without baseline HF received an average of 0.63 and 0.80 units of blood and had a median LOS of 6 and 4 days, respectively. In the liberal strategy, patients with and without baseline HF received an average of 2.44 and 2.49 units of blood and had a median LOS of 5 and 4 days, respectively. Patients with baseline HF had higher rates of death or incident HF (18.0% vs. 10.0%, risk ratio [RR]=1.79 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.50-2.13]), death or recurrent MI (17.6% vs. 13.5%, RR=1.31 [95% CI 1.12-1.53]), and death (10.5% vs. 7.5%, RR 1.41 [95% CI 1.14-1.75]). Among patients with baseline HF, a restrictive transfusion strategy resulted in a trend toward an increase in death or HF and death or MI compared with a liberal transfusion strategy (Table, Figure). Among patients without baseline HF, the risk of incident HF was lower with restrictive than with liberal transfusion strategy. Conclusions Among patients with MI and anemia, a restrictive transfusion strategy resulted in a greater increase in death or HF, death or MI, and death in patients with baseline HF than in patients without baseline HF. A liberal transfusion strategy is safe for patients with MI and anemia, including those with prior or acute HF.TableFigure

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Heart Journal
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.1619
Primary Topic
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A liberal blood transfusion strategy is safe in patients with myocardial infarction, anemia, and heart failure: lessons from MINT

Jordan B. Strom, Maria M. Brooks, William J. Kostis, Claire Bouleti et al.
European Heart Journal
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
article

A liberal blood transfusion strategy is safe in patients with myocardial infarction, anemia, and heart failure: lessons from MINT

Jordan B. Strom, Maria M. Brooks, William J. Kostis, Claire Bouleti, Jeffrey L. Carson, Estêvão Lanna Figueiredo, Mikhael Torosoff, Brian J. Potter, Santaram Vallurupalli, Andrew M. Goldsweig, Brandon M. Herbert, John Hunter Alexander, Jocelyne Benatar, Thao Huynh, Daniel B. Sims
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background In patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) and anemia, the Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion (MINT) trial found a trend toward increased 30-day death or recurrent MI with a restrictive compared with a liberal blood transfusion strategy. Patients with and without heart failure (HF) may respond differently to blood transfusion. Purpose To characterize the effects of restrictive vs. liberal transfusion strategies on clinical outcomes in patients with MI and anemia with and without baseline HF. Methods In the MINT trial, 3504 patients with MI and hemoglobin <10 g/dL were randomized to restrictive (7-8 g/dL) or liberal (10 g/dL) transfusion thresholds. We compared outcomes between patients with and without baseline HF, defined as any history of HF, acute HF, or baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <45%. Outcomes included death or incident HF, death or recurrent MI, death, and incident HF, all at 30 days. Results Compared with patients without baseline HF (n=1633), patients with baseline HF (overall n=1871 (history of HF n=1066, acute HF n=780, LVEF <45% n= 1099) were older, more frequently male and Black, and had higher rates of prior PCI, diabetes, and hypertension. In the restrictive strategy, patients with and without baseline HF received an average of 0.63 and 0.80 units of blood and had a median LOS of 6 and 4 days, respectively. In the liberal strategy, patients with and without baseline HF received an average of 2.44 and 2.49 units of blood and had a median LOS of 5 and 4 days, respectively. Patients with baseline HF had higher rates of death or incident HF (18.0% vs. 10.0%, risk ratio [RR]=1.79 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.50-2.13]), death or recurrent MI (17.6% vs. 13.5%, RR=1.31 [95% CI 1.12-1.53]), and death (10.5% vs. 7.5%, RR 1.41 [95% CI 1.14-1.75]). Among patients with baseline HF, a restrictive transfusion strategy resulted in a trend toward an increase in death or HF and death or MI compared with a liberal transfusion strategy (Table, Figure). Among patients without baseline HF, the risk of incident HF was lower with restrictive than with liberal transfusion strategy. Conclusions Among patients with MI and anemia, a restrictive transfusion strategy resulted in a greater increase in death or HF, death or MI, and death in patients with baseline HF than in patients without baseline HF. A liberal transfusion strategy is safe for patients with MI and anemia, including those with prior or acute HF.TableFigure

European Heart JournalVol. 45(Supplement_1)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US), Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US), Montefiore Medical Center (US), Baystate Medical Center (US), University of Pittsburgh (US), Hadassah Medical Center (IL), Auckland City Hospital (NZ), Johnson University (US), Université de Poitiers (FR), Clinical Research Institute (US), Rutgers Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (NL), McGill University (CA), Université de Montréal (CA), Albany Medical Center Hospital (US), University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.