Comparison of restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies on clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department

absolute indications [12,15].Therefore, within the framework of patient blood management (PBM), the primary goals include prevention of anemia, preservation of red cell mass, maintenance of hemostasis, and avoidance of unnecessary transfusions [16][17][18].The World Health Organization defines anemia as a hemoglobin (Hb) level < 13 g/dL in men, < 12 g/dL in women, and < 11 g/dL in pregnant women [19].However, in clinically stable patients, a transfusion threshold of 7 g/ dL is commonly recommended and supported by multiple clinical guidelines [20][21][22][23].Adverse effects associated with transfusion include hemolytic reactions, alloimmunization, infection risk, immunomodulation, and increased mortality, highlighting the importance of careful decision-making [13-15, 18, 24].Currently, the use of blood components such as packed red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma, and platelets instead of whole blood aims to improve transfusion safety [18].In patients with UGI bleeding, transfusion strategies are generally categorized into two main approaches: restrictive and liberal.The restrictive strategy typically recommends transfusion when Hb levels fall below 7 g/dL, whereas the liberal strategy advocates initiating transfusion at Hb levels of 9-10 g/dL [20, 21,23].In a multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted by Villanueva et al., the restrictive strategy was reported to be superior to the liberal approach in terms of mortality, rebleeding rates, and complications [25,26].Similarly, Cochrane reviews and observational studies have demonstrated that restrictive transfusion strategies are at least as safe as liberal strategies and may even be more advantageous in certain clinical scenarios [23,24,26,27].Conversely, some evidence suggests that liberal transfusion, particularly in variceal bleeding associated with portal hypertension, may increase portal pressure and consequently elevate the risk of rebleeding [12,28,29].Feasibility studies such as TRIGGER have shown that liberal transfusion

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)
Published
2026-03-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-026-04318-x
Primary Topic
Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies on clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department

Suna Eraybar, Evren Dal
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)
Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
article

Comparison of restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies on clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department

Suna Eraybar, Evren Dal
article en

Abstract

absolute indications [12,15].Therefore, within the framework of patient blood management (PBM), the primary goals include prevention of anemia, preservation of red cell mass, maintenance of hemostasis, and avoidance of unnecessary transfusions [16][17][18].The World Health Organization defines anemia as a hemoglobin (Hb) level < 13 g/dL in men, < 12 g/dL in women, and < 11 g/dL in pregnant women [19].However, in clinically stable patients, a transfusion threshold of 7 g/ dL is commonly recommended and supported by multiple clinical guidelines [20][21][22][23].Adverse effects associated with transfusion include hemolytic reactions, alloimmunization, infection risk, immunomodulation, and increased mortality, highlighting the importance of careful decision-making [13-15, 18, 24].Currently, the use of blood components such as packed red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma, and platelets instead of whole blood aims to improve transfusion safety [18].In patients with UGI bleeding, transfusion strategies are generally categorized into two main approaches: restrictive and liberal.The restrictive strategy typically recommends transfusion when Hb levels fall below 7 g/dL, whereas the liberal strategy advocates initiating transfusion at Hb levels of 9-10 g/dL [20, 21,23].In a multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted by Villanueva et al., the restrictive strategy was reported to be superior to the liberal approach in terms of mortality, rebleeding rates, and complications [25,26].Similarly, Cochrane reviews and observational studies have demonstrated that restrictive transfusion strategies are at least as safe as liberal strategies and may even be more advantageous in certain clinical scenarios [23,24,26,27].Conversely, some evidence suggests that liberal transfusion, particularly in variceal bleeding associated with portal hypertension, may increase portal pressure and consequently elevate the risk of rebleeding [12,28,29].Feasibility studies such as TRIGGER have shown that liberal transfusion

Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)
Bursa Technical University (TR), Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi (TR), S.B.Ü. Bursa Yüksek İhtisas Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi (TR)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
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.