Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Sep 22;17(9):e0275126. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275126

Mortality and its associated factors in transfused patients at a tertiary hospital in Uganda

Clement D Okello 1,*, Andrew W Shih 2, Bridget Angucia 1, Noah Kiwanuka 3, Nancy Heddle 4, Jackson Orem 1, Harriet Mayanja-Kizza 5
Editor: Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka6
PMCID: PMC9499229  PMID: 36137107

Abstract

Blood transfusion is life-saving but sometimes also associated with morbidity and mortality. There is limited data on mortality in patients transfused with whole blood in sub-Saharan Africa. We described the 30-day all-cause mortality and its associated factors in patients transfused with whole blood to inform appropriate clinical intervention and research priorities to mitigate potential risks. A retrospective study was performed on purposively sampled patients transfused with whole blood at the Uganda Cancer Institute (UCI) and Mulago hospital in the year 2018. Two thousand twelve patients with a median (IQR) age of 39 (28–54) years were enrolled over a four month period. There were 1,107 (55%) females. Isolated HIV related anaemia (228, 11.3%), gynaecological cancers (208, 10.3%), unexplained anaemia (186, 9.2%), gastrointestinal cancers (148, 7.4%), and kidney disease (141, 7.0%) were the commonest diagnoses. Most patients were transfused with only one unit of blood (n = 1232, 61.2%). The 30 day all-cause mortality rate was 25.2%. Factors associated with mortality were isolated HIV related anaemia (HR 3.2, 95% CI, 2.3–4.4), liver disease (HR 3.0, 95% CI, 2.0–4.5), kidney disease (HR 2.2, 95% CI, 1.5–3.3; p<0.01), cardiovascular disease (HR 2.9, 95% CI, 1.6–5.4; p<0.01), respiratory disease (HR 3.0, 95% CI 1.8–4.9; p<0.01), diabetes mellitus (HR 4.1, 95% CI, 2.3–7.4; p<0.01) and sepsis (HR 6.2, 95% CI 3.7–10.4; p<0.01). Transfusion with additional blood was associated with survival (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7–0.9, p<0.01). In conclusion, the 30-day all-cause mortality was higher than in the general inpatients. Factors associated with mortality were isolated HIV related anaemia, kidney disease, liver disease, respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus and sepsis. Transfusion with additional blood was associated with survival. These findings require further prospective evaluation.

Background

Blood transfusion can be life-saving in many situations. However, transmission of infections like hepatitis B and C, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) [1], bacteria [2] and malaria [3], as well as immunomodulation mar this crucial intervention. The underlying disease and severity of anaemia in patients requiring transfusion may often be associated with increased morbidity and mortality [4, 5]. Anaemia and impaired immunity is associated with decreased survival and progression of the underlying disease [6]. Blood transfusion has also been associated with increased mortality [7]. Most adverse effects of blood transfusion are attributed to the donor leucocytes [8], abundant especially in non-leucoreduced whole blood. In high income countries, whole blood transfusion is reserved for patients with haemorrhagic shock [9] while transfusions in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are mainly done using whole blood [10]. A recent trial in SSA reported lower haemoglobin recovery in children transfused with packed cells than those transfused with whole blood [11].

Blood transfusion in SSA is mainly associated with cancer (33.5%), pregnancy(12.4%) and sickle cell disease (6.9%) [12]. However, limited blood supply in SSA is a major challenge [1315] to the extent that most hospital blood banks issue blood to the patients as soon as they receive the stock. Therefore, most blood transfusion in these settings are with blood that is less than 14 days old [16]. A randomized, controlled trial conducted in six hospitals in North America, Australia and Israel [17] and meta-analyses have shown a non-significant trend towards increased mortality in patients transfused with red blood cells (RBC) stored for a shorter time compared to those stored for a longer time [18, 19]. Additionally, differences in testing strategies for pathogens and processing of blood in SSA may explain a higher incidence of acute transfusion reactions and the bacterial contamination observed in the SSA than in high income countries [2, 20]. These challenges may contribute to morbidity and mortality in transfused patients in SSA.

There is, however scant data on mortality outcomes of transfusion in most SSA countries. We, therefore, undertook a study to describe the mortality and its associated factors in patients transfused with whole blood in a tertiary hospital in Uganda.

Methods

Study design and setting

This was a retrospective study conducted at the Uganda Cancer Institute (UCI) and the internal medicine unit of Mulago National Referral Hospital (MNRH). Patients from the surgical wards and obstetrics/gynaecology wards were not included. Uganda Cancer Institute is the tertiary cancer treatment facility, while MNRH is the national referral and teaching hospital, and are all part of the Mulago hospital complex, located in Kampala, the capital city of Uganda. Patients with all types of cancers including leukaemia, lymphomas and solid tumours are managed at the UCI; whereas patients with general internal medicine conditions are managed in MNRH. Blood transfusion practices at the two centres generally follow the same guidelines from the Ugandan ministry of health, which recommends blood transfusion based on the clinical condition of the patient, and especially when the haemoglobin level is <7 g/dL or 6 g/dL for patients with sickle cell anaemia. Blood components for the two hospitals are processed and provided by the Uganda Blood Transfusion Services (UBTS), Nakasero-Kampala. Every donated blood products/unit is tested for HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and syphilis, and can only be issued to the hospital once all the tested serological markers are negative. Nucleic acid test has recently been included at the UBTS to improve transfusion safety. The whole blood units provided for transfusion are preserved in citrate phosphate dextrose adenine (CPDA-1), kept under refrigerated storage at 1–6°C and are not leucoreduced. At both the UCI and MNRH, pre-transfusion testing consist of recipient’s ABO and Rhesus D blood typing, and a room temperature immediate spin cross-match–all performed using the tile method. There is no active haemovigilance system in Uganda.

Eligibility criteria

Charts of patients aged >14 years and transfused with whole blood during the months of January, April, July and October of 2018 were purposively sampled. These were quarterly months of the year chosen to account for possible seasonality in supply and transfusion practices. Blood collection is usually at its peak during the seasons when student-donors are in school. Very ill patients in the intensive care units (ICUs) were not included. Charts without demographic identifiers and date of blood transfusion were also not included. The sample size or power calculations were not done a priori.

Data collection

Data were manually abstracted from the charts using a standardized data abstraction form. Data collected were demographic information, number of blood units received, and mortality status with the date of mortality. Data collected were verified for completeness and accuracy by the principal investigator. Verified data were coded, and entered into a database using Epidata version 3.1 (Epidata association, Denmark) and cleaned to ensure accuracy before exporting to STATA Version 14 (StataCorp, USA) for analysis. Study approvals and waivers of consent were obtained from the Makerere University School of Medicine Research Ethics Committee (Ref. 2017–106) and the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (Ref. HS 2705). All patients’ information was anonymised.

Data analysis

Demographic and clinical data were reported using descriptive statistics; using mean and standard deviation for parametric data and median and interquartile range (IQR) for nonparametric data. Patients were retrospectively followed from the time of the first hospital transfusion until death in hospital, or until 30 days when they were administratively censored. Additional blood transfusion episodes were recorded during the follow up period. Patients without evidence of death in the hospital or being alive after 30 days were considered lost to follow up. The 30 day mortality rate was expressed as the ratio of the total number of patients who died within 30 days of transfusion to the total number of patients included in the study. The 30 day overall survival (OS) rate was illustrated using the Kaplan-Meier curve. Survival time was measured in days. Patients who were lost to follow up were included in the analysis and were censored on the last recorded date of review. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate the association between patient characteristics and mortality. Characteristics with p value <0.05 at univariable analysis and variables that were well known to be associated with mortality, such as the number of blood units transfused were further analysed in a multivariable model. Baseline haemoglobin levels, stages of cancers and HIV characteristics were not included since they were not consistently stated and the staging systems differed among different types of cancers. The global test for the proportional hazard assumption was met (p = 0.93). Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were generated. A two sided statistical significance was set at p<0.05.

Results

A total of 2,012 transfused patients with a median (IQR) age of 39 (28–54) years were enrolled into the study, of whom 1,107 (55%) were females. The top five common diagnoses were isolated HIV related anaemia, 228 (11.3%); gynaecological cancers, 208 (10.3%); unexplained anaemias, 186 (9.2%); gastrointestinal malignancies, 148 (7.4%); and kidney diseases, 141 (7.0%) (Table 1). Most patients received one unit of whole blood (n = 1,232, 61.2%), and this was consistent in all diagnostic categories; followed by 2 units (n = 625, 31.1%) and 3 units (n = 106, 5.3%). Only 49 (2.4%) patients received > 3 units of blood. Data on transfusion with other blood components were not abstracted.

Table 1. Baseline patient characteristics.

Diagnosis Frequency, n Percentage, %
Isolated HIV related anaemia 228 11.3
Gynaecological malignancies 208 10.3
Unexplained anaemia 186 9.2
Gastrointestinal cancers 148 7.4
Kidney disease 141 7.0
Leukaemia 136 6.8
Upper gastrointestinal bleeding 117 5.8
Liver disease 107 5.3
Lymphoma 70 3.5
Sickle cell disease 66 3.3
Respiratory disease 65 3.2
Kaposi sarcoma 63 3.1
Cardiovascular disease 50 2.5
Breast cancer 49 2.4
Soft tissue cancer 46 2.3
Diabetes mellitus 40 2.0
Sepsis 40 2.0
Malaria 39 1.9
Urological cancer 35 1.7
Central nervous system disease 28 1.4
Bone marrow failure syndrome 28 1.4
Other gastrointestinal disease 26 1.3
Soft tissue infection 22 1.1
Lung cancer 13 0.7
Venous thromboembolism 10 0.5
Other non-cancers 9 0.5
Bone tumour 9 0.5
Benign gynaecological disease 8 0.4
Bleeding disorders 6 0.3
Trauma 6 0.3
Iron deficiency anaemia 5 0.3
Malnutrition 4 0.2
Other cancers 4 0.2

Mortality rate

Of the 2,012 transfused patients enrolled in the study, 148 died on the same day of transfusion while an additional 359 patients died within 30 days of follow-up. Therefore, the 30 day all-cause mortality rate was 25.2% (507 of 2012 patients). The 30 day overall survival (OS) was 69.3% (95% CI, 66.5–72.4), (Fig 1) and the overall median survival was 328 days (47 weeks).

Fig 1. Kaplan-Meier survival estimate of transfused patients.

Fig 1

Patients with increased hazards of mortality were those with isolated HIV related anaemia (HR 3.2, 95% CI, 2.3–4.4), liver disease (HR 3.0, 95% CI, 2.0–4.5), kidney disease (HR 2.2, 95% CI, 1.5–3.3; p<0.01), cardiovascular diseases (HR 2.9, 95% CI, 1.6–5.4; p<0.01), respiratory disease (HR 3.0, 95% CI 1.8–4.9; p<0.01), diabetes mellitus (HR 4.1, 95% CI, 2.3–7.4; p<0.01) and sepsis (HR 6.2, 95% CI 3.7–10.4; p<0.01). Patients with reduced hazards of mortality were those who received additional units of blood transfusion (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7–0.9; p<0.01) (Table 2).

Table 2. Factors associated with mortality.

Characteristic Univariable analysis Multivariable analysis
HR p-value 95% CI HR p-value 95% CI
Male sex 0.8 0.02 0.7–1.0 0.9 0.41 0.8–1.1
Patient age 1.0 0.03 0.9–1.0 0.1 0.10 0.9–1.0
Units of whole blood 1.0 0.58 0.8–1.1 0.8 <0.01 0.7–0.9
Isolated HIV related anaemia 2.3 <0.01 1.8–3.1 3.2 <0.01 2.3–4.4
Gynaecological malignancies 0.6 <0.01 0.4–0.8 0.7 0.07 0.5–1.0
Unexplained anaemia 0.4 <0.01 0.2–0.8 0.7 0.23 0.4–1.3
Gastrointestinal cancers 0.6 0.01 0.4–0.9 0.8 0.16 0.5–1.1
Kidney disease 1.5 0.03 1.0–2.1 2.2 <0.01 1.5–3.3
Leukaemia 1.2 0.37 0.9–1.6 - - -
Upper gastrointestinal bleeding 0.8 0.55 0.5–1.5 - - -
Liver disease 2.1 <0.01 1.4–3.1 3.0 <0.01 1.0–4.5
Lymphoma 0.8 0.17 0.5–1.1 - - -
Sickle cell disease 0.6 0.21 0.2–1.4 - - -
Respiratory disease 2.1 <0.01 1.3–3.3 3.0 <0.01 1.8–4.9
Kaposi sarcoma 1.1 0.69 0.7–1.7 - - -
Cardiovascular disease 1.8 0.05 1.0–3.3 2.9 <0.01 1.6–5.4
Breast cancer 0.7 0.10 0.4–1.1 - - -
Soft tissue cancer 0.5 0.06 0.3–1.0 - - -
Diabetes mellitus 2.7 <0.01 1.5–4.6 4.1 <0.01 2.3–7.4
Sepsis 4.4 <0.01 2.7–7.1 6.2 <0.01 3.7–10.4
Malaria 0.4 0.19 0.1–1.6 - - -
Urological cancer 0.5 0.07 0.2–1.1 - - -
Central nervous system disease 1.9 0.08 0.9–3.8 - - -
Bone marrow failure syndrome 1.4 0.35 0.7–3.0 - - -
Other gastrointestinal disease 1.4 0.47 0.6–3.4 - - -
Soft tissue infection 0.2 0.08 0–1.2 - - -
Lung cancer 0.6 0.45 0.2–2.0 - - -
Venous thromboembolism 0.6 0.62 0.1–4.4 - - -
Other non-cancers <0.1 1 0 -. - - -
Bone tumour 2.3 0.06 1.0–5.6 - - -
Benign gynaecological disease 1.3 0.72 0.3–5.2 - - -
Bleeding disorders 1.2 0.83 0.2–8.9 - - -
Trauma 0.7 0.71 0.1–4.9 - - -
Iron deficiency anaemia <0.1 1 0 -. - - -
Malnutrition 1.3 0.79 0.2–9.4 - - -
Other cancers 0.7 0.70 0.1–4.9 - - -

NOTE: CI–Confidence Interval; HR–Hazard Ratio.

Discussion

In this retrospective study of patients transfused with whole blood in Uganda, we report a 30 day all-cause mortality rate of 25.2%. Factors associated with mortality were isolated HIV related anaemia, liver disease, kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus and sepsis. Patients in this study were from the general in-patient wards. The mortality rate in this study population was higher than the overall mortality in the general medical patients in Mulago-hospital (17.1%) [21] possibly due to the additional strain of anaemia in the study population.

The majority of patients in our study were transfused with only one unit of blood (61.2%). It was not possible to determine whether the transfusion with only one unit of blood was due to blood supply limitation or physician. If blood supply was an issue, then the mortality rate may suggest inadequate transfusion in patients who might have had severe anaemia. However, haemoglobin thresholds were not abstracted in our study. Anaemia is an independent mortality indicator in older [22] and immunocompromised patients [6]. Moreover, patients who received more blood had reduced mortality in our multivariable analysis (p<0.01).

A causal link between transfusion and mortality is difficult to determine since mortality may be associated with the underlying disease or transfusion itself. A systematic study to assess the association of red blood cell transfusion and in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to the ICU failed to identify association across studies for the number of blood units transfused [23]. Also, a meta-analysis on whole blood transfusion was not associated with in-hospital/30-day mortality in patients treated for traumatic haemorrhagic shock [24]. In the setting of massive blood transfusion, a large multicentre retrospective study in China showed lowest mortality when RBCs was transfused at a volume of 5–9 units; however, patient mortality increased with the increase in the volume of ≥10 units [25]. A similar finding was also reported in a retrospective study in the USA on 3,523 medical and surgical patients who received blood transfusion, in which mortality increased linearly over the entire dose range with a 10% increase for each 10 units of erythrocytes transfused [26].

Studies that used transfusion threshold to describe 30-day mortality have not even reported consistent results either. Patients transfused with RBCs with a baseline haemoglobin >5.0 mg/dL had more than twice the odds of mortality compared to those with haemoglobin ≤5.0 mg/dL in an emergency setting in Rwanda. However, the small number of patients with haemoglobin level ≤5.0 mg/dL was a limitation in this study [27]. In patients with cancers and septic shock, survival trend favoured those transfused at haemoglobin threshold of <9g/dL [28]. And in a systematic review by Carson et al. [29], transfusion at haemoglobin threshold of <7 – 8g/dL produced similar outcomes with that of haemoglobin 9-10g/dL.

The 30 day mortality in our study is comparable to the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) study done in Europe, where transfused patients had a mortality rate of 23% [30]. However, most centres (76%) in the SOAP study routinely used leucoreduced RBC without significant supply constraints contrary to our study. Nonetheless, most ICUs have reported lower mortality rates than our study. In a recent meta-analysis that included seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from ICUs in Europe [3133], Canada [34, 35] and Brazil [28, 36], the overall 28 day and 30 day mortality did not exceed 10%. Patients in our study were from the general inpatient wards, but the ICU type patients might have been included due to the scarcity of the ICUs in Uganda [37]. The disease severity score was not reported in our study due to the lack of routinely collected data to calculate these scores.

We observed increased mortality in patients with isolated HIV related anaemia, liver disease, kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus and sepsis. We contend that the association of mortality with the underlying disease may reflect the influence of the disease on mortality [38, 39], rather than transfusion. For example, in a large retrospective study of 50,624 patients in a tertiary hospital in Uganda, the top 5 leading causes of mortality included HIV/AIDS (44.5%), respiratory disease (37.6%), cardiovascular disease (27.8%), sepsis (9%), diabetes mellitus (6.2%) and kidney disease (2.5%) [21], a similar picture to the finding of our study.

The strength of our study is that, it is so far, the first to report the 30-day mortality rate in patients transfused with whole blood in the general medical patient population comprising of cancer and internal medicine patients in the East African region. However, we acknowledge the following weaknesses: firstly, the non-uniform coding of patients’ diagnoses and the absence of disease severity score and comorbidities. Secondly, pre-transfusion haemoglobin threshold were not reported and anaemia itself is a strong predictor of mortality. Our study is also unlikely to be generalizable to high income countries that transfuse blood components rather than whole blood.

In conclusion, our result shows the 30 day all-cause mortality in transfused patients to be higher than in the general inpatients, with increased mortality rates in patients with isolated HIV related anaemia, kidney disease, liver disease, respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus and sepsis; however, patients who received additional blood had reduced mortality rates. This finding requires further prospective evaluation.

Supporting information

S1 Data

(XLSX)

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to Irene Judith Nassozi and Vivian Bayo for their administrative assistance; Ariko Godfrey Achia, Irene Among, Florence Nantezza and Olivia Nabirye for their invaluable time in data collection.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the Uganda Cancer Institute - ADB research project. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Dellinger E.P. and Anaya D.A.. Infectious and immunologic consequences of blood transfusion. Critical Care, 2004. 8(S2): p. S18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Hume H.A., et al. Platelet transfusion therapy in sub‐Saharan Africa: bacterial contamination, recipient characteristics, and acute transfusion reactions. Transfusion, 2016. 56(8): p. 1951–1959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Murphy K.J., et al. Malaria parasitemia among blood donors in Uganda. Transfusion, 2020. 60(5): p. 955–964. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Carson J.L., et al. Effect of anaemia and cardiovascular disease on surgical mortality and morbidity. The Lancet, 1996. 348(9034): p. 1055–1060. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Carson J.L., et al. Mortality and morbidity in patients with very low postoperative Hb levels who decline blood transfusion. Transfusion, 2002. 42(7): p. 812–818. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Lundgren J.D., et al. A clinically prognostic scoring system for patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy: results from the EuroSIDA study. The Journal of infectious diseases, 2002. 185(2): p. 178–187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Chatterjee S., et al. Association of blood transfusion with increased mortality in myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis and diversity-adjusted study sequential analysis. JAMA internal medicine, 2013. 173(2): p. 132–139. doi: 10.1001/2013.jamainternmed.1001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bordin J.O., Heddle N.M., and Blajchman M.A.. Biologic effects of leukocytes present in transfused cellular blood products. 1994. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Spinella P.C., Warm fresh whole blood transfusion for severe hemorrhage: US military and potential civilian applications. Critical care medicine, 2008. 36(7): p. S340–S345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.World Health Organization. The 2016 global status report on blood safety and availability. 2017.
  • 11.George E.C., et al. Whole blood versus red cell concentrates for children with severe anaemia: a secondary analysis of the Transfusion and Treatment of African Children (TRACT) trial. The Lancet Global Health, 2022. 10(3): p. e360–e368. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00565-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Butler E.K., et al. Blood utilization at a national referral hospital in sub‐Saharan Africa. Transfusion, 2015. 55(5): p. 1058–1066. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Allain J.P., Owusu‐Ofori S., and Bates I.. Blood transfusion in sub‐Saharan Africa. Transfusion Alternatives in Transfusion Medicine, 2004. 6(1): p. 16–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Henry D., et al. Transfusion Challenges in Patients with Hematological Malignancies in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Prospective Observational Study from the Uganda Cancer Institute. Scientific Reports (Nature Publisher Group), 2020. 10(1). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lund T.C., et al. The blood supply in Sub-Saharan Africa: needs, challenges, and solutions. Transfusion and Apheresis Science, 2013. 49(3): p. 416–421. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Flegel W.A. Fresh blood for transfusion: how old is too old for red blood cell units? Blood Transfusion, 2012. 10(3): p. 247. doi: 10.2450/2012.0105-12 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Heddle N.M., et al. Effect of short-term vs. long-term blood storage on mortality after transfusion. N Engl J Med, 2016. 375: p. 1937–1945. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Chai‐Adisaksopha C., et al. Mortality outcomes in patients transfused with fresher versus older red blood cells: a meta‐analysis. Vox sanguinis, 2017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Alexander P.E., et al. Transfusion of fresher vs older red blood cells in hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Blood, 2016. 127(4): p. 400–410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Waiswa M.K., et al. Acute transfusion reactions at a national referral hospital in Uganda: a prospective study. Transfusion, 2014. 54(11): p. 2804–2810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kalyesubula R., et al. Trends of admissions and case fatality rates among medical in-patients at a tertiary hospital in Uganda; A four-year retrospective study. PloS one, 2019. 14(5): p. e0216060. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216060 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Wouters H.J., et al. Association of anemia with health-related quality of life and survival: a large population-based cohort study. haematologica, 2019. 104(3): p. 468. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Zheng Y., et al. Association of red blood cell transfusion and in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Critical Care, 2014. 18(6): p. 1–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Crowe E., et al. Whole blood transfusion versus component therapy in trauma resuscitation: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open, 2020. 1(4): p. 633–641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Yang J.C., et al. Correlation between red blood cell transfusion volume and mortality in patients with massive blood transfusion: a large multicenter retrospective study. Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2015. 9(1): p. 137–142. doi: 10.3892/etm.2014.2068 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Johnson D.J., et al. Morbidity and mortality after high-dose transfusion. Anesthesiology, 2016. 124(2): p. 387–395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Moretti K., et al. Transfusion, mortality and hemoglobin level: Associations among emergency department patients in Kigali, Rwanda. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.afjem.2020.01.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Bergamin F.S., et al. Liberal versus restrictive transfusion strategy in critically ill oncologic patients: the transfusion requirements in critically ill oncologic patients randomized controlled trial. Critical care medicine, 2017. 45(5): p. 766–773. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002283 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Carson J.L., et al. Transfusion thresholds for guiding red blood cell transfusion. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2021(12). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Vincent J.-L., et al. Are blood transfusions associated with greater mortality rates? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients study. The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, 2008. 108(1): p. 31–39. doi: 10.1097/01.anes.0000296070.75956.40 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Mazer C.D., et al. Restrictive or liberal red-cell transfusion for cardiac surgery. New England Journal of Medicine, 2017. 377(22): p. 2133–2144. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Holst L.B., et al. Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock. New England Journal of Medicine, 2014. 371(15): p. 1381–1391. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Walsh T.S., et al. Restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies for older mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized pilot trial. Critical care medicine, 2013. 41(10): p. 2354–2363. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318291cce4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Hébert P.C., et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. New England Journal of Medicine, 1999. 340(6): p. 409–417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hébert P.C., et al. Transfusion requirements in critical care: a pilot study. Jama, 1995. 273(18): p. 1439–1444. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Pinheiro de Almeida J., et al. Transfusion requirements in surgical oncology patients: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Anesthesiology, 2015. 122(1): p. 29–38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Atumanya P., et al. Assessment of the current capacity of intensive care units in Uganda; A descriptive study. Journal of critical care, 2020. 55: p. 95–99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Kengne A.P., et al. Anaemia, haemoglobin level and cause-specific mortality in people with and without diabetes. PLoS One, 2012. 7(8): p. e41875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.O’Brien M.E., et al. Anemia is an independent predictor of mortality and immunologic progression of disease among women with HIV in Tanzania. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 2005. 40(2): p. 219–225. doi: 10.1097/01.qai.0000166374.16222.a2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka

20 Jul 2022

PONE-D-22-16519Mortality and its associated factors in transfused patients at a tertiary hospital in UgandaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr Okello

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 3rd September 2022. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka, MBChB (M.D)

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. 

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Dr Clement Dove Okello

The reviewers have completed their review of you manuscript and have requested major/minor revisions. Reviewer 1 made the effort to compile all recommendations on a word document. Please attend to each revision to the best of your ability.

Looking forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Thank you.

Regards

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thank you for affording me this opportunity to review this manuscript. I attach hereto a word document containing all my comments in a tabular format. Each comment is aligned with its corresponding author's statement, and referenced using the line numbers.

Reviewer #2: The paper is relevant and adds value on the subject of whole blood transfusions.

Minor Recommendations

Background:

The paper is on whole blood transfusions yet the background is more focused on blood components transfusion. Appreciating there is not much published on whole blood transfusions, the context in which it is commonly used ( eg resuscitation and pediatrics ) could have been included in the introduction. Any papers that have compared whole blood vs blood component transfusions and their conclusions would have added more weight. The comparing of mortality rate of this paper with other published data on patients who were transfused blood components may be challenged.

Study design and setting:

Line 95- the inclusion of surgical wards/trauma would have provided a better comparison with published data

Eligibility criteria:

Line 115- seasonality in supply and transfusion practices. Elaboration on this would be of value as it is a local experience?

Data analysis:

Line 144- the exclusion of baseline hemoglobin, although mentioned as a limitation, is a crucial omission. The degree of anemia is known to be an important risk factor for mortality and a marker of underlying disease.

Mortality rate:

Line 179- the 148 patients who died on the same day of transfusion, further analysis of this group would have been of value and possibly contributed to additional risk factors

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewers comments.docx

PLoS One. 2022 Sep 22;17(9):e0275126. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275126.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


22 Aug 2022

Line 70 “…such as transmission of diseases like hepatitis B and C…” Please use the word “infections” rather than “diseases” ___Addressed and revised whole paragraph

Lines 70-71 “…human 71 immunodeficiency virus.” Please add the abbreviation “HIV” in brackets and use it henceforth.___ Addressed and updated subsequent HIV

Line 71 “…bacteria [2] and malaria [3] as well as…” Please add a comma after malaria.___ Addressed

Line 77 “…limited blood supply is a major challenge” Is this challenge limited to Sub-Saharan Africa? Or a particular country? Or a continent? Or low-to-middle income countries?____ Specified SSA in line 78

Line 79 “…most blood transfusion in these settings are with blood that is less than 14 days” Is this a good or a bad thing? ___ Addressed in the sentence beginning from line 81 “A randomized, controlled trial conducted in six hospitals in North America, Australia and Israel…”

Line 80 “A randomized, controlled trial conducted in six large hospitals in four countries…” Countries from where? SSA? Africa? Europe? A particular region? Etc. ____ Added North America, Australia and Israel

Lines 81-82 “…increased mortality in patients transfused with fresh red blood cells compared to older red blood cells” What is “fresh” red blood cells? What is “old” red blood cells? ___ Revised to red blood cells stored for a shorter time vs those store for a longer time

Lines 88-89 “We, therefore, undertook a study to describe the mortality and its associated factors in patients transfused with whole blood…” Please confirm that all your study participants received whole blood and not red cell concentrates or other individual blood products._____ Yes we sought out patients who received whole blood and not other blood components

Lines 93-94 “…study conducted at the Uganda Cancer Institute (UCI) and the internal medicine unit of…” It looks like most of your study participants were immunocompromised (HIV and/or malignancy). I would suggest you add a line or so in the background section on the risks of transfusing whole blood in such population.____ Thank you. We have revised paragraph 68-75 to capture this concern

Lines 99-100 “…tumours are treated at the UCI; whereas patients with general internal medicine conditions are taken care of in MNRH I would suggest you use the word “managed” for both “treated” and “taken care of” for uniformity.___ Addressed in lines 101 - 102

Lines 100-101 “…generally follow the same guidelines from the Ugandan ministry of health which recommends…” Please add a comma after the word “health”. ______Addressed, line 103

Line 103 “…haemoglobin level is <7 g/dL or 6 for patients with…” 6 what? Please add the units._____Addressed, line 105

Line 104 “Blood components for the two hospitals are prepared and provided…” Please use the word “processed” instead of “prepared”. _____Addressed, line 106

Lines 105-107 “Prior to delivery to the hospitals, all blood is serologically tested to be negative for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B and C, and syphilis.” Please rephrase: i.e., "Every donated blood products/ unit is tested for HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and syphilis, and can only be issued to the hospital once all the tested serological markers are negative".

Please ensure that no nucleic acid testing is performed on these units before committing yourself to only serological testing. _____Addressed

Thank you. Nucleic acid test has recently been included at the UBTS to improve transfusion safety. Lines 109 -110

Lines 110-111 “…immediate spin cross-match – all performed using the tile method which is standard of care in SSA settings” Which one is the standard of care? The time method or just the cross-match? ____Edited out the “standard of care in SSA settings” to avoid confusion

Line 131 “…median and IQR for nonparametric data” Please spell IQR in full the first time. ____Addressed, line 134

Lines 144-145 “Baseline haemoglobin levels, stages of cancers and HIV characteristics were not included since they were not consistently stated…” Baseline haemoglobin could have been a very valuable piece of information in this study. I’m not sure how readily available this information can be from the blood bank? _______We agree this was a big concern. Unfortunately, it is very challenging to again retrieve the patients’ file to obtain this information. Besides, not all files had a baseline haemoglobin as some patients were transfused on clinical grounds. It’s even harder to get them from the hospital blood banks.

Lines 151-152 “The top five common diagnoses were isolated HIV related anaemia…” Parvovirus B19 infection is very common in this group of patients, and requires treatment with IVI immunoglobulins rather than blood transfusion. Is there any information in this regard? _______There was no information on parvovirus B19

Line 153 “…unexplained anaemias, 186 (9.2)…” Please add the units for 9.2 ____Addressed, line 156

Line 154 “Most patients received 1 unit of blood…” Write “1” in words. Write “whole blood” if it is whole blood.__ Addressed, line 157

Line 209 “In this retrospective study of patients transfused with whole blood in Uganda…” Again, please confirm that all your study participants received whole blood and not red cell concentrates or other individual blood products.___ Affirmative

Line 227 “A systematic study to assess the association of red blood cell transfusion and in-hospital mortality…” You probably might want to also look at the literature about “whole blood” transfusion.____ Sentence added for whole blood on lines 232-234

Line 231 “(red blood cells, RBCs)” Please omit “red blood cells” ____Addressed, line 235

Line 250 “…all patients in our study received non-leucoreduced whole blood.” Please add a line or so in the background about the risks of transfusing “non-leucoreduced whole blood.” ___Addressed in lines 74-75

Lines 260-262 “…the underlying disease condition in our study may simply reflect the inherent influence of the specific disease entity on mortality, rather than the effect of blood transfusion.” I would suggest that the authors add in the background:

- The risks of blood transfusion.

- Advantages and disadvantages of transfusing whole blood vs RBC (leuco-depleted vs unfiltered).

- Clinical impact of anaemia in immunocomromised patients

Please add in the discussion whether your hospitals do have any “haemovigilance” committee, or any designated person who oversees the transfusion-associated reactions.

First paragraph of background, lines 68-75 has been revised to capture this concern

Thank you we have included information on haemovigilance under study setting, Line 114.

Lines 278-279 “…patients who received additional blood had reduced mortality rates.” Is it possible that “inadequate” transfusion might have been a contributing factor in the higher mortality amongst those participants who received only one unit of whole blood?____ Yes, we have highlighted this in lines 221-222: “…If blood supply was an issue then the mortality rate may suggest inadequate transfusion in patients who might have had severe anaemia…”

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka

24 Aug 2022

PONE-D-22-16519R1Mortality and its associated factors in transfused patients at a tertiary hospital in UgandaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Okello

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 7 July 2022 If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka, MBChB (M.D)

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Sep 22;17(9):e0275126. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275126.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


26 Aug 2022

Dear reviewers,

Thank you very much for the speedy response to our submission.

We hereby submit our responses to your comments. Your suggestions are in normal fonts and our responses follow immediately under “Response(s)”.

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Response(s):

• Reference 7, line 74 has been updated.

• Reference 21, line 108 has been deleted.

Reviewers' comments:

Response(s): No attachments seen.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to comments.docx

Decision Letter 2

Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka

12 Sep 2022

Mortality and its associated factors in transfused patients at a tertiary hospital in Uganda

PONE-D-22-16519R2

Dear Dr. Okello,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka, MBChB (M.D)

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka

13 Sep 2022

PONE-D-22-16519R2

Mortality and its associated factors in transfused patients at a tertiary hospital in Uganda

Dear Dr. Okello:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Zivanai Cuthbert Chapanduka

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Data

    (XLSX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewers comments.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to comments.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES