UC Irvine

The use of prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) and fibrinogen concentrates (FIBCs) to achieve hemostasis in the perioperative setting as alternatives to allogeneic blood products remains controversial. To examine the efficacy and safety of PCCs and FIBCs, we conducted a systematic review-in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement-to compare the use of these transfusion alternatives in bleeding surgical patients. We performed a literature search of English articles published between July 1997 and July 2012 in MEDLINE via PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Five randomized trials and 15 nonrandomized studies with a comparator group were included in the final review. Studies were sorted into 1 of the following 3 clinical settings: cardiac surgery, non-cardiac surgery, and reversal of warfarin anticoagulation. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. With the exception of 2 randomized controlled trials, the existing body of literature on the use of PCCs and FIBCs in the perioperative setting was assessed to have a high degree of methodological bias. Overall, prospective studies in the cardiac surgery grouping suggested that patients receiving FIBC and/or PCCs required less allogeneic blood transfusion and had less chest tube drainage. In studies of warfarin reversal, PCCs more rapidly corrected the International Normalized Ratio compared to plasma; however, in the setting of intracranial hemorrhage, functional outcomes were poor regardless of the reversal strategy. With regards to safety outcomes, reporting was not uniform and raises concerns of underreporting. Adequately powered, methodologically sound trials would be required for more definitive conclusions to be drawn about the efficacy of PCCs and FIBC over conventional blood components for the treatment of perioperative coagulopathy in bleeding patients.