Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Transfusion of platelets and FFP in the ICU
12 Plays8 months ago
In this episode, Dr. Sergio Zanotti discusses clinical guidelines for the transfusion of platelets and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) in critically ill patients. He is joined by Dr. Angel Coz Yataco, a practicing pulmonary critical care physician. Dr Coz Yataco is on the faculty of the Cleaveland Clinic Main Campus. He is also the lead author of the recently published American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guidelines on “Transfusion of Fresh Frozen Plasma and Platelets in Critically Ill Adults.”
Additional resources:
American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guidelines on Transfusion of Fresh Frozen Plasma and Platelets in Critically Ill Adults. Coz Yataco a, et al. CHEST 2025: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40074060/
Platelet Transfusion 2025 AAB and ICTMG International Clinical Practice Guidelines. JAMA 2025: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40440268/
Platelet Transfusion before CVC Placement in Patients with Thrombocytopenia. Van Baarle LF, et al. New Eng J of Med 2023: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2214322
Books mentioned in this episode:
Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don’t Know. By Adam Grant: https://bit.ly/404783f
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction to Critical Matters Podcast
00:00:06
Speaker
Welcome to Critical Matters, a sound podcast covering a broad range of topics related to the practice of intensive care medicine.
00:00:14
Speaker
Sound provides comprehensive critical care programs to hospitals across the country.
00:00:19
Speaker
To learn more about our programs and career opportunities, visit www.soundphysicians.com.
00:00:26
Speaker
And now your host, Dr. Sergio Zanotti.
Transfusion Practices Variability in ICU
00:00:32
Speaker
Platelets and fresh frozen plasma are frequently transfused to critically ill patients.
00:00:36
Speaker
Despite their frequent use in the ICU, significant variability in transfusion practices and thresholds persist.
00:00:44
Speaker
In today's episode of the podcast, we will discuss recent clinical guidelines on this topic.
Guest Introduction: Dr. Angel Kosiatako
00:00:49
Speaker
Our guest is Dr. Angel Kosiatako, a practicing pulmonary critical care physician.
00:00:54
Speaker
Dr. Kosiatako is on the faculty of the Cleveland Clinic main campus.
00:00:58
Speaker
He was a member of the 2021 Surviving Campaign Guidelines panel and holds multiple leadership positions at CHEST.
00:01:07
Speaker
He is a member of the Board of Regents and the immediate past chair of the Council of Networks of Chest.
00:01:12
Speaker
He has been awarded the Distinguished Chest Educator Award on multiple occasions, is current editor-in-chief of the Chest Physician Newsletter, and the former section editor for the Critical Care Commentary.
Need for Transfusion Guidelines
00:01:23
Speaker
Dr. Kosciatako is also a member of the editorial board of the Journal of Chest and is the lead author of the recently published American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guidelines on Transfusion of Fresh Frozen Plasma and Platelets in Critically Ill Adults.
00:01:38
Speaker
Angel, welcome to Critical Matters.
00:01:41
Speaker
Thank you so much for the kind introduction, Sergio.
00:01:44
Speaker
It's really, really, really nice.
00:01:46
Speaker
It's really a pleasure and honor to be here with you.
00:01:49
Speaker
Same here.
00:01:49
Speaker
And as we were talking before we started recording, this is a topic that frequently comes up in our practice.
00:01:57
Speaker
There's still a lot of controversy around what is the right thing to do.
00:02:02
Speaker
So from your perspective, why should intensivists care about this topic?
00:02:08
Speaker
Yeah, so it's really interesting because this is an idea that started, I think about five, six years ago when I was a member, I don't even remember if I was a member or the chair of the Critical Cat Network, and we were working through areas in which there was variability or uncertainty and
00:02:30
Speaker
we got the invitation to submit proposals for guidelines.
Benefits vs. Complications of Transfusions
00:02:35
Speaker
And this is one that actually was prioritized.
00:02:38
Speaker
It took a little bit of time to get it done because there was some hiccups along the way, not mean something that typically happens.
00:02:47
Speaker
And the reason why it was impetus to work on this was, number one, we saw a lot of variability in clinical practice.
00:02:55
Speaker
And number two is, which we think is the most important is,
00:03:00
Speaker
We, at least based on experience and some cursory review of the literature at the time, there was really no evidence that there was benefit from transfusing either platelets or FFPs.
00:03:12
Speaker
However, we all know about the complications of giving this.
00:03:17
Speaker
And probably the most extreme scenario are patients, for example, who have received multiple transfusions over a period of time for a number of reasons, like call it
00:03:28
Speaker
patients who have multiple transfusions for bone marrow transplant, et cetera.
00:03:35
Speaker
And these patients become allo-immunized.
00:03:38
Speaker
And in those patients, actually the side effects and the complication profile is a lot more severe than for somebody who might receive one transfusion or not.
00:03:48
Speaker
But ultimately, I think that transfusion of multiple blood products over time can have the serious consequences.
00:03:55
Speaker
And we kind of pose this question
00:03:57
Speaker
If we put this on the scale about the risk and the benefit, is there so much upside to this?
00:04:03
Speaker
Are we really preventing complications from happening or are we mostly doing things because we feel they are probably the right thing to do without any evidence to support it?
00:04:14
Speaker
But then also, are we really preventing the dreaded complications that we're trying to prevent?
00:04:22
Speaker
with the concept that transfusing this is going to help.
00:04:25
Speaker
Absolutely.
Judicious Blood Product Use
00:04:26
Speaker
And like you mentioned, it's important for our clinicians to be reminded that blood products have consequences that can be potentially very serious for our patients.
00:04:38
Speaker
But also, in addition to that, there's cost, and these are not unlimited resources.
00:04:43
Speaker
So being more judicious about how we use them and being good stewards of these resources will also allow them to be available for patients who really need them or who would really benefit from them.
00:04:54
Speaker
So I think it's definitely a great area to focus a clinical guideline
Developing Clinical Guidelines
00:05:01
Speaker
on.
00:05:01
Speaker
Angel, I would like to ask you about the clinical guideline process.
00:05:05
Speaker
So you mentioned the genesis of how this idea came up within CHESS and the American College of Chess Physicians.
00:05:13
Speaker
Could you give us an overview of the methodology that was used for this particular guideline?
00:05:18
Speaker
Yes.
00:05:19
Speaker
So it is a very strict methodology.
00:05:22
Speaker
CHESS adheres very strictly to great methodology.
00:05:27
Speaker
So what this consists is first is from the beginning,
00:05:32
Speaker
experts are identified and the panel is vetted, then these panelists are reviewed for conflicts of interest or relationships that could preclude them from participating on the guideline or could bias their judgment, meaning playlists and FPs is not too much of a problem because there's not a whole lot of
00:05:55
Speaker
typically conflicts like for example with other guidelines that might involve medications that could be sponsored by pharma etc.
00:06:02
Speaker
Then once the panel is convened then we go in the development of the PICO questions and PICO questions followed the format of patient or population intervention competitor and then the outcome.
00:06:17
Speaker
We
00:06:19
Speaker
select the intervention in this case in most of the cases is the intervention is transfusing versus the outcome or the comparison would be not transfusing then the population will be depending on the question patients generally critically ill patients or for example in the case of procedures patients who are undergoing placement of blah blah central line arterial line etc and then the outcomes we
00:06:47
Speaker
stratify the alcohols based on we rank them.
00:06:52
Speaker
So for example, if we look at
00:06:56
Speaker
the complications of or the outcomes for transfusions we're looking for example at mortality we're looking at bleeding events we're looking at for example in the cases of central line maybe bleeding complications or mechanical complications or infectious complications etc so all those outcomes are ranked and then we select what we call the critical outcomes and those are the ones that
00:07:23
Speaker
are going to be informing the recommendations.
00:07:26
Speaker
So then after that, the methodologists that work with us that are the chest provides that methodologic support, they do the data search.
00:07:40
Speaker
So basically, we screen, I don't remember exactly how many we screen for this
00:07:47
Speaker
because it was two guidelines, the RBCs and the one in FFPs.
00:07:51
Speaker
But it's probably somewhere in the neighborhood of a few thousand articles.
00:07:54
Speaker
And the first step is to screen them by title, meaning, because when search terms are introduced, you would put a lot of studies that might be pediatrics, that might be veterinary, that might have different type of outcomes, or maybe are letters to the editor.
00:08:13
Speaker
The job, all these articles are screened by the panel.
00:08:17
Speaker
They're screened by one of the methodologies and one of the panelist members.
00:08:20
Speaker
And when there are discrepancies, then we hash those out to determine whether the discrepancy was.
00:08:26
Speaker
So from that, that's the first step in which there is a lot of narrowing down of the amount of articles that will be going to the next step.
00:08:35
Speaker
The next step is a full text review, which is all the articles are now
00:08:41
Speaker
that were initially selected, now they're looked at and determine if they are good for inclusion and to which pick a question they will be more applicable.
00:08:51
Speaker
After that, the methodologists do the meta-analysis of all these individual outcomes that we ranked as critical, looks for all these data in all of these studies, and then produces a meta-analysis.
00:09:05
Speaker
Once we have the meta-analysis in all of them, the group convenes again, and we discuss the whole evidence-to-decision table that basically looks at, it's basically how the sausage is made.
00:09:18
Speaker
It basically looks at what does the intervention have any beneficial effects, and then we grade how large, small, trivial, then also for the...
Criteria for Recommendations
00:09:31
Speaker
Adverse effects.
00:09:32
Speaker
Then we also look at aspects of cost benefit.
00:09:35
Speaker
Then we look at aspects of feasibility.
00:09:39
Speaker
We look at aspects of effects on equity.
00:09:42
Speaker
And based on all of this, the panel issues and the recommendation that we have five choices, strong recommendation for an intervention,
00:09:52
Speaker
a conditional recommendation for an intervention and neutral recommendation basically the panel is saying you can do whichever their equivalent and then conditional recommendation against intervention and then strong recommendation against intervention typically to have a strong recommendation the data needs to come down from randomized controlled trials and one one
00:10:15
Speaker
step that I may have skipped is when we're looking at the great evidence, typically randomized controlled trials start as strong level of evidence and anything that is not a randomized controlled trial starts at a weak level of evidence.
00:10:32
Speaker
from there we look at different variables like um and this is more in the methodology so i'm not going to go into details but typically uh the uh data is upgraded or downgraded i've rarely seen not having worked on several guidelines that any evidence is upgraded is more about the things that make this specific evidence imperfect so they are downgraded so whenever we see that accommodation is
00:11:02
Speaker
low certainty of evidence or very low certainty of evidence, doesn't necessarily mean that the panel does not feel that the recommendation is something that we should be doing.
00:11:11
Speaker
It's just how the GRAE methodology informs the decision making.
00:11:15
Speaker
And anything that comes from randomized controlled trial starts as strong, but then typically gets downgrade to moderate and low.
00:11:23
Speaker
There's another guideline that I'm working on right now that means even despite having
00:11:28
Speaker
All the data on a specific question being randomized trials, it goes on to low rate of evidence because of some of the nuances that go into the great methodology.
00:11:36
Speaker
And everything that comes from observational comes from, um, starts as low.
00:11:41
Speaker
Rarely, I'm yet to see that some evidence gets upgraded.
00:11:46
Speaker
But then based on that, those recommendations, then we draft the manuscript and then sent to review to the guidelines oversight committee, Chess, then to the president.
00:11:57
Speaker
And then after that, it goes to the journal for a separate peer review.
00:12:02
Speaker
So it goes through several layers.
00:12:04
Speaker
So it's a really humongous amount of work.
00:12:08
Speaker
It's daunting.
00:12:11
Speaker
really something that is really gratifying once you see it through after working on those projects for several years.
00:12:19
Speaker
And Angela, as you mentioned, the level of evidence obviously is based on what's available.
00:12:25
Speaker
And by, I guess, not by definition, but by design, you're often looking for PICO questions and clinical guidelines that don't have an overwhelming level of evidence because then obviously you would know the answer what to do, right?
00:12:40
Speaker
So a lot of this is looking in areas where maybe the available evidence is imperfect.
00:12:45
Speaker
But
00:12:46
Speaker
From a perspective of the recommendations itself, the strength of the recommendation, in simple terms for clinicians at the bedside, how do you think of we recommend versus we suggest or a strong recommendation versus a conditional recommendation?
00:13:01
Speaker
How would you apply that to clinicians at the bedside, patients, and maybe even policymakers?
00:13:07
Speaker
Exactly.
00:13:08
Speaker
So I think this is really important because when we...
00:13:12
Speaker
when panels issue a strong recommendation, and a strong recommendation can be done, for example, with low certainty of evidence.
00:13:20
Speaker
And I want to digress a little bit here to just provide some explanation.
00:13:25
Speaker
And surviving sepsis, for example, I think historically the recommendation on antibiotics has been strong,
00:13:32
Speaker
But if I'm not mistaken, it's always been a low grade of evidence.
00:13:36
Speaker
And it's because we're never going to have a randomized controlled trial that is going to evaluate antibiotics versus no antibiotics, right?
00:13:42
Speaker
That's just unethical.
00:13:44
Speaker
But by design, this will make it a low certainty of evidence.
00:13:47
Speaker
Now, going back to your question as far as how should we apply this at the bedside, whenever a clinician who is reviewing guidelines sees that a recommendation is a strong recommendation,
00:14:00
Speaker
recommendation meaning typically that we recommend that should give us pause because it's something that we should consider doing strongly again guidelines are guidelines and as the name says they are meant to provide guidance but they are not meant to be the end all be all because they're nuances right and that is why the clinician at the bedside needs to see if the recommendation fully applies to their patient
00:14:28
Speaker
When we look at the we suggest or the low certainty of evidence, that is basically saying number one,
00:14:37
Speaker
there is not enough or there is not strong enough evidence.
00:14:40
Speaker
However, the panel chose to make a recommendation because at the end of the day, the panel also has the task as typically composed by experts to provide guidance after looking at all the literature available to clinicians at the bedside.
00:14:58
Speaker
It would be a lot of times we debate whether we should just say provide a neutral recommendation.
00:15:04
Speaker
And sometimes that is done.
00:15:06
Speaker
However,
00:15:08
Speaker
that also poses a problem because the clinician at the bedside will have absolutely no guidance because despite being a recommendation, it really does not provide a whole lot of guidance.
00:15:17
Speaker
So,
00:15:18
Speaker
In summary is, if it's a strong recommendation, it's probably that you should strongly consider doing unless there are reasons why you could not or you should not do it based on your assessment of the patient.
00:15:29
Speaker
And then when we suggest with a low certainty of evidence, that's something that we know there's not enough data and nobody should be helped.
00:15:41
Speaker
that they did something wrong by not following this recommendation necessarily.
00:15:45
Speaker
And the same applies to policymakers, right?
00:15:47
Speaker
Because policymakers use their recommendations to determine a lot of things, right?
00:15:53
Speaker
Like core measures and even some, has some downstream effects to the revenue aspect.
00:16:00
Speaker
But again, only strong recommendations should have this implication.
00:16:04
Speaker
The recommendations that are not strong should not have this implication.
00:16:10
Speaker
Excellent.
00:16:11
Speaker
Let's dive into the actual clinical guidelines.
00:16:15
Speaker
And what I really liked is how the team framed the guidelines into kind of general ICU patients, which we'll discuss first.
00:16:27
Speaker
And then second, they talked about procedures, which obviously are very relevant for the practice of critical care.
00:16:34
Speaker
So why don't we talk about general ICU patients first?
00:16:38
Speaker
And what I would like to is just go through some of the questions that you addressed and you can give us a little bit about what was the recommendation, any justification that you think is appropriate and any additional comments.
00:16:54
Speaker
Sure.
00:16:55
Speaker
Sounds good.
Transfusion Thresholds in Thrombocytopenia
00:16:59
Speaker
So the first question is, should critically ill patients with thrombocytopenia receive transfusions of platelets?
00:17:06
Speaker
And I guess this can be discussed in the distinction between low risk of bleeding versus high risk of bleeding.
00:17:15
Speaker
Correct.
00:17:16
Speaker
And that was a million-dollar question because as we framed this, and this stemmed from the viabilities that we saw in clinical practice on the thresholds to transfuse platelets.
00:17:27
Speaker
And I think universally, we know that, and again, this is, for example, data that there's not specific data in critically ill patients.
00:17:36
Speaker
It's more data that is from general or even hematology oncology patients.
00:17:40
Speaker
But the bottom line was what I think the
00:17:44
Speaker
Consensus is for most is 10 is kind of the magic number by which if we keep the playlist lower than that, there is a higher risk of significant bleeding, especially intracranial bleeding.
00:17:56
Speaker
Then we look at the high risk of bleeding.
00:17:59
Speaker
And by that, we dissected that in two different ways.
00:18:03
Speaker
One is that the patient has inherent characteristics that would make them more prone to bleed.
00:18:11
Speaker
And the other one is that the patient has the potential to bleed in an area in which bleeding could be catastrophic.
00:18:19
Speaker
Like, for example, although we did not cover CNS, meaning one good example would be any CNS type of bleed, the ones that we included and thought were, for example, airway lesions in which the patient has a tumor that has a high propensity to bleed, those kind of things.
00:18:34
Speaker
So when we look in the literature as far as how to define high and low risk of bleed,
00:18:42
Speaker
it became very challenging because there was really not a good definition for low or high risk of bleeding outside the ICU, let alone the ICU.
00:18:52
Speaker
And the only data that we found was the IMPROVE score, which is a score that looked at, it basically looked at different patient characteristics and tried to determine if a patient had a high risk of bleeding.
00:19:09
Speaker
Again, this was a
00:19:11
Speaker
Later validated in critically ill patients, but it was not necessarily something that was specifically designed.
00:19:18
Speaker
So based on that, we really couldn't make strong recommendations on that because, uh,
00:19:24
Speaker
Number one, the data was not necessarily completely related or centered on critical ill patients.
00:19:30
Speaker
It was mostly medical patients or patients who were admitted to the ICU.
00:19:37
Speaker
I'm sorry, to the hematologic oncology floor.
00:19:40
Speaker
And then as far as the cut-offs, then the panel had a lot of discussion because at the beginning is the big question is, should we recommend cut-offs?
00:19:49
Speaker
Should we say a number?
00:19:52
Speaker
And
00:19:53
Speaker
It was less complicated when it came to the high risk of bleeding patients, without high risk of bleeding, I'm sorry, because then that's kind of the commonly used threshold.
00:20:04
Speaker
But then for the patients who are at a high risk of bleeding, we knew it had to be a little higher.
00:20:10
Speaker
The evidence, there was really not much.
00:20:13
Speaker
So we took several hours debating this and the panel concluded that it should be over 30,
00:20:21
Speaker
somewhere between 30 and 50 is reasonable.
00:20:24
Speaker
Just because there's not a whole lot of evidence, the panel chose not to say
00:20:29
Speaker
specific number.
00:20:30
Speaker
That's why there is a range there.
00:20:32
Speaker
So that was very tricky.
00:20:34
Speaker
And again, when we look at these recommendations, it was, it was really not a whole lot of evidence of benefit.
00:20:40
Speaker
There was some evidence for potential harm.
00:20:43
Speaker
So again, if we're looking at a patient that does not really have a high risk of bleeding, I mean, I think 10 is fine.
00:20:54
Speaker
And for patients who have a high risk of bleeding, which could be
00:20:58
Speaker
determined by either characteristics that put the patient at a higher risk of bleeding or the patient has a potential area in which if bleeding were to cure, would be catastrophic, those we said 30 to 50.
00:21:15
Speaker
And I think it's important also as a reminder to clinicians that just doing the same thing for every patient eventually can get us into trouble, right?
00:21:27
Speaker
And that's why it's important for us to sometimes pause and think about the individual patient
00:21:33
Speaker
And like you said, this patient might have a higher risk of bleeding.
00:21:37
Speaker
And again, people might differ on how they classify that.
00:21:40
Speaker
But there are certain common areas that we all would agree would put somebody at a higher risk.
00:21:45
Speaker
And maybe those patients, you are a little bit more aggressive with transfusing platelets.
00:21:49
Speaker
But what we also know is that for the vast majority of patients who might have low platelets for multiple reasons and critical illness who are not at really high risk of bleeding,
00:21:59
Speaker
Unless it goes below 10,000, the risk of a severe spontaneous hemorrhage is very, very low.
00:22:05
Speaker
So there's no really point of transfusing at that point, correct?
00:22:10
Speaker
Exactly.
00:22:10
Speaker
I think you summarized it really well is for most patients, then is the most reasonable.
00:22:18
Speaker
And then for the other ones, I think is individualizing the approach using the clinician assessment at the bedside of what specific factors may that patient have that would require.
00:22:31
Speaker
And again, I think this opens the door for, I think one area in which patients
00:22:36
Speaker
guidelines are criticized a lot is because guidelines or clinicians says that they're being told what to do by guidelines.
00:22:43
Speaker
In this case, this guideline, in my opinion, gives the freedom to the clinician to say, hey, in this case, I think my patient has a high risk of bleeding.
00:22:53
Speaker
I can justify using a higher threshold because I think if my patient who has a high risk of bleeding were to bleed, outcomes could be catastrophic.
00:23:01
Speaker
So I think this recommendation gives the opening for that.
00:23:06
Speaker
Perfect.
00:23:07
Speaker
Is there any specific population that you want to address, Angel?
00:23:13
Speaker
In general, this was mostly all critically ill population.
00:23:18
Speaker
I think the population, if I wanted to emphasize specific population, are maybe the populations in which we have to be even more judicious about transfusions.
00:23:27
Speaker
Patients, for example, in which we know that giving platelets can do even more harm than good.
00:23:36
Speaker
Like, for example, patients who have ITP, TTP, who are highly immunized.
00:23:41
Speaker
So, or patients who have leukostasis, for example, those patients are more likely to be harmed by these transfusions than benefited.
00:23:49
Speaker
So, I think those populations are very, very unique.
00:23:55
Speaker
And those are just a few examples of how we should individualize the decision-making for our patients.
00:24:03
Speaker
The second question to this generalized U population pertains to patients who are actively bleeding.
00:24:10
Speaker
So should critically ill patients with thromocyteopenia and active bleeding receive platelets?
00:24:15
Speaker
How did you respond to that PICO question?
Platelet Transfusion in Active Bleeding
00:24:19
Speaker
So we look at all the evidence as far as transfusing platelets on patients who are actively bleeding.
00:24:26
Speaker
And then we came also into a conundrum looking at
00:24:30
Speaker
what active bleeding actually merits transfusion right because it's different if you have a nosebleed versus some sort of a gi bleed that is requiring transfusions right so completely different so
00:24:48
Speaker
We look at all the data and basically notice that the only available data for the most part was in patients who had very sealed bleed from full hypertension and cirrhosis.
00:25:00
Speaker
And what was identified is that reading platelets counts did not affect the results and even the re-bleeding rates were even higher in patients who had received platelets.
00:25:09
Speaker
It was a little bit paradoxical data, but at the end is looking at all the data, what we decided is to, number one, use the existing classification by the WHO on bleeding, kind of degrees of bleeding.
00:25:29
Speaker
Like for example, grade one is epistaxis or purpura, things that are very minor or microscopic hematuria, something for which we would typically not transfuse.
00:25:39
Speaker
Then grade two is epistaxis that lasts more than 30 minutes, maybe some hematemesis, but not producing hemodynamic instability.
00:25:48
Speaker
Then grade three is bleeding that is requiring red blood cell transfusion over routine transfusion needs or bleeding that is causing some degree of hemodynamic instability.
00:25:58
Speaker
And then
00:25:59
Speaker
Number four is basically the ones that we fear in the ICU, the ones that basically start bleeding and you cannot stop.
00:26:06
Speaker
So in those cases, for example, one of the other examples that came, what if somebody is bleeding from the nose or somebody is bleeding from a central line insertion site or an arterial line?
00:26:17
Speaker
In those cases, I think most clinicians would agree that maybe the more sensible approach would be let's apply pressure for a reasonable amount of time, 20, 30 pressure.
00:26:27
Speaker
Let's tamponade that nosebleed.
00:26:29
Speaker
and reassess.
00:26:31
Speaker
And for bleedings that are mild, like grade one or two, I think we should, by all means, prioritize non-transfusion interventions that are going to potentially stop the bleeding, like compression, et cetera.
00:26:45
Speaker
If those don't improve the bleeding, then we should consider the transfusion to 50.
00:26:51
Speaker
And then for
00:26:55
Speaker
I think there is a lot less debate or hesitation that probably 50 is the most commonly accepted threshold to transfuse platelets.
00:27:08
Speaker
So the take-home message here really is to try to, in an objective way, evaluate the severity of bleeding.
00:27:15
Speaker
And there are plenty of patients who might have bleeding that is, like you mentioned, Angel, probably more suitable to some sort of local compression or other treatments to try to stop the bleeding.
00:27:30
Speaker
And when we have more severe bleeding, that requires...
00:27:34
Speaker
higher levels of support and transfusions, those are the ones that we might consider giving platelets.
00:27:40
Speaker
And the target here would be keep them above 50,000.
00:27:43
Speaker
Is that correct?
00:27:45
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:27:48
Speaker
You got it.
00:27:50
Speaker
The second part of the guidelines really focused on procedures, and this has always been not only an issue of tremendous variability within the ICU among intensivists, but also it's not uncommon for our patients to get procedures done by other colleagues, right, interventional radiology or some other colleague, and it's not uncommon for other colleagues to always work
00:28:14
Speaker
want coagulation corrected, they want platelets corrected.
00:28:20
Speaker
And my sense is that over the last several years, that has led probably to an overuse of both platelet transfusions and fresh frozen plasma.
00:28:32
Speaker
So could you tell us how you thought about and how you classified and kind of approached the procedural aspect of this question?
Transfusion in Procedures
00:28:42
Speaker
Yeah.
00:28:43
Speaker
So we look at different procedures in the ICU that are commonly done at the bedside.
00:28:50
Speaker
As you said, there is a lot of variability.
00:28:52
Speaker
Like, I mean, even among our own colleagues from our same group, in some might feel more comfortable with a specific number.
00:29:01
Speaker
And a lot of that comes from experience.
00:29:04
Speaker
And typically in
00:29:06
Speaker
I think this probably has happened to all of us.
00:29:08
Speaker
We will remember forever a bad complication we had after a procedure, and that tends to inform our practices moving forward.
00:29:16
Speaker
But also it's the other practitioners that are outside our department, right?
00:29:19
Speaker
We need to have a tunnel line to be placed by intervention radiologists.
00:29:23
Speaker
They may have a complete different practice pattern regarding transfusion.
00:29:28
Speaker
So we try to look at all of this, and we...
00:29:32
Speaker
kind of found some trials and there was actually a recent trial in New England that for the most part informed a vast chunk of the recommendation and that's how we came with the recommendation the way it was.
00:29:45
Speaker
Again, unfortunately, because it was only one large randomized trial and there was some discrepancy with the other trials ended up being a low certainty of evidence despite starting as a randomized controlled trial.
00:29:57
Speaker
So, and I think the important message here is that
00:30:01
Speaker
we need to make sure that different factors are considered because the data that has looked at this is two small and one larger on the mild control trial.
00:30:13
Speaker
A lot of these studies excluded patients with INR more than three.
00:30:16
Speaker
So meaning if you have a patient who has thrombocytopenia and an INR more than three, that is when the clinician at the best side judgment is paramount to make those decisions.
00:30:26
Speaker
But if it's something isolated like just thrombocytopenia or just
00:30:31
Speaker
an elevated INR.
00:30:32
Speaker
And that's how we define coagulopathy for these guidelines.
00:30:36
Speaker
There was really, there's so much variability in the definition of coagulopathy that it became difficult.
00:30:41
Speaker
We just took a pragmatic approach, which is the way that most trials in forming these guidelines defined coagulopathy or the endpoint around the needs to transfuse FFP.
00:30:52
Speaker
So that is how we came up to the recommendations.
00:30:55
Speaker
And basically is, uh,
00:31:00
Speaker
You don't need to transfuse specifically for central lines or A lines.
00:31:04
Speaker
I think what you should look at is we should look at the inherent patient transfusion risks and use that as a decision point.
00:31:14
Speaker
Again, acknowledging that the viability practices around the country and around the world, for example, it might be different if there is
00:31:24
Speaker
variability in operator experience, like maybe it's in the middle of the night in a setting in which the person placing the light may not be as experienced.
00:31:34
Speaker
That needs to be factored in.
00:31:35
Speaker
Whether or not there is availability of ultrasound, that also is important, although most ICUs now have ultrasounds.
00:31:44
Speaker
But we're thinking about the parts of the world that are well resourced, but that may not be true in other parts of the world.
00:31:52
Speaker
Then again, the concomitant presence of elevation in INR and also thrombocytopenia.
00:32:01
Speaker
And then the other factor is, for example, if that line is going to be tunneled or if we are going to
00:32:10
Speaker
place the catheter in a site in which compression is not feasible, like the subplavian, for example, then also dose mandate different approaches.
00:32:20
Speaker
But in general, the overall recommendation as the first line should be, we do not need to transfuse platelets or FFPs prior to a central line.
00:32:32
Speaker
What we need to do is look at the patient's individual risk factors, use that as a decision point.
00:32:37
Speaker
But again, consider the nuance of all the different
00:32:40
Speaker
factors like I just mentioned earlier.
00:32:43
Speaker
But like you mentioned, for the majority of patients, we do not need to transfuse FFP or platelets for a central line.
00:32:52
Speaker
And then obviously, like you mentioned, practice has evolved.
00:32:56
Speaker
And in most places, at least here in the U.S., there is ultrasound availability, but we also obviously are creating guidelines and thinking of
00:33:05
Speaker
other places that might not have the same resources.
00:33:09
Speaker
So just to individualize at that point.
00:33:12
Speaker
What exactly?
00:33:13
Speaker
And sorry to interrupt you.
00:33:16
Speaker
One more area that we thought would be important as a future research priority was the use of viscoelastic monitoring.
00:33:22
Speaker
I mean, it has different names depending on what specific test you use and different centers.
00:33:28
Speaker
But there is
00:33:30
Speaker
I mean, growing data of this in the trauma relation, there's growing data on this maybe in the GI bleeding world around liver patients.
00:33:37
Speaker
I think this potentially would have a role in the future of something that we could use as a parameter to determine whether we would consider a transfusion prior to a procedure or not.
Thoracentesis and Paracentesis Guidelines
00:33:53
Speaker
What was the discussion around thoracentesis and paracentesis?
00:33:58
Speaker
So in this one, it was really interesting because the data, and again, in this case, the data was mostly retrospective.
00:34:06
Speaker
And as you know, there is a publication bias, right?
00:34:10
Speaker
There is the big knowledge that data on bad outcomes tends to be published more than data that does not show that, that doesn't show any benefit from an intervention, right?
00:34:26
Speaker
So the data that we found basically
00:34:29
Speaker
What was an equivocal was that complications from these procedures are extremely rare.
00:34:36
Speaker
To the point that when we discussed the area of research priorities, we came to the conclusion that studies to assess and give a solid answer on this are practically impossible because the complication rates are so low that you will need so large
00:35:00
Speaker
samples, that those studies would not be feasible.
00:35:05
Speaker
So all that being said, knowing that the complications of either Thora or parasynthesis being low-risk procedures are so low and that there is potential harm by giving either of these two interventions, the decision was to
00:35:26
Speaker
suggest against routine transfusion prior to a thorough paracenties.
00:35:31
Speaker
And I want to take a little pause here to preface this, that in the guideline we made very clear that what should inform, so when we go from the section of general critical patients to the section of procedures, we preface this by saying, this should, the overall risk of bleeding and overall decision to transfuse a patient
00:35:52
Speaker
should be assessed first before the individual need to transfuse for a specific procedure.
00:35:58
Speaker
And ultimately, that should, in the patient's individual needs, based on the risk, should inform all the decisions, even before we discuss the procedural need.
00:36:12
Speaker
And I think it's a good exercise, right, when we're making decisions based on risk-benefit to risk stratify our patients individually.
00:36:19
Speaker
Not every patient has the same risk of a transfusion like you mentioned earlier, and including that into our thought process and the equation of our decision-making is extremely important.
00:36:32
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:36:33
Speaker
So now comes my favorite procedure, not necessarily in terms of the procedure itself, but in terms of the discussion about platelets, which is lumbar punctures, which we don't do as frequently, but when they're needed, should be done.
Lumbar Puncture Transfusion Practices
00:36:48
Speaker
And this might be something that a lot of intensivists send to IR, so they might get a lot of pushback.
00:36:54
Speaker
But what is the finding of the discussion by the Clinical Guideline Committee regarding the transfusion of FFP and platelets for patients undergoing lung bar puncture?
00:37:06
Speaker
Yeah.
00:37:07
Speaker
So at the beginning, when we look at the data, we actually identify a lot of studies in patients who were obstetric.
00:37:20
Speaker
and oncologic populations and epidural catheter use.
00:37:23
Speaker
And we evaluated all this data and determined that it was not necessarily something that would be applicable to our patient population or to our population of critically ill patients.
00:37:38
Speaker
So we excluded those patients.
00:37:40
Speaker
Then basically the only two studies that made the criteria were
00:37:47
Speaker
assess the outcomes of traumatic lumbar puncture or spinal hematoma.
00:37:51
Speaker
And again, spinal hematoma was very rare.
00:37:57
Speaker
It was very rare, it's less than 0.2% or something along those lines.
00:38:02
Speaker
So, but in this case, the potential complications, despite not being common, could be potentially catastrophic.
00:38:10
Speaker
We're looking at potentially producing a spinal hematoma and producing a patient to be
00:38:18
Speaker
paraplegic because of a complication like this.
00:38:20
Speaker
So this is a good example of kind of when we look at the high risk of bleeding, low risk of bleeding that we discussed earlier in this case is yes, the complications rate are low, but if they were to happen, it could be catastrophic and something that could potentially have been prevented.
00:38:38
Speaker
Again, the data showing that it prevents this is not strong, is not conclusive.
00:38:46
Speaker
But the way the panel approached this is, this is how practice has been, because there's even a very nice survey that was published that showed that over 90% of clinicians would transfuse for thrombocytopenia or an INR more than two.
00:39:03
Speaker
So that is kind of common practice.
00:39:06
Speaker
So if we were going to suggest switching that, we felt that we needed to have strong evidence to say,
00:39:14
Speaker
This is the reason why we should not be doing it.
00:39:18
Speaker
And in that case, that evidence was not there.
00:39:22
Speaker
So that's why we decided as a panel to say that we should aim for an INR around two or lower and platelet counts around 40 to 50 if we are going to do a lumbar puncture in a patient in the ICU.
00:39:39
Speaker
This is data that, for example, might not be suitable for a randomized controlled trial, and maybe more registry type of data might be something that could be useful to looking at this, or maybe, again, the role of viscoelastic testing to determine if transfusions would change this risk of bleeding.
00:40:02
Speaker
And it's important to reemphasize that lumbar puncture is approached differently than the other procedures that we mentioned, thoracentesis, paracentesis, central venous catheter and arterial line, for all the reasons that you mentioned.
00:40:16
Speaker
And again, studying these questions with randomized controlled trials is not only very hard, but unlikely to happen in the near future for all the reasons that we discussed.
00:40:29
Speaker
Exactly.
00:40:30
Speaker
And that's the difficult part because although we suggested priorities for research, we know that it's going to be very difficult to do them.
00:40:42
Speaker
And because of that is why we chose to make, despite being weak, recommendations or suggestions for or against an intervention because we felt that
00:40:56
Speaker
it was better to issue a recommendation, even if the evidence or the certainty of evidence was not high.
00:41:04
Speaker
It's better to issue this so that clinicians at least have something that is providing them guidance, as opposed to saying we don't have enough evidence, so the evidence is not as strong, but we wanted to make sure that we were providing guidance to clinicians at the pet site.
Routine Transfusions for Procedures
00:41:21
Speaker
Finally, you did discuss as well bedside endoscopy, specifically bronchoscopy and GI endoscopy, which are both common procedures in critically ill patients.
00:41:33
Speaker
Could you share with us what was the recommendation from the panel?
00:41:37
Speaker
Yeah.
00:41:38
Speaker
So for...
00:41:40
Speaker
Bronchoscopy, first of all, we need to narrow it down to the bronchoscopy that happens in the ICU, right?
00:41:46
Speaker
So we very explicitly said we're not talking about advanced bronchoscopy that will require the use of more sophisticated tools or biopsies, et cetera.
00:41:55
Speaker
So this is the typical airway inspection or a typical airway inspection with BAL that is done in the ICU.
00:42:02
Speaker
And for those, it was basically only
00:42:05
Speaker
two retrospective studies that evaluated platelet transfusions prior to bronchoscopy in the ICU and also in cancer patients with different transfusion thresholds.
00:42:14
Speaker
But ultimately, the conclusion was that transfusions of platelets prior to a bronchoscope did not change the risk of complications.
00:42:27
Speaker
And when you look to FFPs, there were no studies that
00:42:32
Speaker
look at FFPs prior to bronchoscopy.
00:42:35
Speaker
So the panel kind of weighing all the potential benefits of transfusing, which really there's not much because it's a low risk procedure.
00:42:47
Speaker
However, the potential complications of platelets and FFPs are not zero.
00:42:56
Speaker
There are some, especially
00:42:58
Speaker
the more volume we transfuse.
00:42:59
Speaker
So that's why we decided to issue our recommendation saying we suggest against routine transfusions for patients.
00:43:06
Speaker
Again, prefacing that it's important for everything that should be prefaced by the overall assessment of the individual patient's risk of bleeding.
00:43:19
Speaker
Are there any comments that you can share regarding other clinical guidelines on the same topic?
00:43:24
Speaker
It's interesting that a couple of weeks after you published the clinical guidelines, or I saw a different clinical guideline in JAMA from heme societies, they talked about patients that were not certainly specifically critically ill in other populations, but there's obviously other clinical guidelines out there as well.
00:43:44
Speaker
These are unique in that they were specific for critically opatients, which is what we care about on this podcast.
00:43:51
Speaker
But any comments, Angel, on how they kind of align or differ from other big guidelines?
00:43:59
Speaker
Yes, I think we look at different other guidelines.
00:44:03
Speaker
And again, these guidelines are not used to...
00:44:08
Speaker
guide our decision making.
00:44:10
Speaker
We make decision making independently looking at all the data that we identified.
00:44:15
Speaker
This is including the discussion part kind of to compare what we are recommending and why maybe we are agreeing or not so much agreeing with other societies in different areas.
00:44:28
Speaker
So we look at the guidelines from the Association for the Advancement of Blood Therapies, the AABB, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and also the British Society of Hematology.
00:44:40
Speaker
There's also the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.
00:44:42
Speaker
And for the most part, there was quite a bit of agreement on that type of recommendations.
00:44:52
Speaker
For example, when we're looking about, we're talking about patients
00:44:57
Speaker
As far as recommendations for general critically ill patients, basically our recommendations align with the AABB and the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and even for the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine when it comes to patients with a high risk of bleeding.
00:45:14
Speaker
I think we're all in agreement that 10 is, if there is a number that we should probably use is the 10.
00:45:21
Speaker
But then for patients with high risk of bleeding,
00:45:25
Speaker
Some of the other guidelines recommending a higher threshold, but did not specify
00:45:31
Speaker
why or what that threshold would be.
00:45:35
Speaker
So we wanted to go a step further there and say, these are the things that you should consider as higher risk of bleeding.
00:45:43
Speaker
And in those patients, we're not going to stop and just say, use a higher threshold.
00:45:47
Speaker
Let's go not to the 50, which is what would be used for active bleeding in most patients, but somewhere in the middle, 30 to 50.
00:45:55
Speaker
Again, judgment of the clinician at the bedside is really important.
00:46:00
Speaker
Then when it comes to the active leading patients, I think there was some data from the International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis that basically recommended 50 in patients who were in DIC and bleeding.
00:46:15
Speaker
A little bit different than the population we were looking at, but that's the data that we identified.
00:46:22
Speaker
And then, for example, the ESICM did not make a recommendation in patients who were bleeding patients.
00:46:30
Speaker
That was interesting and we kind of decided to make a recommendation, so in that case.
00:46:37
Speaker
And then when it came to the specific procedures, the recommendations were variable again, because we were not only looking at now recommendations from AAVE and hematology societies, but we were also looking at societies, for example, for interventional radiology.
00:46:56
Speaker
And I think what most people kind of agree is
00:47:01
Speaker
we should not be transfusing at all in patients who have over 50.
00:47:05
Speaker
And I think that makes sense.
00:47:07
Speaker
Now, between 10 and 50 is when the rubber meets the road.
00:47:13
Speaker
And I think the variability in our case, we said,
00:47:17
Speaker
no need to transfuse, assess the patient individual risk factors, right?
00:47:21
Speaker
So if the patient is at low risk of bleeding, we would say 10 is fine.
00:47:26
Speaker
Basically high risk of bleeding, you may want to keep the patient somewhere in the 30 to 50, and then use that as your baseline to determine the needs for transfusion for the procedure.
00:47:35
Speaker
But for example, the interventional radiology side is recommended 20, which might seem as a disagreement with ours, but not necessarily because we're saying
00:47:44
Speaker
we're looking at a patient with high risk of bleeding, we're saying maybe 30 to 50, but again, it's very nuanced.
00:47:49
Speaker
And I think this is where the clinician looking at the patient, looking at the individual factors and all the other parameters that are informing that need to place a line.
00:47:59
Speaker
If it's a tunnel line, if there's concomitant, coagulopathy, et cetera, those are all factors that should be considered.
00:48:07
Speaker
When it came to the fora and para, I think it was unanimous, nobody believes or shouldn't say that.
00:48:15
Speaker
several professional societies classified lower and parsing this as a low risk procedures and there was no recommendation to routinely transfuse.
00:48:23
Speaker
Again, for lumbar puncture, it was very similar in the sense that most societies say, despite a low risk of bleeding from this procedure, the complication is
00:48:38
Speaker
potentially catastrophic.
00:48:39
Speaker
So most of them recommend similar numbers to what we are recommending.
00:48:43
Speaker
And this includes the site interventional radiology as well.
00:48:47
Speaker
And then for bronchoscopy, there was not a whole lot of data from other societies for bronchoscopy.
00:48:56
Speaker
Finally, as we close, putting everything together for the clinicians at the bedside, could you share common pitfalls that clinicians should avoid?
Pitfalls in Transfusion Practices
00:49:08
Speaker
Yes, I think number one would be to transfuse to a number.
00:49:13
Speaker
Although we recommended numbers or ranges to provide some guidance, these are not the end all be all.
00:49:22
Speaker
I think that's when we need to look at our patients individually and look at the characteristics to decide if the specific recommendation would apply to them.
00:49:31
Speaker
Number two is we should routinely, or we should get away from the routine
00:49:38
Speaker
use of transfusions prior to the procedure just because a number is low, et cetera.
00:49:45
Speaker
I think in these cases, we need to individualize the care of the patient.
00:49:50
Speaker
And although guidelines are supposed to be meant to, in a way, homogenize the care, actually what we're saying is less homogenizing, but what needs to be homogeneous is the assessment of the individual patient characteristics to determine if there's a need for transfusion or not.
00:50:06
Speaker
And I think the other part that I think is really important, which not necessarily a pitfall, but it's something that I wanted to emphasize is, as you mentioned earlier, playlist and FFPs are scarce resources, they're precious resources.
00:50:19
Speaker
And even talking not necessarily about the cost is if we were to transfuse less using a more judicious approach, we will cut down the number of units
00:50:34
Speaker
that are transfused per year very significantly.
00:50:36
Speaker
I think we did calculations and it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of half a million units per year.
00:50:43
Speaker
And this is important because there are patients who truly need the transfusions, patients who have conditions that will need recurrent transfusions.
00:50:51
Speaker
So in those patients, actually by transfusing patients who may have
00:50:57
Speaker
an indication that it's less solid, and we divert those precious resources to those patients and away from the patients who would truly need it.
00:51:05
Speaker
Ultimately, we are potentially worsening issues of accessibility and also equity because there is data that shows that patients of African-American descent have, African-American ancestry, I'm sorry, have, when it comes to the
00:51:24
Speaker
pool of blood, they are less likely to have units that are more compatible with them than patients from other ethnicities.
00:51:33
Speaker
So it's also important.
00:51:35
Speaker
So it has so many layers in which it can affect patient care just from, number one, having the unit, but also having the correct unit for specific populations.
Considered Approach to Transfusion Decisions
00:51:46
Speaker
Any pearls of wisdom when we consider transfusion platelets and FFP for our clinicians?
00:51:54
Speaker
I think it's probably to really think about, do I really need to transfuse this patient?
00:52:00
Speaker
Am I really transfusing it because I think it's going to help the patient?
00:52:05
Speaker
Or am I transfusing this unit because that's what I've been doing?
00:52:09
Speaker
But now that I can review the data that shows that maybe there's not much benefit, is that something that I really need to do?
00:52:19
Speaker
And from my perspective, Angel, I think the take-home message really is to pause and be more thoughtful about our individual patients and not just react to a number on a screen and to really think about what are the risks they have for bleeding, what will be potential risk of transfusions in this particular patient, and
00:52:41
Speaker
What are the risks they have based on other comorbidities?
00:52:45
Speaker
And really, like you said, take a little bit more of a thoughtful approach to when we will transfuse.
00:52:51
Speaker
And what it really indicates also is that the available evidence would suggest that we should probably be transfusing a little bit less platelets and less FFPs.
00:53:01
Speaker
But when we do so, do it in a much more deliberate and thoughtful way.
00:53:06
Speaker
Mm-hmm.
00:53:08
Speaker
Totally agree.
00:53:09
Speaker
Thank you for the guidelines.
Book Recommendation: 'Think Again'
00:53:11
Speaker
A lot of work goes into this, as you explained, and I know.
00:53:15
Speaker
And these are difficult topics because we don't have all the answers.
00:53:18
Speaker
But one of the things that I've always appreciated about guidelines is that they're wonderful places to read because they review the existing literature and not only give you, like you said, guidance, but allow you to learn more about the topic and what's available and what is missing.
00:53:36
Speaker
So I would encourage all our listeners to take a look at the guidelines.
00:53:39
Speaker
We'll obviously add a reference in the show notes.
00:53:43
Speaker
And as we close, Angel, we like to ask questions unrelated to the clinical topic.
00:53:52
Speaker
To tap in the wisdom of our guest, would that be okay?
00:53:56
Speaker
Absolutely.
00:53:57
Speaker
My first question relates to books.
00:54:00
Speaker
Is there a book or are there any books that have influenced you significantly or a book that you have gifted often to other people?
00:54:08
Speaker
Yeah, there is a book that I actually read.
00:54:10
Speaker
It was a couple, maybe over a year and a half ago, that really made me think again.
00:54:16
Speaker
And it's kind of redundant because the title of the book is Think Again.
00:54:20
Speaker
I don't know if you had the chance to read it by Adam Grant.
00:54:23
Speaker
And actually, it's very interesting because it challenges us to rethink the way we think and maybe kind of think again about our common ways in which we approach things, showing some flexibility in the way we approach clinical problem solving.
00:54:42
Speaker
And I think it's very easy after doing, for example, medicine or just our typical day-to-day things in life,
00:54:49
Speaker
to have a preconceived idea of what we're going to be facing or we're going to be encountering.
00:54:56
Speaker
And sometimes we may tend to anchor.
00:54:57
Speaker
And I think this book's uses kind of shows us, or at least it did to me, how to, by storytelling, really, how it's important to have flexibility in our decision making.
00:55:11
Speaker
Because that leads to, number one, make better decisions.
00:55:15
Speaker
Number two is be able to collaborate with people.
00:55:18
Speaker
And three is to, because we are thinking outside our usual walls, how to innovate and be better.
00:55:26
Speaker
So it's to be curious, to challenge what we know.
00:55:29
Speaker
And I think in medicine, at least we do this routinely, but sometimes because of kind of the day-to-day routine, we may fall into this little habit of
00:55:39
Speaker
the anchor and something because we kind of have seen this many times, but it's kind of looking at everything with a fresh mind.
00:55:45
Speaker
And I think that is, it's really, really, really something that kind of changed how,
00:55:52
Speaker
my way to approach certain things in life.
00:55:55
Speaker
So that was really, really, really a nice book.
00:55:58
Speaker
I agree.
00:55:58
Speaker
I had an opportunity to read Adam Grant's Think Again and agree with everything you said.
00:56:05
Speaker
For me, what was interesting from this book was it made me realize that as much as we like to call ourselves scientists, physicians in general, we do not think like scientists.
00:56:17
Speaker
we definitely hold strong to confirmation bias.
00:56:22
Speaker
And we usually look at the available literature to support those biases.
00:56:27
Speaker
And like you said, we have to be more humble and challenge more what we think is right and have an open mind because it's the only way that we really will do well by our patients, but also continue to advance our practice.
00:56:39
Speaker
So wonderful read.
00:56:40
Speaker
I will add a link in the show notes.
00:56:42
Speaker
Thanks for sharing that.
00:56:45
Speaker
Thank you.
00:56:45
Speaker
The second question I think is a perfect follow-up because it really talks about what we mentioned in the book, which is could you share something you changed your mind about over the last couple of years?
Saying No and Maintaining Well-being
00:56:57
Speaker
Yes.
00:56:59
Speaker
And maybe it's too late now because I've been practicing for what I think 15 years now since finishing training and it's okay to say no.
00:57:08
Speaker
And I think as one finishes training and is...
00:57:14
Speaker
trying to establish a career, trying to establish, I mean, a reputation and trying to kind of expand your clinical acumen, your research profile, your educational profile.
00:57:27
Speaker
Sometimes we may take on, that's happened to me certainly, to take so many opportunities that at the point is you're really, your plate is too full that you,
00:57:40
Speaker
or overwhelm and start sacrificing other parts, other aspects of your life, like family life, personal life, self-care, exercising, meditation, if you practice that, because you have so many obligations.
00:57:54
Speaker
But at the end of the day, what I've learned is, unfortunately, by experiences, it takes you to be in a good state of mind, to care for yourself so that you can do everything.
00:58:06
Speaker
much better in the projects that you are signing up for.
00:58:11
Speaker
But again, that takes the ability to say no to a lot of offers that you might receive
00:58:20
Speaker
that maybe don't align with your long-term goals and kind of being more selective.
00:58:25
Speaker
And again, this might be a little, a lot harder once you, when you're starting, but as you become more experienced or seasoned or old, that's probably the better word.
00:58:35
Speaker
It's, it's a little bit easier, but I think it's kind of working with a mentor, working with somebody who kind of can help you kind of understand what your career goals are and kind of
00:58:48
Speaker
using the opportunities from all the offers that you may receive to kind of further that goal and not just kind of go into, kind of dilute yourself that ultimately you end up sacrificing in the overall, in the wholeness of the person and ultimately affecting what you want to accomplish in the first place.
00:59:10
Speaker
Excellent.
00:59:11
Speaker
And I agree.
00:59:12
Speaker
I think it's something that people usually say no out of fear and the fear is probably unfounded.
00:59:20
Speaker
And ultimately, you are sacrificing what's most important to you and where you can create the most value by adding too many things to your plate.
00:59:29
Speaker
So great, great comment, Angel.
00:59:32
Speaker
Thanks for sharing that.
00:59:34
Speaker
The final question is more like a closing statement.
00:59:38
Speaker
What would you want every listener to know?
00:59:42
Speaker
And this is something that actually was reflecting on this, I was thinking, and it's something that I tell my fellows and sometimes they kind of don't understand at the beginning.
00:59:52
Speaker
And it's the power of aggressive waiting.
00:59:54
Speaker
And I say that in that way, being to kind of raise their eyebrows and it's like, sometimes what we just need to do for a patient for that day is to wait, to see how the interventions have
01:00:10
Speaker
are going to change the course, but we need to give them time.
01:00:15
Speaker
Because if we're going in a zigzag motion,
01:00:18
Speaker
We're less likely to, one, benefit the patient, or two, see what the effects of the interventions we have made.
01:00:23
Speaker
And by saying this, I don't know me by any way that we should not be aggressive, or that we should not take care of our patients aggressively, and I mean, looking at all the information, but sometimes it's just take a pause and wait for the effects of interventions that we have prioritized.
01:00:44
Speaker
Sometimes that's hard, especially early in the career.
01:00:46
Speaker
And that's what I tell my fellows.
01:00:47
Speaker
That is the art of aggressive waiting.
01:00:49
Speaker
Just wait, but when I say aggressive, I mean be vigilant, not passive waiting, vigilant waiting.
01:00:56
Speaker
And if you see there are signs that things are not going the right way, by all means intervene.
01:01:01
Speaker
But sometimes just waiting makes a whole lot of difference.
01:01:06
Speaker
Aggressive waiting.
01:01:07
Speaker
I love that term.
01:01:08
Speaker
I haven't heard it before, but I agree 100%.
01:01:11
Speaker
Angel, thank you so much for sharing your expertise and your time with us.
01:01:17
Speaker
Look forward to having you back on the podcast to discuss other topics relevant to the practice of critical care medicine.
01:01:25
Speaker
It's my pleasure.
01:01:26
Speaker
I had a lot of fun.
01:01:27
Speaker
It has been really great and hope to be able to come again.
01:01:30
Speaker
I think it's really a great resource and I'm really happy that you're doing this to share with our peer critical care ICU practitioners, physicians, APPs.
01:01:41
Speaker
I think it's great and I commend you for that.
01:01:44
Speaker
Thank you.
01:01:46
Speaker
Thank you for listening to Critical Matters, a sound podcast.
01:01:50
Speaker
Make sure to subscribe to Critical Matters on Apple or Google Podcasts and share with your network.
01:01:56
Speaker
Sound's transforming the way critical care is provided in hospitals across the country.
01:02:00
Speaker
To learn more, visit www.soundphysicians.com.