Cost Savings of Whole Blood Versus Component Therapy at a Community Level 1 Trauma Center.

Background: Blood product component-only resuscitation (CORe) has been the standard of practice in both military and civilian trauma care with a 1:1:1 ratio used in attempt to recreate whole blood (WB) until recent data demonstrated WB to confer a survival advantage, leading to the emergence of WB as the contemporary resuscitation strategy of choice. Little is known about the cost and waste reduction associated with WB vs CORe.
Methods: This study is a retrospective single-center review of adult trauma patients admitted to a community trauma center who received WB or CORe as part of their massive transfusion protocol (MTP) resuscitation from 2017 to 2021. The WB group received a minimum of one unit WB while CORe received no WB. Univariate and multivariate analyses were completed. Statistical analysis was conducted using a 95% confidence level. Non-normally distributed, continuous data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.
Results: 576 patients were included (201 in WB and 375 in CORe). Whole blood conveyed a survival benefit vs CORe (OR 1.49 P < .05, 1.02-2.17). Whole blood use resulted in an overall reduction in products prepared (25.8%), volumes transfused (16.5%), product waste (38.7%), and MTP activation (56.3%). Cost savings were $849 923 annually and $3 399 693 over the study period.
Discussion: Despite increased patient volumes over the study period (43.7%), the utilization of WB as compared to CORe resulted in an overall $3.39 million cost savings while improving mortality. As such, we propose WB should be utilized in all resuscitation strategies for the exsanguinating trauma patient.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.