Intraoperative autotransfusion in hepatic resection for malignancy. Is it safe?

Impact of autotransfusion on recurrence of colorectal cancer liver metastasis: Long-term follow-up of patients undergoing curative intent hepatectomy

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) occurs in upto 50% of cases and drives patient outcomes. Up-front liver resection is the treatment of choice in resectable cases. There is no consensus yet established as to the safety of intraoperative autotransfusion in liver resection for CRLM.

METHODS

Patients undergoing curative-intent hepatectomy for CRLM at a single quaternary-care institution from 1999 to 2016 were included. Demographics, surgical variables, Fong Clinical Risk Score (FCRS), use of intraoperative auto and/or allotransfusion, and survival data were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed accounting for allotransfusion, extent of hepatectomy, FCRS, and systemic treatment regimens.

RESULTS

Three-hundred sixteen patients were included. The median follow-up was 10.4 years (7.8-14.1 years). The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in all patients were 1.6 years (interquartile range: 0.63-6.6 years) and 4.4 years (2.1-8.7), respectively.  Before PSM, there was a significantly reduced RFS in the autotransfusion group (0.96 vs. 1.73 years, p = 0.20). There was no difference in OS (4.11 vs. 4.44 years, p = 0.118). Patients in groups of FCRS 0-2 and 3-5 both had reduced RFS when autotransfusion was used (p = 0.005). This reduction in RFS was further found when comparing autotransfusion versus no autotransfusion within the FCRS 0-2 group and within the FCRS 3-5 group (p = 0.027). On Cox-regression analysis, autotransfusion (hazard ratio = 1.423, 1.028-2.182, p = 0.015) remained predictive of RFS. After PSM, there were no differences in FCRS (p = 0.601), preoperative hemoglobin (p = 0.880), allotransfusion (p = 0.130), adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 1.000), immunotherapy (p = 0.172), tumor grade (p = 1.000), use of platinum-based chemotherapy (p = 0.548), or type of hepatic resection (p = 0.967). After matching, there was a higher rate of recurrence with autotransfusion (69.0% vs. 47.6%, p = 0.046). There was also a reduced time to recurrence in the autotransfusion group compared with the group without (p = 0.006). There was no difference in OS after PSM (p = 0.262).

CONCLUSION

Autotransfusion may adversely affect recurrence in liver resection for CRLM. Until further studies clarify this risk profile, the use of intraoperative autotransfusion should be critically assessed on a case-by-case basis only when other resuscitation options are not available.

Safety of Intraoperative Cell Salvage in Cancer Surgery: An Updated Meta-Analysis of the Current Literature

Background

Allogeneic blood transfusions in oncologic surgery are associated with increased recurrence and mortality. Adverse effects on outcome could be reduced or avoided by using intraoperative autologous blood cell salvage (IOCS). However, there are concerns regarding the safety of the autologous IOCS blood. Previous meta-analyses from 2012 and 2020 did not identify increased risk of cancer recurrence after using autologous IOCS blood. The objective of this review was to reassess a greater number of IOCS-treated patients to present an updated and more robust analysis of the current literature.

Methods

This systematic review includes full-text articles listed in PubMed, Cochrane, Cochrane Reviews, and Web of Science. We analyzed publications that discussed cell salvage or autotransfusion combined with the following outcomes: cancer recurrence, mortality, survival, allogeneic transfusion rate and requirements, length of hospital stay (LOS). To rate the strength of evidence, a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) of the underlying evidence was applied.

Results

In the updated meta-analysis, 7 further observational studies were added to the original 27 observational studies included in the former 2020 analysis. Studies compared either unfiltered (n = 2,311) or filtered (n = 850) IOCS (total n = 3,161) versus non-IOCS use (n = 5,342). Control patients were either treated with autologous predonated blood (n = 484), with allogeneic transfusion (n = 4,113), or did not receive a blood transfusion (n = 745). However, the current literature still contains only observational studies on these topics, and the strength of evidence remains low. The risk of cancer recurrence was reduced in recipients of autologous salvaged blood with or without LDF (odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64-0.90) compared to nontransfused patients or patients with allogeneic transfusion. There was no difference in mortality (OR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.71-1.27) and LOS (mean difference -0.07 days, 95% CI: -0.63 to 0.48) between patients treated with IOCS blood or those in whom IOCS was not used. Due to high heterogeneity, transfusion rates or volumes could not be analyzed.

Conclusion

Randomized controlled trials comparing mortality and cancer recurrence rate of IOCS with or without LDF filtration versus allogeneic blood transfusion were not found. Outcome was similar or better in patients receiving IOCS during cancer surgery compared to patients with allogeneic blood transfusion or nontransfused patients.

[Safety of cell salvage in tumor surgery : Systematic review with meta-analysis]

BACKGROUND

Allogeneic blood transfusion is avoidable in many oncological interventions by the use of cell salvage or mechanical autotransfusion (MAT). As irradiation is elaborate and expensive, the safety of leucocyte depletion filters (LDF) for autologous blood from the surgical field might be a more acceptable alternative for the prevention of cancer recurrences. A previous meta-analysis could not identify an increased risk of cancer recurrence. The aim of this review article is to provide an update of a previous meta-analysis from 2012 as well as a safety analysis of cell salvage with LDF due to the improved data situation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This systematic review included all studies in PubMed, Cochrane, Cochrane Reviews and Web of Science on cell salvage or autotransfusion combined with outcomes, e.g. cancer recurrence, mortality, survival, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay (LOS) after the use of MAT without irradiation and with or without LDF. The grades of recommendations (GRADE) assessment of underlying evidence was applied.

RESULTS

A total of seven new observational studies and seven meta-analyses were found that compared unfiltered or filtered cell salvage with autologous predeposition, allogeneic transfusion or without any transfusion. No randomized controlled trials have been completed. A total of 27 observational and cohort studies were included in a meta-analysis. The evidence level was low. The risk of cancer recurrence in recipients of autologous salvaged blood with or without LDF was reduced (odds ratio, OR 0.71, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.58-0.86) as compared to non-transfused subjects, allogeneic or predeposited autologous transfusion. The transfusion rate could not be assessed due to the substantial selection bias and large heterogeneity. Cell salvage does not change mortality and LOS. Leucocyte depletion studies reported a removal rate of cancer cells in the range of 99.6-99.9%.

CONCLUSION

Randomized controlled trials on a comparison of MAT and allogeneic blood transfusion as well as LDF and irradiation would be desirable but are not available. From observational trials and more than 6300 subjects and various tumors, cell salvage in cancer surgery with or without LDF appears to be sufficiently safe. The efficacy of leucocyte depletion of autologous salvaged blood is equivalent to irradiation. Unavailability of radiation is not a contraindication for cell salvage use in cancer surgery. By usage of leucocyte depleted salvaged autologous blood, the risks of allogeneic transfusion can be avoided.

Intraoperative cell salvage with autologous transfusion in elective right or repeat hepatectomy: a propensity-score-matched case-control analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver resection may be associated with substantial blood loss, and cell saver use has been recommended for patients at high risk. We performed a study to compare the allogenic erythrocyte transfusion rate after liver resection between patients who had intraoperative cell salvage with a cell saver device versus patients who did not. Our hypothesis was that cell salvage with autologous transfusion would reduce the allogenic blood transfusion rate.

METHODS

Cell salvage was used selectively in patients at high risk for intraoperative blood loss based on preoperatively known predictors: right and repeat hepatectomy. Patients who underwent elective right or repeat hepatectomy between Nov. 9, 2007, and Jan. 27, 2016 were considered for the study. Data were retrieved from a liver resection database and were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with cell saver use (since January 2013) constituted the experimental group, and those without cell salvage (2007-2012), the control group. To reduce selection bias, we matched propensity scores. The primary outcome was the allogenic blood transfusion rate within 90 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were the number of transfused erythrocyte units, and rates of overall and infectious complications.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients were included in the study, 41 in the cell saver group and 55 in the control group. Of the 96, 64 (67%) could be matched, 32 in either group. The 2 groups were balanced for demographic and clinical variables. The allogenic blood transfusion rate was 28% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.5%-43.7%) in the cell saver group versus 72% (95% CI 56.3%-87.5%) in the control group (p < 0.001). The overall and infectious complication rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative cell salvage with autologous transfusion in elective right or repeat hepatectomy reduced the allogenic blood transfusion rate.

Perioperative fluid management in major hepatic resection: an integrative review

BACKGROUND

Fluid intervention and vasoactive pharmacological support during hepatic resection depend on the preference of the attending clinician, institutional resources, and practice culture. Evidence-based recommendations to guide perioperative fluid management are currently limited. Therefore, we provide a contemporary clinical integrative overview of the fundamental principles underpinning fluid intervention and hemodynamic optimization for adult patients undergoing major hepatic resection.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review was performed of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials using the terms "surgery", "anesthesia", "starch", "hydroxyethyl starch derivatives", "albumin", "gelatin", "liver resection", "hepatic resection", "fluids", "fluid therapy", "crystalloid", "colloid", "saline", "plasma-Lyte", "plasmalyte", "hartmann's", "acetate", and "lactate". Search results for MEDLINE and EMBASE were additionally limited to studies on human populations that included adult age groups and publications in English.

RESULTS

A total of 113 articles were included after appropriate inclusion criteria screening. Perioperative fluid management as it relates to various anesthetic and surgical techniques is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should have a fundamental understanding of the surgical phases of the resection, hemodynamic goals, and anesthesia challenges in attempts to individualize therapy to the patient's underlying pathophysiological condition. Therefore, an ideal approach for perioperative fluid therapy is always individualized. Planning and designing large-scale clinical trials are imperative to define the optimal type and amount of fluid for patients undergoing major hepatic resection. Further clinical trials evaluating different intraoperative goal-directed strategies are also eagerly awaited.

Indications for and complications of transfusion and the management of gynecologic malignancies

Anemia, which is highly prevalent in oncology patients, is one of the most established negative prognostic factors for several gynecologic malignancies. Multiple factors can cause or contribute to the development of anemia in patients with gynecologic cancers; these factors include blood loss (during surgery or directly from the tumor), renal impairment (caused by platinum-based chemotherapy), and marrow dysfunction (from metastases, chemotherapy, and/or radiation therapy). Several peri- and intra-operative strategies can be used to optimize patient management and minimize blood loss related to surgery. Blood transfusions are routinely employed as corrective measures against anemia; however, blood transfusions are one of the most overused healthcare interventions. There are safe and effective evidence-based blood transfusion strategies used in other patient populations that warrant further investigation in the surgical oncology setting. Blood is a valuable healthcare resource, and clinicians can learn to use it more judiciously through knowledge of the potential risks and complications of blood interventions, as well as the ability to properly identify the patients most likely to benefit from such interventions.

Should intraoperative cell-salvaged blood be used in patients with suspected or known malignancy?

PURPOSE

Intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) is used as an alternative to allogeneic blood transfusion in an attempt to avoid or minimize the risks associated with allogeneic blood. Intraoperative cell salvage is generally avoided in surgeries where malignancy is confirmed or suspected due to concern for potential metastasis or cancer recurrence. The application of post-processing methods for ICS is hypothesized to eliminate this potential risk. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine the in vitro experimental evidence as it pertains to the removal of tumour cells from ICS blood and to review the clinical studies where ICS blood has been used in patients with malignancy.

SOURCE

A search of the English literature for relevant articles published from 1973 to 2012 was undertaken using MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Bibliographies were cross-referenced to locate further studies.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Leukoreduction filters are an effective method for removal of malignant cells from ICS blood. Small non-randomized clinical studies to date do not show evidence of an increased rate of metastasis or cancer recurrence. Although a theoretical risk of disease recurrence persists, the decision to use autologous ICS blood must be weighed against the known risks of allogeneic blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

Transfusion of autologous blood harvested via ICS should be considered a viable option for reduction or avoidance of allogeneic product during many oncologic surgeries and may be a lifesaving option for those patients who refuse allogeneic blood products.

2011 update to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists blood conservation clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

Practice guidelines reflect published literature. Because of the ever changing literature base, it is necessary to update and revise guideline recommendations from time to time. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons recommends review and possible update of previously published guidelines at least every three years. This summary is an update of the blood conservation guideline published in 2007.

METHODS

The search methods used in the current version differ compared to the previously published guideline. Literature searches were conducted using standardized MeSH terms from the National Library of Medicine PUBMED database list of search terms. The following terms comprised the standard baseline search terms for all topics and were connected with the logical 'OR' connector--Extracorporeal circulation (MeSH number E04.292), cardiovascular surgical procedures (MeSH number E04.100), and vascular diseases (MeSH number C14.907). Use of these broad search terms allowed specific topics to be added to the search with the logical 'AND' connector.

RESULTS

In this 2011 guideline update, areas of major revision include: 1) management of dual anti-platelet therapy before operation, 2) use of drugs that augment red blood cell volume or limit blood loss, 3) use of blood derivatives including fresh frozen plasma, Factor XIII, leukoreduced red blood cells, platelet plasmapheresis, recombinant Factor VII, antithrombin III, and Factor IX concentrates, 4) changes in management of blood salvage, 5) use of minimally invasive procedures to limit perioperative bleeding and blood transfusion, 6) recommendations for blood conservation related to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and cardiopulmonary perfusion, 7) use of topical hemostatic agents, and 8) new insights into the value of team interventions in blood management.

CONCLUSIONS

Much has changed since the previously published 2007 STS blood management guidelines and this document contains new and revised recommendations.

Use of a leucocyte filter to remove tumour cells from intra-operative cell salvage blood

SUMMARY

The intra-operative blood loss of 50 consecutive gynae-oncology patients undergoing surgery for endometrial, cervical or ovarian cancer was cell salvaged and filtered. In each case blood samples were taken from the effluent tumour vein, a central venous line, the cell saver reservoir, the cell salvage re-transfusion bag after processing but before filtration and from the cell salvage re-transfusion bag after processing and filtration. Samples were examined using immunohistochemical monoclonal antibody markers for epithelial cell lines. Viable, nucleated malignant cells were detected in 2/50 central venous samples, 34/50 reservoir samples and 31/50 unfiltered cell salvaged samples. After passage through a Pall RS leucocyte depletion filter no remaining viable, nucleated malignant cells were detected in any sample. The clinical risks of cell salvage in these circumstances should be reviewed in the light of the risks of allogeneic blood transfusion.

Autologous versus allogeneic transfusions: no difference in perioperative outcome after partial hepatectomy. Autologous transfusion on hepatectomy outcome

Blood transfusion is often necessary in patients undergoing liver resection. Because of the risks associated with allogeneic blood products, preoperative autologous blood donation has been advocated, but its benefit with respect to perioperative outcome remains unclear. This study compares perioperative outcome in patients transfused only with autologous blood to a matched cohort receiving only allogeneic blood. All patients subjected to hepatic resection and given only perioperative autologous red cell transfusions were identified from a prospective database of 2,123 patients and reviewed retrospectively. This group was matched to patients transfused only with a comparable number of allogeneic red cell units and to a control group that received no blood products. All patients in the autologous or allogeneic group received either 1 or 2 U. Matching was based on age, comorbidity, extent of hepatic resection, and estimated blood loss. Matched pair analysis was performed using the paired t test, McNemar and Stuart-Maxwell tests. From December 1991 to May 2003, 124 patients undergoing hepatic resection received perioperative autologous blood only, for which optimal matching was possible in 104. The groups were similar with respect to age, comorbidities, and blood loss; the proportions receiving preoperative chemotherapy, requiring a major resection (>or=3 segments) or a complex procedure (concomitant major procedure in addition to the principal hepatic resection) were also similar. There were no differences between the autologous and allogeneic groups in length of hospitalization, complications, and operative mortality. In patients undergoing hepatic resection, autologous blood transfusion did not demonstrably improve perioperative outcome when compared to a matched cohort of patients receiving a similar number of allogeneic units.

Blood salvage autotransfusion during transplantation for hepatocarcinoma: does it increase the risk of neoplastic recurrence?

Impact of intraoperative blood salvage autotransfusion (IBSA) on neoplastic recurrence. during liver transplantations for hepatocellular carcinoma (LT-HCC). Between January 1989 and February 2003, 16 patients received a LT-HCC without IBSA. This group was compared with 31 patients who received the same surgical procedure during the same period, but with IBSA. Data were prospectively collected. All patients had at least a 1-year postoperative follow up. Pairing was made according to the size of the largest nodule. The percentage of recurrence observed in the two groups was similar: 6.4% in the IBSA group vs. 6.3% in the group without IBSA. The median amount of transfused salvage blood was 1558 ml. The differences observed between the two groups concerned the Child score which was A in 58% patients of the IBSA group vs. 80% in the other group; the percentage of severe portal hypertension was 55% in the IBSA group vs. 31%; the median number of packed red blood cell units transfused intraoperatively was 7 in the IBSA group vs. 0, and the median number of frozen fresh plasma units transfused intraoperatively was 11 in the IBSA group vs. 4.5. It appears that IBSA, essentially used during the most haemorrhagic transplantations, could be used in the case of HCC because it does not modify the risk of neoplastic recurrence.

Evaluation of intraoperative autotransfusion filtration for hepatectomy and pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Hepatectomy and pancreatectomy are often associated with significant intraoperative blood loss leading to postoperative anemia, which has been demonstrated to lead to increased perioperative morbidity, a prolonged hospital stay, and decreased overall survival. Cancer has remained an absolute contraindication to autotransfusion because of the unproven concern about reinfusion of malignant cells. Thus, the aim of this study was to test for the presence of malignant cells in autotransfused filtered blood in patients undergoing major pancreatic and liver resection.

METHODS

A prospective study of 20 consecutive patients evaluated the presence of malignant cells from autotransfusion filtered blood after resection by flow cytometric and immunohistochemical methods.

RESULTS

Ten patients underwent major hepatectomy for metastatic colorectal cancer, with a median blood loss of 500 mL (range, 200-700 mL). Three patients received a total of six units of packed red blood cells. Ten patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma with a median blood loss of 400 mL (range, 200-1300 mL). Five patients received a total of nine units of packed red blood cells. Flow cytometry did not demonstrate the presence of any cytokeratin-positive carcinoma cells in filtered blood.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative autotransfusion for major hepatectomy in metastatic colorectal cancer and pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma is safe and should begin to be evaluated in a phase II study for efficacy.

One hundred consecutive hepatobiliary resections for biliary hilar malignancy: preoperative blood donation, blood loss, transfusion, and outcome

BACKGROUND

Many reports on blood loss and transfusion requirements during hepatectomy for metastatic liver cancer or hepatocellular carcinoma have been published; however, there are no reports on these issues in hepatectomy for biliary hilar malignancy. The aim of this study was to review our experience with blood loss and perioperative blood requirements in 100 consecutive hepatectomies for biliary hilar malignancy.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive hepatectomies with en bloc resection of the caudate lobe and extrahepatic bile duct for hilar malignancies were performed, including 81 perihilar cholangiocarcinomas and 19 advanced gallbladder carcinomas involving the hepatic hilus. Fifty-eight hilar resections were combined with other organ and/or vascular resection. Data on preoperative blood donation, intraoperative blood loss, and perioperative transfusion were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Preoperative autologous blood donation was possible in 73 patients (3.4 +/- 1.2 U). Intraoperative blood loss was 1850 +/- 1000 mL (range, 677-5900 mL), and it was < 2000 mL in 62 patients. Intraoperatively, only 7 of the 73 patients (10%) who donated blood received transfusion of unheated, homologous blood products (packed red blood cells or fresh frozen plasma), whereas 18 the 23 patients (67%) without donation received homologous transfusions. Only 16 patients received transfusion postoperatively, and overall, 35 patients received unheated homologous blood products. Total serum bilirubin concentrations after hepatectomy in patients receiving autologous blood transfusion only was similar to those in patients who did not receive transfusion. The incidence of postoperative complications was higher in the 35 patients who received perioperative homologous transfusion than in 65 patients who did not (94% vs 52%; P <.0001). The mortality rate (including all deaths) was 3% (myocardial infarction, intra-abdominal bleeding, and liver failure, 1 patient each).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the technical difficulties arising from hepatectomy for biliary hilar malignancy, approximately two thirds of hepatectomies can be performed in an experienced center without perioperative homologous blood transfusion using preoperative blood donation.

Can a leukocyte depletion filter (LDF) reduce the risk of reintroduction of hepatocellular carcinoma cells?

During liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, HCC could theoretically be introduced into the systemic circulation when salvaged blood is used with an autotransfusion device. Several reports have shown that some types of leukocyte depletion filters (LDFs) could completely reduce the risk for reintroducing some types of tumor cells. In this study, we tested the ability of the LDF (RCEZ1T, Pall Biomedical Co, NY, USA) to reduce the risk for reintroducing HCC cells in vitro by using a very sensitive detection method. We divided the test group into 6 groups: group I was 10 cells, group II was 20 cells, group III was 2 x 10(3) cells, group IV was 2 x 10(5) cells, group V was 2 x 10(6) cells, and group VI was 2 x 10(7) cells. The counted cells in 200 mL saline were passed through the RCEZ1T using the force of gravity. To identify the presence of cells, the pellet was resuspended, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed. Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), a housekeeping gene, was used as a primer. In groups I and II, the HCC cells were completely filtered in all experiments. However, in groups III, IV, and V, the HCC cells were not completely filtered in a few of the repeated experiments, with the unfiltered rate of tumor cells being between 8% and 20%. In group VI, the HCC cells were not completely filtered in all the repeated experiments. In conclusion, the RCEZ1T filter markedly reduced the risk for reintroduction of HCC cells. However, at high HCC cell load the filter cannot completely remove all the tumor cells. Further studies are required to assess the impact in clinical settings.

Autologous blood storage before hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma with underlying liver disease

BACKGROUND

Preoperative autologous blood donation has been suggested for patients with liver disease who are to undergo liver resection. The aim of this retrospective study was to clarify the risk factors for increased blood loss and the need for blood transfusion during hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

From January 1996 to December 2000, 206 consecutive patients, 98.5 per cent of whom had underlying liver disease, underwent elective hepatectomy for HCC.

RESULTS

Major hepatectomy was performed in 34 patients (16.5 per cent) and minor hepatectomy in 172 patients (83.5 per cent). The mean blood loss was 410 (median 260) ml. Eleven (5.3 per cent) of the 206 patients received blood transfusion during or after the operation. Operation time (P = 0.004) and central venous pressure (CVP) (P = 0.041) were independently correlated with blood loss of more than 1000 ml. Only preoperative haemoglobin level (P = 0.001) was independently correlated with the need for blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

In patients with underlying liver disease, maintaining CVP at a level below 5 cm H2O during parenchymal transection to reduce blood loss is more important than reserving autologous blood before the operation.

[Perioperative autotransfusion with salvage blood in cancer surgery]

OBJECTIVES

Intraoperative blood cells salvage using a Cell Saver technique is controversial in oncologic surgery because tumor cells could be aspirated and reinfused to the patient. The goal of this review was to discuss the risk associated with this technique, and the way to minimize it.

DATA SOURCES

A review of the literature has been made by questioning PubMed site (http://nbci.nlm.nih.gov) on the period of 1968 to 2000. The key words were: intraoperative blood salvage, blood transfusion, autologous, cancer. Cases reports have been excluded.

STUDY SELECTION

Tumor cells aspirated and reinfused have been numbered in both experimental and clinical studies. In clinical studies, the outcome after intraoperative cells salvage/reinfusion has been compared to published data or historical groups of allogeneic transfusion, all in non randomized studies.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Both experimental and clinical studies confirmed the presence of cancer cells in the blood either aspirated or reinfused. However, six clinical studies with limited number of patients did not show metastatic spread associated with Cell Saver. The addition of leukocyte filters reduces greatly this quantity of cancer cells. Irradiation of the pack did not destroy tumor cells but blocked their proliferative capacity. In the other hand, some infiltrative tumors were shown to have permanent cancer cells seeding, quantitatively superior to the seeding observed when a Cell Saver is used.

CONCLUSION

It seems reasonable to use the Cell Saver in oncologic surgery, if possible with a leukocyte filter, not only in case of unexpected major bleeding (consensus), but also in programmed cases with high risk of huge hemorrhage.

Autoapheresis and intraoperative blood salvage in oncologic surgery

Transfusion of predeposit or salvaged autologous blood has continued to grow since the 1980s. Issues such as the indications for use and cost effectiveness as well as the safety of autologous blood salvaged during cancer surgery have emerged and should be addressed. The concern for possible contamination of autologous RBC with cancer cells responsible for metastasis has limited the use of autologous salvaged blood in cancer patients. Nevertheless, clinical experience has been gained on the use of salvaged blood in patients with colorectal, gastric, renal, hepatic, breast, bladder and lung cancer. No evidence has been reported showing an increase in metastasis or a decrease in patient survival, in spite of the obvious demonstration that salvaged blood is contaminated with viable tumor cells which are not washed out of the RBC layer during intraoperative blood salvage (IOBS). However, a number of limitations have hampered the widespread use of IOBS in these patients and the technique is not well established. Increasing knowledge of the deleterious effects of allogeneic blood transfusion both in terms of the increased number of viral or bacterial infections and the down-regulation of the patient's immune system have recalled attention to IOBS and to the techniques such as filtration, which might reduce the risk of reinfusion of cancer cells, or totally eliminate the risks such as irradiation has been proposed by Hansen's group. This paper reviews the topic with some emphasis on our personal experience with gamma and X-ray irradiation of salvaged blood in a large reference hospital, where IOBS and filtration of salvaged blood were established for use in cancer patients in 1993 and 1996.

Perioperative autologous blood donation in children

Autologous blood donation in children has become a standard of care. Children have to live with the life-time complications associated with allogeneic blood including the transmission of known and unknown pathogens, and the impact of alloimmunization on future blood transfusions, organ transplants and pregnancies. Donor reaction, allogeneic exposure and utilization rates in pediatric preoperative autologous donation (PAD) programs are as good if not better than reported in adult literature. Children are very resilient when undergoing extreme isovolemic hemodilution (IHD). PAD, IHD and intraoperative blood recovery appear to be useful components of a pediatric blood conservation program. Prospective, randomized studies addressing the specific needs of children are required to properly define their perioperative role.

Blood irradiation for intraoperative autotransfusion in cancer surgery: demonstration of efficient elimination of contaminating tumor cells

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative blood salvage is contraindicated in cancer surgery because of contaminating tumor cells and the risk of systemic dissemination. On the basis of the radiosensitivity of cancer cells, irradiation of salvaged blood with 50 Gy is proposed as a way to allow return of salvaged blood.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Elimination of tumor cells by blood irradiation was studied in vitro with cells from 10 cell lines and from 14 tumor preparations after their addition to red cells in high numbers, or with blood shed during cancer surgery. Before and after gamma radiation, tumor cells were isolated by density gradient centrifugation and tested for their proliferative capacity in a cell colony assay. DNA metabolism was analyzed by incorporation of 5' bromodesoxyuridine.

RESULTS

Survival curves of cells from various tumors confirmed D0 (the dose required to reduce the fraction of surviving cells to 37 percent of the original value) values in the range of 1.2 to 2.2 Gy. After irradiation of tumor cell-contaminated blood with 50 Gy, no cell colony formation was observed, which indicates a reduction rate exceeding 10 log. Irradiated cancer cells showed viability, but no residual DNA metabolism.

CONCLUSION

The level of inactivation by a 50-Gy dose far exceeds that needed to inactivate the number of proliferating tumor cells observed or expected in wound blood. These results provide the experimental basis for the clinical application of blood irradiation for intraoperative blood salvage in cancer surgery.

Use of preoperative autologous blood donation in liver resections for colorectal metastases

BACKGROUND

Transfusion of allogeneic blood is associated with risks of human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis transmission, transfusion reactions, and other potential immunologic and infectious complications. To determine if predonation of autologous blood impacts upon transfusion practice and clinical outcome following liver resection, clinical records of 379 consecutive patients undergoing hepatic resection for metastases of colorectal cancer were identified from the prospective hepatobiliary database and reviewed.

METHODS

Of the 379 hepatic resections performed for colorectal metastases between January 1991 and January 1996, 240 (63%) were hepatic lobectomy or trisegmentectomy. Thirty-two percent of patients (123 of 379) agreed to preoperative blood donation (POBD), and their clinical characteristics including age, preoperative hemoglobin, and operative mortality were comparable with those of patients without POBD. Liver resections were carried out using standard vascular inflow and outflow control. Parenchymal transections were performed bluntly with maintenance of low central venous pressure (0 to 5 cm H2O). No vascular isolation or normovolemic hemodilution was used intraoperatively. All erythrocyte transfusions during the entire hospital stay were considered and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Forty-five percent of patients (172 of 379) received blood transfusions during or after liver resections, of which 61% (105 of 172) required only 1 or 2 units. Only 17% of the POBD group required allogeneic blood. This was significantly less than the group without POBD (43%, P <0.01). There was no significant difference in the operative mortality (2.3% versus 4.9%, P = 0.2) and the median survival (50 versus 40 months, P = 0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Major hepatic resections using current surgical techniques can be performed safely with low blood loss and transfusion is required for only a minority of patients. POBD further reduces transfusion requirement.

Cell saver and radical retropubic prostatectomy: analysis of cost-effectiveness

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of using cell saver suction during radical prostatectomy to decrease the risk of random donor transfusions in patients predonating blood, as well as to compare costs.

METHODS

From March 1992 to October 1993, two consecutive groups of 86 patients underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy. The first group utilized predonated blood alone, and the second group utilized cell saver suction and predonated blood. The two groups were compared with respect to their transfusion records, preoperative and discharge hemoglobins, and estimated blood losses to determine the usefulness of cell saver suction during radical retropubic prostatectomy.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference in the rate of random donor blood transfusions between these two evenly matched groups of patients. The risk of receiving random donor transfusions was decreased to 5% by having 4 U of blood predonated by or for the patient prior to radical prostatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients who are able to predonate blood, cell saver suction is neither cost-effective nor useful in decreasing the risk of receiving random donor blood transfusions.

Detrimental effects of perioperative blood transfusion

Evidence suggests that perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion increases the risk of infectious complications after major surgery and of cancer recurrence after curative operation. This has been attributed to immunosuppression. Several authors have suggested that filtered whole blood and/or red cell concentrate, or leucocyte- and buffy coat-reduced red cells in artificial medium or their own plasma, may reduce postoperative immunosuppression. It was also anticipated that the use of autologous blood might minimize the risk of perioperative transfusion, but studies have unexpectedly shown similar postoperative infectious complications and cancer recurrence and/or survival rates in patients receiving autologous blood donated before operation and those receiving allogeneic blood. Future studies should identify common risk factors associated with blood storage.

[Transfusion and cancer]

Relationship between blood transfusion and cancer is considered from five points of view: 1) The cancer patient as a blood donor. Cancer must remain a cause of exclusion from blood donation. 2) Autologous blood transfusion for cancer patients. Predeposited autologous blood transfusion is only possible for a small number of patients. Intraoperative blood salvage carries with it the risk of disseminating tumor cells. 3) History of blood transfusion and the risk of having a cancer: a) the persistence of immune alterations following blood transfusion for years might expose the patient to an increased risk of having a cancer; b) blood transfusion might carry immunosuppressive viruses, and hepatitis viruses are related to the risk of liver cancer. 4) Cancer recurrence and blood transfusion. Conclusion of most of the published studies is that blood transfusion is associated with an increased risk of recurrence of colorectal cancer. The only realistic randomized study would compare different transfusion strategies (allogenic, leukocyte poor allogenic and autologous blood transfusion) to determine which is the best for cancer patients. 5) Post-transfusion GVH in cancer patients. Some cases have recently been published. They all can be explained by a particular HLA compatibility between the recipient and one of the blood donors.