The benefit of the Hemonetics cell saver apparatus during cardiac surgery

Comparison of Haemonetics Cell Saver 5+ and manual density separation for optimum depletion of red blood cells and preservation of CD34+ cells in major ABO-incompatible bone marrow grafts

BACKGROUND AIMS

The current approach for preventing hemolysis of red blood cells (RBCs) in major ABO-incompatible bone marrow (BM) grafts after infusion is to deplete RBCs from BM products before transplantation. Traditionally, manual density separation (MDS) using Ficoll-Hypaque (Cytiva Sweden AB, Uppsala, Sweden has been used to accomplish RBC depletion. This process yields good CD34+ cell recovery, but it requires open manipulation and is labor-intensive and time-consuming. We hypothesized that an alternative automated method using Haemonetics Cell Saver 5+ (Haemonetics Corporation, Boston, MA, USA) would offer equivalent RBC depletion and CD34+ cell recovery. Small marrow volumes from pediatric donors can be processed using Cell Saver (CS) without adding the third-party RBCs necessary for other automated methods.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis comprised data from 58 allogeneic BM grafts. RBC depletion and CD34+ cell recovery from BM using MDS (35 grafts) were compared with CS (14 grafts). Nine products underwent RBC depletion using CS with Ficoll (CS-F) when RBC volume was less than 125 mL.

RESULTS

Linear regression analysis of log transformation of CD34+ cell recovery adjusted for log transformation of both baseline CD34+ cell content and baseline total volume showed no significant difference between MDS and CS (estimated coefficient, -0.121, P = 0.096). All products contained an RBC volume of less than 0.25 mL/kg post-processing. CD34+ cell recovery with CS-F was comparable to MDS and CS and suitable for pediatric recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide evidence that an automated method using Haemonetics Cell Saver 5+ achieves RBC depletion and CD34+ cell recovery comparable to MDS when adjusting for baseline factors.

Qualitative Assessment of Blood Washing with the Continuous Autologous Transfusion System (CATS)

A number of different blood-processing methods can be used at the end of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) to improve the quality of autologous blood. They include centrifugation, hemofiltration and cell-washing. They differ in processing time required, cost of disposables and the quality of the processed autologous blood product. The newly developed continuous auto-transfusion system (CATS: Fresenius AG, Bad Homburg) uses a continuous cell-washing method. In a prospective study, the oxygenator blood of 10 patients was processed at the end of cardiac surgery with CATS and the quality of autologous blood before and after processing was compared. The processing volumes and the time required were recorded. The concentrations and elimination rates of blood parameters and waste products such as activated coagulation and complement products were measured. At the end of CPB a mean volume of 1,010 ± 174 ml diluted oxygenator blood was processed and concentrated to 310 ± 88 ml in 11.0 ± 2.2 mins. Cellular elements such as erythrocytes and leucocytes were mostly retained and their concentration showed a significant increase after processing (250% and 210% respectively; p < 0.01). Thus, the blood processing with CATS resulted in an excellent hemoconcentration (hematocrit 62 ± 3 vs. 24 ± 4% before processing) with a consistent reproducibility. On the other hand, the CATS concentrate showed a significant loss of autologous plasma proteins. Likewise, all water soluble elements such as waste products are significantly lower in concentration after processing and, if calculated by quantity, they show a high elimination rate (> 93%).

In conclusion, the continuous autologous transfusion system permits an automated, rapid and continuous processing of autologous blood yielding a standardised high quality erythrocyte concentrate.

Management of intraoperative fluid balance and blood conservation techniques in adult cardiac surgery

Blood transfusions are associated with adverse physiologic effects and increased cost, and therefore reduction of blood product use during surgery is a desirable goal for all patients. Cardiac surgery is a major consumer of donor blood products, especially when cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is used, because hematocrit drops precipitously during CPB due to blood loss and blood cell dilution. Advanced age, low preoperative red blood cell volume (preoperative anemia or small body size), preoperative antiplatelet or antithrombotic drugs, complex or re-operative procedures or emergency operations, and patient comorbidities were identified as important transfusion risk indicators in a report recently published by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. This report also identified several pre- and intraoperative interventions that may help reduce blood transfusions, including off-pump procedures, preoperative autologous blood donation, normovolemic hemodilution, and routine cell saver use.A multimodal approach to blood conservation, with high-risk patients receiving all available interventions, may help preserve vital organ perfusion and reduce blood product utilization. In addition, because positive intravenous fluid balance is a significant factor affecting hemodilution during cardiac surgery, especially when CPB is used, strategies aimed at limiting intraoperative fluid balance positiveness may also lead to reduced blood product utilization.This review discusses currently available techniques that can be used intraoperatively in an attempt to avoid or minimize fluid balance positiveness, to preserve the patient's own red blood cells, and to decrease blood product utilization during cardiac surgery.

Coagulation and fibrinolytic protein kinetics in cardiopulmonary bypass

The development of Cardiopulmonary Bypass (CPB) catopulted the field of cardiothoracic surgery into a new dimension--one that changed the lives of individuals with congenital and acquired heart disease worldwide. Despite its contributions, CPB has clear limitations and creates unique challenges for clinicians and patients alike, stemming from profound hemostatic pertubations and accompanying risk for bleeding and possibly thrombotic complications.

Perioperative blood transfusion and blood conservation in cardiac surgery: the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and The Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND

A minority of patients having cardiac procedures (15% to 20%) consume more than 80% of the blood products transfused at operation. Blood must be viewed as a scarce resource that carries risks and benefits. A careful review of available evidence can provide guidelines to allocate this valuable resource and improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed all available published evidence related to blood conservation during cardiac operations, including randomized controlled trials, published observational information, and case reports. Conventional methods identified the level of evidence available for each of the blood conservation interventions. After considering the level of evidence, recommendations were made regarding each intervention using the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology classification scheme.

RESULTS

Review of published reports identified a high-risk profile associated with increased postoperative blood transfusion. Six variables stand out as important indicators of risk: (1) advanced age, (2) low preoperative red blood cell volume (preoperative anemia or small body size), (3) preoperative antiplatelet or antithrombotic drugs, (4) reoperative or complex procedures, (5) emergency operations, and (6) noncardiac patient comorbidities. Careful review revealed preoperative and perioperative interventions that are likely to reduce bleeding and postoperative blood transfusion. Preoperative interventions that are likely to reduce blood transfusion include identification of high-risk patients who should receive all available preoperative and perioperative blood conservation interventions and limitation of antithrombotic drugs. Perioperative blood conservation interventions include use of antifibrinolytic drugs, selective use of off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery, routine use of a cell-saving device, and implementation of appropriate transfusion indications. An important intervention is application of a multimodality blood conservation program that is institution based, accepted by all health care providers, and that involves well thought out transfusion algorithms to guide transfusion decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on available evidence, institution-specific protocols should screen for high-risk patients, as blood conservation interventions are likely to be most productive for this high-risk subset. Available evidence-based blood conservation techniques include (1) drugs that increase preoperative blood volume (eg, erythropoietin) or decrease postoperative bleeding (eg, antifibrinolytics), (2) devices that conserve blood (eg, intraoperative blood salvage and blood sparing interventions), (3) interventions that protect the patient's own blood from the stress of operation (eg, autologous predonation and normovolemic hemodilution), (4) consensus, institution-specific blood transfusion algorithms supplemented with point-of-care testing, and most importantly, (5) a multimodality approach to blood conservation combining all of the above.

Patients with a history of type II heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with thrombosis requiring cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass: a prospective observational case series

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with thrombosis (HITT) type II is a life-threatening complication of heparin therapy that most often occurs after 5-10 days of exposure to heparin. Anticoagulation is a significant concern for patients with HITT type II being prepared for cardiac surgery requiring cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). We report a case series of 12 patients with a history HITT type II who underwent CPB and cardiac surgery. Six patients did not express the antibody that mediates HITT type II immediately before surgery. Heparin was used as the anticoagulant for the duration of CPB only, and all these patients did well without thrombotic complications. Six patients expressed the antibody that mediates HITT type II immediately before surgery. Hirudin was used as the anticoagulant for CPB in these patients. The ecarin clotting time was used to guide hirudin therapy during CPB. The patients receiving hirudin did well, but they had a large amount of bleeding, required transfusions of multiple allogeneic blood products, and had a frequent rate of reexploration of the mediastinum after CPB.

Autotransfusion in cardiac surgery

There are a number of problems with allogeneic blood transfusion. Some of these problems are defined and can be quantified, such as the problem of rising cost or the risk of viral infection, but some of the problems are not well defined and it is only outcome data that point to allogeneic blood transfusion contributing to patient mortality and morbidity. Autotransfusion includes any technique in which the patient's own blood is collected, processed and stored, followed by reinfusion when circumstances dictate. In the perioperative period of cardiac surgery, a number of techniques are recognized as useful in this context. Preoperative autologous donation, with or without erythropoietin supplementation, intraoperative acute normovolaemic haemodilution, intraoperative cell salvage, postoperative cell salvage (reinfusion of shed mediastinal blood) and platelet rich plasmapheresis are all techniques which are used with more or less enthusiasm to reduce the need for an allogeneic blood transfusion. Modification of the priming technique of the cardiopulmonary bypass circuit using an autologous blood prime is included in this review even though it does not fall strictly within the definition of autotransfusion. Although autotransfusion is not the answer to every problem, there is no doubt that it should play a significant part in the strategy of blood conservation.

Cell salvage and leucodepletion

Cell salvage has been used as a method of blood conservation for more than three decades. Although the principles and development of the Latham bowl had occurred in the 1960s, it was not until the early 1970s that washing of the concentrated red cells was introduced and a product that was universally acceptable was obtained. The last 25 years have seen little in the way of development of cell salvage, although significant refinement has taken place. Although the simple picture of cell salvage involves removal of the buffy coat, including platelets and leucocytes, in practice there are reports of great variation in the removal of these cells. Most recent studies suggest that there is very little removal of leucocytes by cell salvage. The leucocytes that remain in the red cell suspension following cell salvage have undergone significant morphological changes and the surface expression of leucocyte adhesion receptors increases dramatically during the process. There is little evidence that removal of these activated leucocytes has any significant clinical benefit. Although leucofiltration of blood before storage has been shown to be an extremely safe process, 'bedside leucofiltration', including leucofiltration of cell salvage blood, may not be without problems. Reports of hypotensive events while receiving blood products through a bedside leucocyte reduction filter have emerged during the last few years. This may be due to bradykinin production following platelet exposure to negatively charged leucocyte filters.

Cell saver efficacy for routine coronary artery bypass surgery

A retrospective study was conducted to determine the effect of intraoperative Haemonetics Cell Saver (HCS) usage on postoperative homologous blood product requirements in CABG patients. From 1 January to 31 December 1993, 516 patients without renal disease or postoperative surgical or gastrointestinal haemorrhage had elective, first-time CABG surgery. The HCS was utilized in 435 of these patients (Group CS) and in 81 patients the HCS was excluded (Group NCS). Preoperative patient variables were similar in the group. We evaluated the HCS effect on blood product transfusion by comparing -x units of red blood cells (RBC), fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and platelets (PLTS) transfused per patient between groups CS and NCS. There were no differences in the -x units of RBC (1.9 +/- 2.7 CS vs. 1.8 +/- 1.5 NCS) or in the RBC transfusion rate (48% CS vs 50% NCS). There were also no significant differences between the groups in -x units of FFP (0.9 +/- 0.8 CS vs 0.4 +/- 0.9 NCS) or PLTS (0.7 +/- 3.1 CS vs 0.4 +/- 2.5 NCS), or in the percentage of patients receiving these products (12% CS vs 8% NCS). These data provide no evidence that the use of the HCS decreases the amount of homologous blood bank products required postoperatively in patients having routine first-time CABG surgery. The current era of aggressive blood conservation may have limited the role of the HCS in routine CABG surgery.