Can old dogs learn new "transfusion requirements in critical care": a survey of packed red blood cell transfusion practices among members of The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma

Determinants of hospital variability in perioperative red blood cell transfusions during coronary artery bypass graft surgery

OBJECTIVE

To identify to what extent distinguishing patient and procedural characteristics can explain center-level transfusion variation during coronary artery bypass grafting surgery.

METHODS

Observational cohort study using the Perfusion Measures and Outcomes Registry from 43 adult cardiac surgical programs from July 1, 2011, to July 1, 2017. Iterative multilevel logistic regression models were constructed using patient demographic characteristics, preoperative risk factors, and intraoperative conservation strategies to progressively explain center-level transfusion variation.

RESULTS

Of the 22,272 adult patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass, 7241 (32.5%) received at least 1 U allogeneic red blood cells (range, 10.9%-59.9%). When compared with patients who were not transfused, patients who received at least 1 U red blood cells were older (68 vs 64 years; P < .001), were women (41.5% vs 15.9%; P < .001), and had a lower body surface area (1.93 m² vs 2.07 m²; P < .001), respectively. Among the models explaining center-level transfusion variability, the intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.07 for model 1 (random intercepts), 0.12 for model 2 (patient factors), 0.14 for model 3 (intraoperative factors), and 0.11 for model 4 (combined). The coefficient of variation for center-level transfusion rates were 0.31, 0.29, 0.40, and 0.30 for models 1 through 4, respectively. The majority of center-level variation could not be explained through models containing both patient and intraoperative factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that variation in center-level red blood cells transfusion cannot be explained by patient and procedural factors alone. Investigating organizational culture and programmatic infrastructure may be necessary to better understand variation in transfusion practices.

Red blood cell transfusion and its alternatives in oncologic surgery-A critical evaluation

Although blood transfusions have been used for more than 100 years and their potential to save lives is indisputable, there is still limited data on medium- and long-term outcomes after hemotherapy. Until recently, red blood cell transfusions represented the most commonly employed treatment for cancer anemia. As transfusions have been related to worse patient outcome in oncologic surgery, preventive strategies and alternative treatment approaches in the perioperative setting are warranted. This review aims to evaluate the evidence concerning the impact of transfusion on the course of malignant diseases with a focus on oncologic surgery and to provide a bundle of measures to improve patient care. The perioperative period is pivotal in determining long-term cancer outcome. An increasingly recognized area for improvement during this highly sensitive period is the treatment of anemia for three main reasons: Firstly, anemia has been recognized as an independent predictor of poor prognosis in cancer patients. Secondly, anemia is largely undertreated. Thirdly and probably most importantly, anemia therapy relied and often still relies heavily on red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, which may be an often suboptimal stopgap treatment. Perioperative RBC transfusions should be kept to a minimum due to growing concerns regarding the associated risks, which this review tries to clarify by providing an update of recent literature. This review furthermore discusses treatments for anemia and provides best-practice approaches to improve perioperative management of oncology patients undergoing surgery.

Transfusion Practices Among General Surgeons at a Tertiary Care Center: a Survey Based Study

INTRODUCTION

Blood transfusion practices affect both patient's outcomes and utilization of institutional resources. Evidence shows that liberal blood transfusion has a detrimental effect on patient's outcome. A restrictive approach of blood transfusion is recommended by current clinical guidelines.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the attitudes, knowledge, and practices of general surgery (GS) staff and residents regarding peri-operative blood transfusion and anemia management.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A self-administered, web-based questionnaire was developed, and its link was sent to the emails of all general surgeons at King Abdul-Aziz University Hospital (KAUH), Jeddah city, Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire included four parts: 1) background of surgeons; 2) preoperative assessment and management of anemia; 3) post-operative blood transfusion and alternatives; and 4) enablers and barriers.

RESULTS

56 surgeons responded to the questionnaire. We found variations in blood transfusion practices, notably the hemoglobin threshold. For stable non-cardiac cases, 7 g/dL was considered the threshold by 50% of respondents. For stable patients with past cardiac disease, a higher threshold was chosen by most (9 g/dL by 43% and 10 gm/dL by 21%). Most respondents believed that transfusion had no effect on the risk of survival (73%) and on the risk of cancer recurrence (55%) after oncologic surgical resection. Recognized facilitators were the availability of scientific evidence (84%), medicolegal concerns (57%), preference (52%), and institutional protocols (50%).

CONCLUSION

Although current clinical guidelines recommend a restrictive transfusion practice, most respondents tended to over-order blood for elective procedures and were not aware of the potential complications of liberal blood transfusion. To implement the restrictive transfusion policies, health institutions should improve the awareness of surgeons and incorporate a strong supporting evidence in formulating local institutional guidelines.

Higher vs. lower haemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock: subgroup analyses of the TRISS trial

BACKGROUND

Using a restrictive transfusion strategy appears to be safe in sepsis, but there may be subgroups of patients who benefit from transfusion at a higher haemoglobin level. We explored if subgroups of patients with septic shock and anaemia had better outcome when transfused at a higher vs. a lower haemoglobin threshold.

METHODS

In post-hoc analyses of the full trial population of 998 patients from the Transfusion Requirements in Septic Shock (TRISS) trial, we investigated the intervention effect on 90-day mortality in patients with severe comorbidity (chronic lung disease, haematological malignancy or metastatic cancer), in patients who had undergone surgery (elective or acute) and in patients with septic shock as defined by the new consensus definition: lactate above 2 mmol/l and the need for vasopressors to maintain a mean arterial pressure above 65 mmHg.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics were mostly similar between the two intervention groups in the different subgroups. There were no differences in the intervention effect on 90-day mortality in patients with chronic lung disease (test of interaction P = 0.31), haematological malignancy (P = 0.47), metastatic cancer (P = 0.51), in those who had undergone surgery (P = 0.99) or in patients with septic shock by the new definition (P = 0.20).

CONCLUSION

In exploratory analyses of a randomized trial in patients with septic shock and anaemia, we observed no survival benefit in any subgroups of transfusion at a haemoglobin threshold of 90 g/l vs. 70 g/l.

Past, present and forecast of transfusion medicine: What has changed and what is expected to change?

Blood transfusion is the second most used medical procedures in health care systems worldwide. Over the last few decades, significant changes have been evolved in transfusion medicine practices. These changes were mainly needed to increase safety, efficacy, and availability of blood products as well as reduce recipients' unnecessary exposure to allogeneic blood. Blood products collection, processing, and storage as well as transfusion practices throughout all patient populations were the main stream of these changes. Health care systems across the world have adopted some or most of these changes to reduce transfusion risks, to improve overall patients' outcome, and to reduce health care costs. In this article, we are going to present and discuss some of these recent modifications and their impact on patients' safety.

Understanding Perioperative Transfusion Practices in Gastrointestinal Surgery-a Practice Survey of General Surgeons

BACKGROUND

Despite guidelines recommending restrictive red blood cell transfusion (RBCT) strategies, perioperative transfusion practices still vary significantly. To understand the underlying mechanisms that lead to gaps in practice, we sought to assess the attitudes of surgeons regarding the perioperative management of anemia and use of RBCT in patients having gastrointestinal surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a self-administered Web-based survey of general surgery staff and residents, in a network of eight academic institutions at the University of Toronto. We developed a questionnaire using a systematic approach of items generation and reduction. We tested face and content validity and test-retest reliability. We administered the survey via emails, with planned reminders.

RESULTS

Total response rate was 48.1 % (62/125). Half (51.0 %) of respondents stated that they were unlikely to conduct a preoperative anemia work-up. About 54.0 % reported ordering preoperative oral iron supplementation for anemia. Most respondents indicated using a 70 g/L hemoglobin trigger (92.0 %) for transfusion. Factors increasing thresholds above 70 g/L included cardiac comorbidity (58.0 %), acute cardiac disease (94.0 %), symptomatic anemia (68.0 %), and suspected bleeding (58.0 %). With those factors, the transfusion threshold often increased above 90 g/L. Respondents perceived RBCTs to increase the postoperative morbidity (62 %), but not to impact the mortality (48 %) and cancer recurrence (52 %). Institutional protocols (68.0 %), blood conservation clinics (44.0 %), and clinical practice guidelines (84.0 %) were believed to encourage restrictive use of RBCTs.

CONCLUSION

Self-reported perioperative transfusion practices for GI surgery are heterogeneous. Few respondents investigated preoperative anemia. Stated use of RBCT indications varied from recommendations in published guidelines for patients with symptomatic anemia. Establishing team consensus and implementing local blood management guidelines appear necessary to improve uptake of evidence-based recommendations.