Occurrence and determinants of poor response to short-term pre-operative erythropoietin treatment

Management of severe peri-operative bleeding: Guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care: Second update 2022

BACKGROUND

Management of peri-operative bleeding is complex and involves multiple assessment tools and strategies to ensure optimal patient care with the goal of reducing morbidity and mortality. These updated guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) aim to provide an evidence-based set of recommendations for healthcare professionals to help ensure improved clinical management.

DESIGN

A systematic literature search from 2015 to 2021 of several electronic databases was performed without language restrictions. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies and to formulate recommendations. A Delphi methodology was used to prepare a clinical practice guideline.

RESULTS

These searches identified 137 999 articles. All articles were assessed, and the existing 2017 guidelines were revised to incorporate new evidence. Sixteen recommendations derived from the systematic literature search, and four clinical guidances retained from previous ESAIC guidelines were formulated. Using the Delphi process on 253 sentences of guidance, strong consensus (>90% agreement) was achieved in 97% and consensus (75 to 90% agreement) in 3%.

DISCUSSION

Peri-operative bleeding management encompasses the patient's journey from the pre-operative state through the postoperative period. Along this journey, many features of the patient's pre-operative coagulation status, underlying comorbidities, general health and the procedures that they are undergoing need to be taken into account. Due to the many important aspects in peri-operative nontrauma bleeding management, guidance as to how best approach and treat each individual patient are key. Understanding which therapeutic approaches are most valuable at each timepoint can only enhance patient care, ensuring the best outcomes by reducing blood loss and, therefore, overall morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

All healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients at risk for surgical bleeding should be aware of the current therapeutic options and approaches that are available to them. These guidelines aim to provide specific guidance for bleeding management in a variety of clinical situations.

Preoperative Epoetin-α with Intravenous or Oral Iron for Major Orthopedic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THIS TOPIC

WHAT THIS ARTICLE TELLS US THAT IS NEW: BACKGROUND:: Preoperative administration of epoetin-α with iron is commonly used in anemic patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery, but the optimal route of iron intake is controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effects of erythropoietin in combination with oral or intravenous iron supplementation.

METHODS

This study was a prospective, randomized, single-blinded, parallel arm trial. Patients scheduled for elective hip or knee arthroplasty with hemoglobin 10 to 13 g/dl received preoperative injections of erythropoietin with oral ferrous sulfate or intravenous ferric carboxymaltose. The primary endpoint was the hemoglobin value the day before surgery.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were included in the analysis. The day before surgery, hemoglobin, increase in hemoglobin, and serum ferritin level were higher in the intravenous group. For the intravenous and oral groups, respectively, hemoglobin was as follows: median, 14.9 g/dl (interquartile range, 14.1 to 15.6) versus 13.9 g/dl (interquartile range, 13.2 to 15.1), group difference, 0.65 g/dl (95% CI, 0.1 to 1.2; P = 0.017); increase in hemoglobin: 2.6 g/dl (interquartile range, 2.1 to 3.2) versus 1.9 g/dl (interquartile range, 1.4 to 2.5), group difference, 0.7 g/dl (95% CI, 0.3 to 1.1; P < 0.001); serum ferritin: 325 µg/l (interquartile range, 217 to 476) versus 64.5 µg/l (interquartile range, 44 to 107), group difference, 257 µg/l (95% CI, 199 to 315; P < 0.001). The percentage of patients with nausea, diarrhea, or constipation was higher in the oral group, 52% versus 2%; group difference, 50% (95% CI, 35 to 64%; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

After preoperative administration of erythropoietin, body iron stores and stimulation of the erythropoiesis were greater with intravenous ferric carboxymaltose than with oral ferrous sulfate supplementation.

Preoperative erythropoietin administration in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy without transfusion

Purpose

In this study, we administered erythropoietin preoperatively to patients who underwent open radical prostatectomy without transfusion to increase their hemoglobin levels and investigated the efficacy of this procedure.

Materials and Methods

We evaluated 62 patients who underwent open radical prostatectomy performed by the same surgeon between June 2005 and January 2011. The 22 patients who refused transfusion were assigned to group 1; the patients who accepted transfusion were assigned to group 2. Before surgery, we administered erythropoietin beta to group 1 patients whose hemoglobin levels were <12 g/dL and retrospectively compared the clinical data of the two groups. We used the t-test and the chi-square test for statistical analysis.

Results

Mean preoperative hemoglobin levels in group 1 after erythropoietin administration (14.5 g/dL) were significantly higher than those in group 2 (13.59 g/dL, p=0.003). Moreover, the difference in the mean hemoglobin levels before and after surgery for group 1 patients (3.55 g/dL) significantly exceeded that for group 2 patients (2.08 g/dL, p=0.000). Additional analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in perioperative complications between the groups.

Conclusions

Preoperative erythropoietin administration increased the safety margin of hemoglobin levels, and this strategy worked sufficiently well in our experience.