The role of intra-operative cell salvage in patient blood management for revision hip arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study

Safety of Intraoperative Cell Salvage in Two-Stage Revision of Septic Hip Arthroplasties

(1) Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) during reimplantation in the two-stage revision of septic hip arthroplasties. (2) Methods: As part of an internal quality control study, blood cultures were taken from the processed ICS blood during reimplantation and examined for possible bacterial load (study group). Due to a high rate of bacterial detection with uncertain clinical significance, consecutive ICS samples were also examined from patients undergoing aseptic revision hip arthroplasty (control group). Microbiological samples, patient and surgical characteristics and the follow-up data were analyzed retrospectively. (3) Results: 9 out of 12 (75%) patients in the study group and 5 out of 8 (63%) patients in the control group had positive ICS blood cultures. There was no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.642). The initial pathogens causing the periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) were not detected, but the bacterial spectrum resembled skin flora, with a high proportion of coagulase-negative staphylococci. No complications due to possible bloodstream-associated infections were observed. In summary, the detected pathogens were interpreted as contamination without clinical significance. (4) Conclusions: ICS in the context of reimplantation was considered a safe and recommendable procedure to optimize patient blood management.

Pharmacological interventions for the prevention of bleeding in people undergoing elective hip or knee surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip and knee replacement surgery is a well-established means of improving quality of life, but is associated with a significant risk of bleeding. One-third of people are estimated to be anaemic before hip or knee replacement surgery; coupled with the blood lost during surgery, up to 90% of individuals are anaemic postoperatively. As a result, people undergoing orthopaedic surgery receive 3.9% of all packed red blood cell transfusions in the UK. Bleeding and the need for allogeneic blood transfusions has been shown to increase the risk of surgical site infection and mortality, and is associated with an increased duration of hospital stay and costs associated with surgery. Reducing blood loss during surgery may reduce the risk of allogeneic blood transfusion, reduce costs and improve outcomes following surgery. Several pharmacological interventions are available and currently employed as part of routine clinical care.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative efficacy of pharmacological interventions for preventing blood loss in elective primary or revision hip or knee replacement, and to identify optimal administration of interventions regarding timing, dose and route, using network meta-analysis (NMA) methodology.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews, from inception to 18 October 2022: CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Transfusion Evidence Library (Evidentia), ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs of people undergoing elective hip or knee surgery only. We excluded non-elective or emergency procedures, and studies published since 2010 that had not been prospectively registered (Cochrane Injuries policy). There were no restrictions on gender, ethnicity or age (adults only). We excluded studies that used standard of care as the comparator. Eligible interventions included: antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid (TXA), aprotinin, epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA)), desmopressin, factor VIIa and XIII, fibrinogen, fibrin sealants and non-fibrin sealants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed the review according to standard Cochrane methodology. Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using CINeMA. We presented direct (pairwise) results using RevMan Web and performed the NMA using BUGSnet. We were interested in the following primary outcomes: need for allogenic blood transfusion (up to 30 days) and all-cause mortality (deaths occurring up to 30 days after the operation), and the following secondary outcomes: mean number of transfusion episodes per person (up to 30 days), re-operation due to bleeding (within seven days), length of hospital stay and adverse events related to the intervention received.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 102 studies. Twelve studies did not report the number of included participants; the other 90 studies included 8418 participants. Trials included more women (64%) than men (36%). In the NMA for allogeneic blood transfusion, we included 47 studies (4398 participants). Most studies examined TXA (58 arms, 56%). We found that TXA, given intra-articularly and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g pre-incision, intraoperatively and postoperatively, ranked the highest, with an anticipated absolute effect of 147 fewer blood transfusions per 1000 people (150 fewer to 104 fewer) (53% chance of ranking 1st) within the NMA (risk ratio (RR) 0.02, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0 to 0.31; moderate-certainty evidence). This was followed by TXA given orally at a total dose of 3 g pre-incision and postoperatively (RR 0.06, 95% CrI 0.00 to 1.34; low-certainty evidence) and TXA given intravenously and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g intraoperatively and postoperatively (RR 0.10, 95% CrI 0.02 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence). Aprotinin (RR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.96; low-certainty evidence), topical fibrin (RR 0.86, CrI 0.25 to 2.93; very low-certainty evidence) and EACA (RR 0.60, 95% CrI 0.29 to 1.27; very low-certainty evidence) were not shown to be as effective compared with TXA at reducing the risk of blood transfusion. We were unable to perform an NMA for our primary outcome all-cause mortality within 30 days of surgery due to the large number of studies with zero events, or because the outcome was not reported. In the NMA for deep vein thrombosis (DVT), we included 19 studies (2395 participants). Most studies examined TXA (27 arms, 64%). No studies assessed desmopressin, EACA or topical fibrin. We found that TXA given intravenously and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g intraoperatively and postoperatively ranked the highest, with an anticipated absolute effect of 67 fewer DVTs per 1000 people (67 fewer to 34 more) (26% chance of ranking first) within the NMA (RR 0.16, 95% CrI 0.02 to 1.43; low-certainty evidence). This was followed by TXA given intravenously and intra-articularly at a total dose of 2 g pre-incision and intraoperatively (RR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.00 to 9.12; low-certainty evidence) and TXA given intravenously and intra-articularly, total dose greater than 3 g pre-incision, intraoperatively and postoperatively (RR 0.13, 95% CrI 0.01 to 3.11; low-certainty evidence). Aprotinin was not shown to be as effective compared with TXA (RR 0.67, 95% CrI 0.28 to 1.62; very low-certainty evidence). We were unable to perform an NMA for our secondary outcomes pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction and CVA (stroke) within 30 days, mean number of transfusion episodes per person (up to 30 days), re-operation due to bleeding (within seven days), or length of hospital stay, due to the large number of studies with zero events, or because the outcome was not reported by enough studies to build a network. There are 30 ongoing trials planning to recruit 3776 participants, the majority examining TXA (26 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that of all the interventions studied, TXA is probably the most effective intervention for preventing bleeding in people undergoing hip or knee replacement surgery. Aprotinin and EACA may not be as effective as TXA at preventing the need for allogeneic blood transfusion. We were not able to draw strong conclusions on the optimal dose, route and timing of administration of TXA. We found that TXA given at higher doses tended to rank higher in the treatment hierarchy, and we also found that it may be more beneficial to use a mixed route of administration (oral and intra-articular, oral and intravenous, or intravenous and intra-articular). Oral administration may be as effective as intravenous administration of TXA. We found little to no evidence of harm associated with higher doses of tranexamic acid in the risk of DVT. However, we are not able to definitively draw these conclusions based on the trials included within this review.

Intraoperative cell salvage in revision hip arthroplasty

Aims

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the evidence for the use of intraoperative cell salvage in patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty, and specifically to analyze the available data in order to quantify any associated reduction in the use of allogenic blood transfusion, and the volume which is used.

Methods

An electronic search of MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was completed from the date of their inception to 24 February 2022, using a search strategy and protocol created in conjunction with the PRISMA statement. Inclusion criteria were patients aged > 18 years who underwent revision hip arthroplasty when cell salvage was used. Studies in which pre-donated red blood cells were used were excluded. A meta-analysis was also performed using a random effects model with significance set at p = 0.05.

Results

Of the 283 studies which were identified, 11 were included in the systematic review, and nine in the meta-analysis. There was a significant difference (p < 0.001) in the proportion of patients requiring allogenic transfusion between groups, with an odds ratio of 0.331 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.165 to 0.663) associated with the use of cell salvage. For a total of 561 patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty who were treated with cell salvage, 247 (44.0%) required allogenic transfusion compared with 418 of 643 patients (65.0%) who were treated without cell salvage. For those treated with cell salvage, the mean volume of allogenic blood which was required was 1.95 units (390 ml) per patient (0.7 to 4.5 units), compared with 3.25 units (650 ml) per patient (1.2 to 7.0 units) in those treated without cell salvage. The mean difference of -1.91 units (95% CI -4.0 to 0.2) in the meta-analysis was also significant (p = 0.003).

Conclusion

We found a a significant reduction in the need for allogenic blood transfusion when cell salvage was used in patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty, supporting its routine use in these patients. Further research is required to determine whether this effect is associated with types of revision arthroplasty of differing complexity.

Cell salvage for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion in adults undergoing elective surgery

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety and availability of transfused donor blood have prompted research into a range of techniques to minimise allogeneic transfusion requirements. Cell salvage (CS) describes the recovery of blood from the surgical field, either during or after surgery, for reinfusion back to the patient.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of CS in minimising perioperative allogeneic red blood cell transfusion and on other clinical outcomes in adults undergoing elective or non-urgent surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two clinical trials registers for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews from 2009 (date of previous search) to 19 January 2023, without restrictions on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs assessing the use of CS compared to no CS in adults (participants aged 18 or over, or using the study's definition of adult) undergoing elective (non-urgent) surgery only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 106 RCTs, incorporating data from 14,528 participants, reported in studies conducted in 24 countries. Results were published between 1978 and 2021. We analysed all data according to a single comparison: CS versus no CS. We separated analyses by type of surgery. The certainty of the evidence varied from very low certainty to high certainty. Reasons for downgrading the certainty included imprecision (small sample sizes below the optimal information size required to detect a difference, and wide confidence intervals), inconsistency (high statistical heterogeneity), and risk of bias (high risk from domains including sequence generation, blinding, and baseline imbalances). Aggregate analysis (all surgeries combined: primary outcome only) Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain if there is a reduction in the risk of allogeneic transfusion with CS (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.72; 82 RCTs, 12,520 participants). Cancer: 2 RCTs (79 participants) Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain whether there is a difference for mortality, blood loss, infection, or deep vein thrombosis (DVT). There were no analysable data reported for the remaining outcomes. Cardiovascular (vascular): 6 RCTs (384 participants) Very low- to low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain whether there is a difference for most outcomes. No data were reported for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Cardiovascular (no bypass): 6 RCTs (372 participants) Moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is probably a reduction in risk of allogeneic transfusion with CS (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.97; 3 RCTs, 169 participants). Very low- to low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain whether there is a difference for volume transfused, blood loss, mortality, re-operation for bleeding, infection, wound complication, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and hospital length of stay (LOS). There were no analysable data reported for thrombosis, DVT, pulmonary embolism (PE), and MACE. Cardiovascular (with bypass): 29 RCTs (2936 participants) Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be a reduction in the risk of allogeneic transfusion with CS, and suggests there may be no difference in risk of infection and hospital LOS. Very low- to moderate-certainty evidence means we are uncertain whether there is a reduction in volume transfused because of CS, or if there is any difference for mortality, blood loss, re-operation for bleeding, wound complication, thrombosis, DVT, PE, MACE, and MI, and probably no difference in risk of stroke. Obstetrics: 1 RCT (1356 participants) High-certainty evidence shows there is no difference between groups for mean volume of allogeneic blood transfused (mean difference (MD) -0.02 units, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.04; 1 RCT, 1349 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be no difference for risk of allogeneic transfusion. There were no analysable data reported for the remaining outcomes. Orthopaedic (hip only): 17 RCTs (2055 participants) Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain if CS reduces the risk of allogeneic transfusion, and the volume transfused, or if there is any difference between groups for mortality, blood loss, re-operation for bleeding, infection, wound complication, prosthetic joint infection (PJI), thrombosis, DVT, PE, stroke, and hospital LOS. There were no analysable data reported for MACE and MI. Orthopaedic (knee only): 26 RCTs (2568 participants) Very low- to low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain if CS reduces the risk of allogeneic transfusion, and the volume transfused, and whether there is a difference for blood loss, re-operation for bleeding, infection, wound complication, PJI, DVT, PE, MI, MACE, stroke, and hospital LOS. There were no analysable data reported for mortality and thrombosis. Orthopaedic (spine only): 6 RCTs (404 participants) Moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is probably a reduction in the need for allogeneic transfusion with CS (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.63; 3 RCTs, 194 participants). Very low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests there may be no difference for volume transfused, blood loss, infection, wound complication, and PE. There were no analysable data reported for mortality, re-operation for bleeding, PJI, thrombosis, DVT, MACE, MI, stroke, and hospital LOS. Orthopaedic (mixed): 14 RCTs (4374 participants) Very low- to low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain if there is a reduction in the need for allogeneic transfusion with CS, or if there is any difference between groups for volume transfused, mortality, blood loss, infection, wound complication, PJI, thrombosis, DVT, MI, and hospital LOS. There were no analysable data reported for re-operation for bleeding, MACE, and stroke.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In some types of elective surgery, cell salvage may reduce the need for and volume of allogeneic transfusion, alongside evidence of no difference in adverse events, when compared to no cell salvage. Further research is required to establish why other surgeries show no benefit from CS, through further analysis of the current evidence. More large RCTs in under-reported specialities are needed to expand the evidence base for exploring the impact of CS.

Pharmacological interventions for the prevention of bleeding in people undergoing definitive fixation or joint replacement for hip, pelvic and long bone fractures

BACKGROUND

Pelvic, hip, and long bone fractures can result in significant bleeding at the time of injury, with further blood loss if they are treated with surgical fixation. People undergoing surgery are therefore at risk of requiring a blood transfusion and may be at risk of peri-operative anaemia. Pharmacological interventions for blood conservation may reduce the risk of requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion and associated complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of different pharmacological interventions for reducing blood loss in definitive surgical fixation of the hip, pelvic, and long bones.

SEARCH METHODS

We used a predefined search strategy to search CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Transfusion Evidence Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) from inception to 7 April 2022, without restrictions on language, year, or publication status. We handsearched reference lists of included trials to identify further relevant trials. We contacted authors of ongoing trials to acquire any unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people who underwent trauma (non-elective) surgery for definitive fixation of hip, pelvic, and long bone (pelvis, tibia, femur, humerus, radius, ulna and clavicle) fractures only. There were no restrictions on gender, ethnicity, or age. We excluded planned (elective) procedures (e.g. scheduled total hip arthroplasty), and studies published since 2010 that had not been prospectively registered. Eligible interventions included: antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid, aprotinin, epsilon-aminocaproic acid), desmopressin, factor VIIa and XIII, fibrinogen, fibrin sealants, and non-fibrin sealants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We did not perform a network meta-analysis due to lack of data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs (929 participants), published between 2005 and 2021. Three trials did not report any of our predefined outcomes and so were not included in quantitative analyses (all were tranexamic acid versus placebo). We identified three comparisons of interest: intravenous tranexamic acid versus placebo; topical tranexamic acid versus placebo; and recombinant factor VIIa versus placebo. We rated the certainty of evidence as very low to low across all outcomes. Comparison 1. Intravenous tranexamic acid versus placebo Intravenous tranexamic acid compared to placebo may reduce the risk of requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion up to 30 days (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.69; 6 RCTs, 457 participants; low-certainty evidence) and may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.77; 2 RCTs, 147 participants; low-certainty evidence).  It may result in little to no difference in risk of participants experiencing myocardial infarction (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 2 RCTs, 199 participants; low-certainty evidence), and cerebrovascular accident/stroke (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 3 RCTs, 324 participants; low-certainty evidence).  We are uncertain if there is a difference between groups for risk of deep vein thrombosis (Peto OR 2.15, 95% CI 0.22 to 21.35; 4 RCTs, 329 participants, very low-certainty evidence), pulmonary embolism (Peto OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.66; 4 RCTs, 329 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and suspected serious drug reactions (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 2 RCTs, 185 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for number of red blood cell units transfused, reoperation, or acute transfusion reaction. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for imprecision (wide confidence intervals around the estimate and small sample size, particularly for rare events), and risk of bias (unclear or high risk methods of blinding and allocation concealment in the assessment of subjective measures), and upgraded the evidence for transfusion requirement for a large effect.  Comparison 2. Topical tranexamic acid versus placebo We are uncertain if there is a difference between topical tranexamic acid and placebo for risk of requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.22; 2 RCTs, 101 participants), all-cause mortality (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; 1 RCT, 36 participants), risk of participants experiencing myocardial infarction (Peto OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.00 to 7.62; 1 RCT, 36 participants), cerebrovascular accident/stroke (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; 1 RCT, 65 participants); and deep vein thrombosis (Peto OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.77; 2 RCTs, 101 participants).  All outcomes reported were very low-certainty evidence. No data were available for number of red blood cell units transfused, reoperation, incidence of pulmonary embolism, acute transfusion reaction, or suspected serious drug reactions. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for imprecision (wide confidence intervals around the estimate and small sample size, particularly for rare events), inconsistency (moderate heterogeneity), and risk of bias (unclear or high risk methods of blinding and allocation concealment in the assessment of subjective measures, and high risk of attrition and reporting biases in one trial). Comparison 3. Recombinant factor VIIa versus placebo   Only one RCT of 48 participants reported data for recombinant factor VIIa versus placebo, so we have not presented the results here.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We cannot draw conclusions from the current evidence due to lack of data. Most published studies included in our analyses assessed the use of tranexamic acid (compared to placebo, or using different routes of administration).  We identified 27 prospectively registered ongoing RCTs (total target recruitment of 4177 participants by end of 2023). The ongoing trials create six new comparisons: tranexamic acid (tablet + injection) versus placebo; intravenous tranexamic acid versus oral tranexamic acid; topical tranexamic acid versus oral tranexamic acid; different intravenous tranexamic acid dosing regimes; topical tranexamic acid versus topical fibrin glue; and fibrinogen (injection) versus placebo.

The Use of Intraoperative Cell Salvage in Two-Stage Revision of Septic Hip Arthroplasties: A Double-Center Retrospective Study

(1) Background: intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) devices can provide a valuable contribution to patient blood management. An infection of the surgical site presents a formal contraindication to the use of ICS. To date, there is no recommendation for the use of ICS in the context of reimplantation in two-stage septic exchange arthroplasty. (2) Methods: at two hospitals of maximum endoprosthetic care, a retrospective evaluation of patients who had received ICS blood during reimplantation of hip arthroplasties was performed. Patients' and surgical characteristics, intraoperative cultures, and the occurrence of septic complications in the short- and long-term follow-up were recorded. (3) Results: 144 patients were included. Detection of positive cultures during reimplantation occurred in 13 cases. A total of 127 patients showed no complication, 8 patients showed a non-specific septic complication, 6 patients a local persistence of infection, and 3 patients a possible bloodstream-associated infection. No significant correlation was found between the occurrence of complications and the detection of positive intraoperative cultures. (4) Conclusions: no clustering of septic complications due to the use of ICS during reimplantation was found. In the risk-benefit analysis, we considered the use of ICS during reimplantation to be indicated in terms of patient blood management, while the safety of the procedure during septic first-stage resection arthroplasty or septic one-stage exchange arthroplasty was not investigated. Given the paucity of comparative literature, further studies are needed on ideal patient blood management in the setting of septic revision arthroplasty.

The use of intraoperative cell salvage in total hip arthroplasty with subtrochanteric shortening osteotomy for the treatment of high hip dislocation: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) is an important component of blood management in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. However, the role of ICS is less well defined in total hip arthroplasty (THA) with subtrochanteric shortening osteotomy (SSO) which is a common surgical technique to manage high hip dislocation. This study aimed to determine the effect of ICS during THA with SSO and to identify factors associated with the ability to salvage sufficient collection for reinfusion in patients with high hip dislocation.

METHODS

We identified 178 patients who underwent THA with SSO for high hip dislocation between November 2010 and April 2021. The consecutive cohort was analyzed by logistic regression to determine the effect of ICS on postoperative allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) and to explore the associations between patient demographics, clinical and radiographic characteristics, preoperative laboratory examination, and surgical variables with the ability to generate adequate blood salvage to reinfuse.

RESULTS

In the consecutive cohort of 178 patients, cell salvage was reinfused in 107 patients (60.1%) and postoperative allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion within 3 days of implantation was administrated in 40 patients (22.5%). In multivariate analysis, the reinfusion of ICS (OR (95%CI) 0.17 (0.07-0.47)), center of rotation (COR) height ≥ 60 mm (OR (95%CI) 3.30 (1.21-9.01)), the length of SSO ≥ 30 mm (OR (95%CI) 2.75 (1.05-7.22)) and the use of drainage (OR (95%CI) 2.28 (1.04-5.03)) were identified as independent factors of postoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion. In addition, the following variables were identified as independent factors associated with the ability to generate sufficient blood salvage volume for reinfusion: COR height ≥ 60 mm (OR (95%CI) 3.47 (1.58-7.61)), limb-length discrepancy (LLD) ≥ 25 mm (OR (95%CI) 2.55 (1.15-5.65)) and length of SSO ≥ 30 mm (OR (95%CI) 2.75 (1.33-5.69)).

CONCLUSIONS

ICS was efficacious in reducing the exposure rate of postoperative RBC transfusion for high hip dislocation during THA with SSO. In addition, patients with greater COR height, larger LLD, and longer length of SSO were predisposed to generate sufficient collection for reinfusion in THA with SSO.

Fix and replace: Simultaneous fracture fixation and hip replacement for acetabular fractures in older patients

INTRODUCTION

Displaced acetabular fractures in the elderly present significant treatment challenges. The 'fix and replace' concept involves open reduction and internal fixation of the acetabulum, providing bony stability to accept the press-fit of an acetabular cup, with a cemented femoral stem. This allows early mobilisation and the advantages this confers. This study of 57 patients treated with fix and replace describes our technique, outcomes, and survival analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 57 'fix and replace' procedures in patients aged over 60 was performed. Data was collected on mechanism, fracture type, demographics, time to surgery, comorbidity index, complications, EQ-5D and Oxford hip scores (OHS). Radiographs were reviewed for fracture healing, implant loosening, cup migration, and heterotopic ossification.

RESULTS

57 patients aged 60 to 95 had fix and replace surgery. The median ASA score was 3. The mean Charlson Index was 4.8. 45 patients had a low-energy fall, 6 had a road traffic accident, 3 fell off a bicycle, and 1 mechanism was unclear. The fracture patterns were anterior column posterior hemitransverse (67%), associated both columns (9%), posterior column (9%), posterior column and posterior wall (9%), and transverse (2%). The mean time to surgery was 8.4 days (0-14). 26 out of 57 (46%) received a blood transfusion. Mean length of stay was 17.6 days (7-86). The mean follow-up was 35.5 months. 4 dislocations were treated with closed reduction, whilst 1 required excision arthroplasty. 2 infections resolved with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), whilst 1 required a two-stage revision. 1 acetabular component had migrated requiring revision. The median pre-injury OHS was 44 (26-48) compared to 37.3 (28-48) at 1 year. There were no deaths at 30-days, whilst at 1 year 7 patients had died. Kaplan Meier survival analysis showed mean survival was 1984.5 days. Implant survival was 90% at 1 year.

CONCLUSION

While fix and replace is conceptually attractive, this medically complex patient group requires considerable support peri‑ and post-operatively. Further studies are required to provide clinicians with more information to decide on how best to provide a holistic management strategy for such injuries in this frail patient cohort.

Effectiveness of intraoperative cell salvage in aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty: a single-center retrospective study

Background and study aim: Revision of total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is associated with significant blood loss. We have used intraoperative cell savage (ICS) systematically in these patients for the last ten years. We sought to determine how often re-suspended red blood cells could be re-transfused and to identify predictors of re- transfusion. Materials and methods: Patients who underwent aseptic rTHA between January 2011 and December 2020 at our center were enrolled in this retrospective observational study. Exclusion criteria were revision for infection or tumor. The primary outcome was the successful use of ICS defined as the ability to re-transfuse at least 125 mL of ICS blood. Secondary outcome measures included re-transfused ICS blood volume, aspirated blood volume, allogenic blood transfusion, and post-operative hemoglobin level. Uni- and multi-variable logistic regressions were used to identify patients and procedure characteristics associated with successful ICS. Mann-Whitney U tests, Student’s t tests and Chi-square tests were used to compare outcomes between patients with and without successful ICS. A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: ICS was successful in 93 (69.9%) out of 133 patients. The extent of revision, categorized as isolated acetabulum, isolated femur, or combined revision was the only predictor of successful ICS. Postoperative hemoglobin levels as well as rate and amount of allogenic red blood cells transfusion did not differ between the groups. Conclusions: ICS is useful in most patients undergoing rTHA. Those requiring a combined revision have the greatest chance of successful re-infusion.

Optimising the use of cell salvage in revision hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative cell salvage is an established method to reduce the requirement for and the volume of allogenic blood transfusion but adds to the financial cost of performing surgery.

AIMS

The primary aim of this study was to determine which patients and what type of revision hip surgery benefit most from intraoperative cell salvage.

METHODS

This observational study included patients who underwent revision hip surgery performed by the senior author at a single orthopaedic unit. The cohort was divided into single and two-component revision groups; then, the transfusion requirement combined with analysis of patient factors was used to create a decision-making protocol.

FINDINGS

The two-component group had a significantly higher number of cases using cell salvage and a higher total transfusion volume. Patients who required postoperative allogenic blood transfusions had a higher mean age, were less likely to have received tranexamic acid and had a lower preoperative haemoglobin level.

CONCLUSION

Based on these results, a decision-making protocol was developed for when to use cell salvage in revision hip surgery.

The use of cell salvage during second-stage reimplantation for the treatment of chronic hip periprosthetic joint infection: a retrospective cohort study

Introduction

Given the possibility of inadvertent bacterial contamination of salvaged blood, the use of cell salvage is relatively contraindicated in cases of reimplantation for chronic hip periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, there are no published data supporting this assertion. The purpose of the current study was to compare the reinfection rate and rate of postoperative allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) in second-stage reimplantation for PJI with or without intraoperative cell salvage reinfusion.

Materials and methods

We identified 125 patients who underwent two-stage exchange for chronic hip PJI between November 2012 and April 2019. The groups of patients who had (n = 61) and had not (n = 64) received intraoperative cell salvage reinfusion were compared with respect to the curative infection-free rate. Moreover, we compared the need for postoperative ABT and identified independent factors associated with ABT using multiple regression analysis.

Results

The log-rank survival curve with an endpoint of infection eradication failure was not significantly different between the cell salvage group (98.4%, 95% CI 95.3–99.9%) and the control group (95.3%, 95% CI 90.2–99.9%) at one year (log rank, P = .330). The rates of postoperative ABT in the cell salvage group were significantly lower than those in the control group (11.5% vs 26.6%, P = .041). In multivariable models, patient age, body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin level, and intraoperative cell salvage were independent predictors of ABT exposure (P < .05).

Conclusions

The use of cell salvage during reimplantation in two-stage exchange for chronic hip PJI did not appear to increase the reinfection rate, while it significantly reduced the rate of postoperative allogeneic red blood transfusion. Greater age, lower BMI, lower preoperative hemoglobin, and non-intraoperative cell salvage reinfusion were associated with higher rate of allogeneic red blood transfusion.

Incidence and risk factors for blood transfusion in simultaneous bilateral total hip arthroplasty

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate the incidence and risk factors for blood transfusion in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral total hip arthroplasty (SimBTHA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2011 and June 2021, a total of 341 patients (289 males, 52 females; median age: 53 years; range, 43 to 66 years) who underwent SimBTHA were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups as those who did and did not require allogeneic blood transfusion. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify independent risk factors for transfusion.

RESULTS

The incidence of transfusion in SimBTHA was 12.9%. We found that a higher preoperative hemoglobin level (odds ratio [OR]: 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86-0.96), tranexamic acid (TXA) use (OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.09-0.58), and intraoperative autologous blood transfusion from a closed suction drainage system (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.09-0.80) were protective against the need for transfusion in patients after SimBTHA. In addition, drainage use (OR: 3.52; 95% CI: 1.49-8.32) and intraoperative blood loss (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.04-1.33) were the independent risk factors for blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

The risk factors for transfusion after SimBTHA should be evaluated to establish specific, personalized transfusion risk assessments for each individual patient. For SimBTHA, the main risk factors include intraoperative bleeding and the use of drainage tube, while higher preoperative hemoglobin levels, TXA use, and autologous blood transfusion from a closed suction drainage system may reduce transfusion risk.

The role of intraoperative cell salvage for musculoskeletal sarcoma surgery

•

Musculoskeletal sarcoma surgery involving the lower limb is associated with significant intraoperative blood loss, with more than 500 ml in 96% of patients.

•

Salvaged blood was processed and re-infused in 94% of patients.

•

An estimated one-fourth of intraoperative blood loss was returned to the patient through (Intraoperative cell salvage) ICS.

•

Cytological analysis of imprints from leucodepletion filters(LDF) and reinfused blood did not reveal evidence of tumour cells.

Background

The efficacy and safety of cell salvage for musculoskeletal sarcoma surgery have not been reported, and concerns over re-infusion of tumour cells remain. This study aims to i) describe the intra-operative blood loss and cell salvage reinfusion volumes for lower limb sarcoma and pelvic sarcoma procedures ii) and explore whether there is evidence of tumour cells in reinfused blood.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of 109 consecutive surgical procedures for biopsy-proven sarcoma or bone metastasis performed between 1 July 2015 and 30 October 2019. Salvaged blood was processed and reinfused when intraoperative blood loss exceeded 500 ml. Primary bone tumour (n = 86(79%)) and metastasis (n = 23(21%) constituted the study group and surgeries were classified under hemipelvectomy (n = 43(39%)), lower limb endoprosthesis replacement (LLE) (n = 50(46%)) and wide excision surgery (WE) (n = 16(15%)). Microscopic examination of imprint cytology of leuco-depletion(LD) filters, and peripheral smear examination was performed for reinfused blood.

Results

Median (IQR) intra-operative blood loss was 1750 (600–3000) ml for hemipelvectomy, 850 (600–1200) ml for LLE, and 1000 (550–2000) ml for WE. Salvaged blood was re-infused in 102 of 109 (94%) patients. The mean (SD) volume of re-infusion was 445(4 2 5) ml for hemipelvectomy, 206(1 3 1) ml for LLE, and 184(1 0 6) ml for WE. In total, 64 of 109 (59%) patients received an allogeneic red blood transfusion within 72 h of surgery. Cytology analysis of imprints taken from the filtered blood available in 95(87%) patients and peripheral smear examination of reinfused blood available in 32(29%) patients did not reveal evidence of tumour cells on microscopic examination of any samples.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates that musculoskeletal sarcoma surgery is associated with significant blood loss, and cell salvage permits reinfusion of autologous blood in most patients. The cytological analysis did not reveal evidence of tumour cells in reinfused blood, consistent with other studies where cell salvage is used for cancer surgery.

The use of a triflange salvage system for catastrophic pelvic osteolysis after failed total hip arthroplasty

Introduction

The custom triflange acetabular implant (CTAI) has been described to address catastrophic pelvic osteolysis, but long-term outcome data is scarce.

Methods

Revision-free survivorship after revision THA with a CTAI was retrospectively reviewed in seven patients.

Results

Mean and median follow-up time were 7.39 (1.61-16.8) years and 7.50 years, respectively. Revision-free survivorship was 85.7% (6/7). One patient underwent revision for recurrent dislocations. All patients were able to ambulate at recent follow-up- 2/7 without assistance.

Conclusions

The CTAI is a viable option for patients with catastrophic pelvic osteolysis. There is a high complication rate, but the incidence of revision is low.