Recombinant human erythropoietin facilitates autologous blood donation in children undergoing corrective spinal surgery

[The 2013 Seville Consensus Document on alternatives to allogenic blood transfusion. An update on the Seville Document]

Since allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) is not harmless, multiple alternatives to ABT (AABT) have emerged, though there is great variability in their indications and appropriate use. This variability results from the interaction of a number of factors, including the specialty of the physician, knowledge and preferences, the degree of anemia, transfusion policy, and AABT availability. Since AABTs are not harmless and may not meet cost-effectiveness criteria, such variability is unacceptable. The Spanish Societies of Anesthesiology (SEDAR), Hematology and Hemotherapy (SEHH), Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH), Critical Care Medicine (SEMICYUC), Thrombosis and Hemostasis (SETH) and Blood Transfusion (SETS) have developed a Consensus Document for the proper use of AABTs. A panel of experts convened by these 6 Societies have conducted a systematic review of the medical literature and have developed the 2013 Seville Consensus Document on Alternatives to Allogeneic Blood Transfusion, which only considers those AABT aimed at decreasing the transfusion of packed red cells. AABTs are defined as any pharmacological or non-pharmacological measure aimed at decreasing the transfusion of red blood cell concentrates, while preserving patient safety. For each AABT, the main question formulated, positively or negatively, is: « Does this particular AABT reduce the transfusion rate or not?» All the recommendations on the use of AABTs were formulated according to the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

[The 2013 Seville Consensus Document on alternatives to allogenic blood transfusion. An update on the Seville Document]

Since allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) is not harmless, multiple alternatives to ABT (AABT) have emerged, though there is great variability in their indications and appropriate use. This variability results from the interaction of a number of factors, including the specialty of the physician, knowledge and preferences, the degree of anemia, transfusion policy, and AABT availability. Since AABTs are not harmless and may not meet cost-effectiveness criteria, such variability is unacceptable. The Spanish Societies of Anesthesiology (SEDAR), Hematology and Hemotherapy (SEHH), Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH), Critical Care Medicine (SEMICYUC), Thrombosis and Hemostasis (SETH) and Blood Transfusion (SETS) have developed a Consensus Document for the proper use of AABTs. A panel of experts convened by these 6 Societies have conducted a systematic review of the medical literature and have developed the 2013 Seville Consensus Document on Alternatives to Allogeneic Blood Transfusion, which only considers those AABT aimed at decreasing the transfusion of packed red cells. AABTs are defined as any pharmacological or non-pharmacological measure aimed at decreasing the transfusion of red blood cell concentrates, while preserving patient safety. For each AABT, the main question formulated, positively or negatively, is: "Does this particular AABT reduce the transfusion rate or not?" All the recommendations on the use of AABTs were formulated according to the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

Blood-saving techniques

Major surgery is associated with intraoperative and postoperative bleeding, generally treated with homologous blood transfusions, which carry the risk of infection, allergic reactions, or incompatibility as well as a number of organizational and economic problems. Transfusion strategies and steps to minimize perioperative bleeding are needed. Another resource is drugs; human recombinant erythropoietin, aprotinin, and some analogues of lysine have been used to reduce the rate of allogenic transfusions in the perioperative period. The safest method is autologous blood transfusions through predeposits and hemodilution; however, it can only be used for elective surgery. Autologous transfusion techniques include blood collection, both intraoperatively, as described by Orr, and postoperatively, as introduced by Borghi in 1984, which enables the continuous monitoring of postoperative bleeding. Blood collection can also be performed during emergency surgery, reducing the rate and costs of homologous transfusions.

Blood transfusion for the treatment of acute anaemia in inflammatory bowel disease and other digestive diseases

Allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) is frequently used as the first therapeutic option for the treatment of acute anaemia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), especially when it developed due to gastrointestinal or perioperative blood loss, but is not risk-free. Adverse effects of ABT include, but are not limited to, acute hemolytic reaction (wrong blood or wrong patient), febrile non-hemolytic transfusional reaction, bacterial contamination, transfusion-related acute lung injury, transfusion associated circulatory overload, transfusion-related immuno-modulation, and transmission of almost all infectious diseases (bacteria, virus, protozoa and prion), which might result in increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, the main physiological goal of ABT, i.e. to increase oxygen consumption by the hypoxic tissues, has not been well documented. In contrast, the ABT is usually misused only to increase the haemoglobin level within a fixed protocol [mostly two by two packed red blood cell (PRC) units] independently of the patient’s tolerance to normovolemic anaemia or his clinical response to the transfusion of PRC units according to a “one-by-one” administration schedule. Evidence-based clinical guidelines may promote best transfusion practices by implementing restrictive transfusion protocols, thus reducing variability and minimizing the avoidable risks of transfusion, and the use of autologous blood and pharmacologic alternatives. In this regard, preoperative autologous blood donation (PABD) consistently diminished the frequency of ABT, although its contribution to ABT avoidance is reduced when performed under a transfusion protocol. In addition, interpretation of utility of PABD in surgical IBD patients is hampered by scarcity of published data. However, the role of autologous red blood cells as drug carriers is promising. Finally, it must be stressed that a combination of methods used within well-constructed protocols will offer better prospects for blood conservation in selected IBD patients undergoing elective surgery.

Efficacy of preoperative erythropoietin administration in pediatric neuromuscular scoliosis patients

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study examining 61 patients with neurogenic scoliosis who underwent anterior and/or posterior spinal instrumentation at the age of 18 and younger.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to investigate this finding further by analyzing the effect of recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO) on hematocrit, transfusion and complication rates, and the length of intensive care unit (ICU) days in patients with neurogenic scoliosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The preoperative use of rhEPO has been shown to decrease perioperative transfusion requirements in many adult and pediatric patients. A recent study at our institution demonstrated the efficacy of rhEPO in pediatric idiopathic scoliosis patients, but suggested the possibility of an "erythropoietin resistance" in the pediatric neurogenic scoliosis population.

METHODS

The patients' age at the time of surgery, gender, Cobb angle, erythropoietin administration and dosage, hematocrit levels, type of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, duration of surgery, number of vertebrae fused, comorbidities, complications, transfusion status, and the length of ICU days were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty-five (57.3%) children received preoperative rhEPO, whereas 26 patients (42.7%) did not receive rhEPO. The mean preoperative and discharge hematocrit levels in the patients treated with rhEPO were significantly higher than the non-rhEPO group (P = 0.05). There were no significant difference in likelihood of transfusion, complications, and the length of ICU days between the rhEPO and the non-rhEPO groups. A multivariate analysis demonstrated that the number of fused vertebral levels maintained its significance (P = 0.044) and surgical time had a trend toward significance (P = 0.051) in predicting likelihood of transfusion.

CONCLUSION

The use of rhEPO effectively stimulated erythropoiesis in these patients and yet demonstrated no significant clinical benefit in reducing the likelihood of transfusion in neurogenic patients in this study. More research is necessary to design a transfusion risk reduction protocols that will minimize the exposure of neurogenic scoliosis patients to allogeneic blood products.