Additional filtering of blood from a cell salvage device is not likely to show important additional benefits in outcome in cardiac surgery

The effectiveness of cell salvage in extracorporeal circulation surgeries in relation to use of health resources after use: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Alternatives to allogeneic blood transfusions are sought for resource management reasons and it is necessary to investigate the efficiency and efficacy on Cell Salvage use. The objective of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of the Cell Salvage system in addressing factors related to healthcare service utilization that may lead to increased healthcare expenditure.

Methods

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted through literature search in Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria were studies in English/Spanish, without year restriction and Randomized Controlled Trials design, conducted in adults.

Results

Twenty-six studies were included in the systematic review, involving a total of 4781 patients (nexperimental group = 2365; ncontrol group = 2416). Significant differences favored the Cell Salvage system in units of transfused Red Blood Cells, in terms of units (p = 0.04; SMD = -0.42 95 % CI = -0.83 to -0.02) and individuals (p = 0.001; RR = 0.71, 95 % CI = 0.60 to 0.84) transfused. No significant differences were found in ICU (p = 0.93) and hospital stay duration (p = 0.21), number of reoperations (p = 0.68), and number of units and individuals transfused in terms of platelets (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Cell Salvage use holds high potential for reducing healthcare costs and indirectly contributing to improving blood and blood product reserves within blood banks. Results obtained thus far do not provide definitive evidence regarding the duration of hospital stay, ICU stay, need for reoperation, or the quantity of transfused platelets. Therefore, it is recommended to increase the number of studies to assess the impact on the economic models of the Cell Salvage system.

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.

Extensive cell salvage and postoperative outcomes following thoracoabdominal and descending aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

Cell salvage (CS) reduces intraoperative blood transfusion. However, it may cause deformity of the red blood cells and loss of coagulation factors, which may lead to unwanted sequelae. Thus, we hypothesized that extensive CS would lead to adverse outcomes after descending/thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (D/TAAA) repair.

METHODS

Between 1991 and 2017, 2012 patients undergoing D/TAAA repair were retrospectively reviewed. After we excluded patients without reported intraoperative CS amount, patients were enrolled in the study (N = 1474) and divided into 2 groups: low CS (salvaged units <40, N = 983) and high CS (salvaged units ≥40, N = 491). Analyses were performed to verify the extensive CS as the risk factor for adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

Preoperative demographics showed that the high-CS group had a significantly greater incidence of male patients (72% vs 58%), heritable aortic disease (24% vs 17%), redo (27% vs 20%), greater glomerular filtration rate (mL/min/1.73 m², 75 vs 66) and more extensive aneurysms (TAAA extent II-IV). The high-CS group had significantly more postoperative complications compared with the low-CS group, including respiratory failure, renal failure, cardiac complications, neurologic deficits, bleeding, and 30-day mortality. Multivariable analysis confirmed high CS was an independent risk factor for renal failure along with long bypass time, older age, and extent of repairs. There was an incremental risk of renal failure and 30-day mortality proportional to salvaged cell unit (P < .001 in both).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased salvaged cell units were associated with adverse postoperative outcomes after D/TAAA repairs. Risk of renal failure and mortality increased proportionally to the salvaged cell units.