Autologous blood transfusion in revision hip arthroplasty. A prospective, controlled study of 30 patients

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.

Intraoperative blood salvage in revision total hip arthroplasty: who benefits most?

The purpose of the present study was to identify factors that predict reinfusion following intraoperative blood salvage (IOBS). We retrospectively identified 298 patients who underwent aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty at our institution between February 2005 and January 2007. Of these, 160 (53.7%) received reinfusion from IOBS. In the reinfusion group, an average of 850 mL (range, 300-4300) of fluid was collected and an average of 270 mL (range, 135-1350) of red blood cells was returned. Exchange of both the femoral and acetabular components, use of a trochanteric osteotomy, increased body mass index, and advanced age were associated with reinfusion. Based on these results, surgeons may consider using IOBS on patients with these preoperative characteristics.

Cell salvage for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood have prompted reconsideration of the use of allogeneic (from an unrelated donor) red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and a range of techniques to minimise transfusion requirements.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the evidence for the efficacy of cell salvage in reducing allogeneic blood transfusion and the evidence for any effect on clinical outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified studies by searching CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1950 to June 2009), EMBASE (1980 to June 2009), the internet (to August 2009) and bibliographies of published articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials with a concurrent control group in which adult patients, scheduled for non-urgent surgery, were randomised to cell salvage (autotransfusion) or to a control group who did not receive the intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted and the risk of bias assessed. Relative risks (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcomes were the number of patients exposed to allogeneic red cell transfusion and the amount of blood transfused. Other clinical outcomes are detailed in the review.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 75 trials were included. Overall, the use of cell salvage reduced the rate of exposure to allogeneic RBC transfusion by a relative 38% (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.70). The absolute reduction in risk (ARR) of receiving an allogeneic RBC transfusion was 21% (95% CI 15% to 26%). In orthopaedic procedures the RR of exposure to RBC transfusion was 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.57) compared to 0.77 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.86) for cardiac procedures. The use of cell salvage resulted in an average saving of 0.68 units of allogeneic RBC per patient (WMD -0.68; 95% CI -0.88 to -0.49). Cell salvage did not appear to impact adversely on clinical outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest cell salvage is efficacious in reducing the need for allogeneic red cell transfusion in adult elective cardiac and orthopaedic surgery. The use of cell salvage did not appear to impact adversely on clinical outcomes. However, the methodological quality of trials was poor. As the trials were unblinded and lacked adequate concealment of treatment allocation, transfusion practices may have been influenced by knowledge of the patients' treatment status potentially biasing the results in favour of cell salvage.

Cell salvage for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood, have prompted reconsideration of the use of allogeneic (blood from an unrelated donor) red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and a range of techniques to minimise transfusion requirements.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the evidence for the efficacy of cell salvage in reducing allogeneic blood transfusion and the evidence for any effect on clinical outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified studies by searching CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1950 to June 2009), EMBASE (1980 to June 2009), the Internet (to August 2009) and bibliographies of published articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials with a concurrent control group in which adult patients, scheduled for non-urgent surgery, were randomised to cell salvage (autotransfusion), or to a control group, who did not receive the intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted and the risk of bias assessed. Relative risks (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Data were pooled using a random effects model. The primary outcomes were the number of patients exposed to allogeneic red cell transfusion, and the amount of blood transfused. Other clinical outcomes are detailed in the review.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 75 trials were included. Overall, the use of cell salvage reduced the rate of exposure to allogeneic RBC transfusion by a relative 38% (RR=0.62: 95% CI 0.55 to 0.70). The absolute reduction in risk (ARR) of receiving an allogeneic RBC transfusion was 21% (95% CI 15% to 26%). In orthopaedic procedures the RR of exposure to RBC transfusion was 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.57) compared to 0.77 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.86) for cardiac procedures. The use of cell salvage resulted in an average saving of 0.68 units of allogeneic RBC per patient (WMD=-0.68; 95% CI -0.88 to -0.49). Cell salvage did not appear to impact adversely on clinical outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest cell salvage is efficacious in reducing the need for allogeneic red cell transfusion in adult elective cardiac and orthopaedic surgery. The use of cell salvage did not appear to impact adversely on clinical outcomes. However, the methodological quality of trials was poor. As the trials were unblinded and lacked adequate concealment of treatment allocation, transfusion practices may have been influenced by knowledge of the patients' treatment status potentially biasing the results in favour of cell salvage.

Intraoperative red blood-cell salvage in revision hip surgery. A case-matched study

BACKGROUND

Revision hip arthroplasty is commonly associated with substantial blood loss and the subsequent need for transfusion. This leads to an increased risk of blood-borne infection and hemolytic reactions. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate whether the use of intraoperative red blood-cell salvage in revision hip arthroplasty reduces the overall rate of allogeneic transfusion.

METHODS

Forty-seven patients who had undergone revision hip arthroplasty with the use of intraoperative cell salvage were identified. A computer database was used to individually match these patients, for age, sex, and eleven operative variables, to control patients who had undergone revision hip arthroplasty in the same unit without intraoperative cell salvage. Data gathered included the total allogeneic transfusion requirement for each patient, preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin levels, and operative time.

RESULTS

The total allogeneic transfusion requirement was significantly lower in the group that had intraoperative cell salvage than in the control group (median, 2 compared with 6 U of packed red blood cells, p = 0.0006), with a median reduction in allogeneic transfusion of 4 U. There was no significant difference in preoperative or postoperative hemoglobin levels between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of intraoperative cell salvage significantly lowered the allogeneic transfusion requirement, which can lead to substantial cost savings. To our knowledge, this is the first study in which the use of intraoperative red blood-cell salvage in revision hip arthroplasty was evaluated by matching patients on the basis of age, sex, and operative variables.

Cell salvage for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood, have prompted reconsideration of the use of allogeneic (blood from an unrelated donor) red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and a range of techniques to minimise transfusion requirements.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the evidence for the efficacy of cell salvage in reducing allogeneic blood transfusion and the evidence for any effect on clinical outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents and the websites of international health technology assessment agencies. The reference lists in identified trials and review articles were also searched, and study authors were contacted to identify additional studies. The searches were updated in January 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled parallel group trials in which adult patients, scheduled for non-urgent surgery, were randomised to cell salvage, or to a control group, who did not receive the intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. The main outcomes measures were the number of patients exposed to allogeneic red cell transfusion, and the amount of blood transfused. Other outcomes measured were re-operation for bleeding, blood loss, post-operative complications (thrombosis, infection, non-fatal myocardial infarction, renal failure), mortality, and length of hospital stay (LOS).

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, the use of cell salvage reduced the rate of exposure to allogeneic RBC transfusion by a relative 39% (relative risk [RR] = 0.61: 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52 to 0.71). The absolute reduction in risk (ARR) of receiving an allogeneic RBC transfusion was 23% (95% CI 16% to 30%). In orthopaedic procedures the RR of exposure to RBC transfusion was 0.42 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.54) compared to 0.77 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.87) for cardiac procedures. The use of cell salvage resulted in an average saving of 0.67 units of allogeneic RBC per patient (weighted mean difference was -0.64; 95% CI -0.89 to -0.45). Cell salvage did not appear to impact adversely on clinical outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest cell salvage is efficacious in reducing the need for allogeneic red cell transfusion in adult elective surgery. However, the methodological quality of trials was poor. As the trials were unblinded and lacked adequate concealment of treatment allocation, transfusion practices may have been influenced by knowledge of the patients' treatment status biasing the results in favour of cell salvage.

Cell salvage for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood, have prompted reconsideration of the use of allogeneic (blood from an unrelated donor) red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and a range of techniques to minimise transfusion requirements.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the evidence for the efficacy of cell salvage in reducing allogeneic blood transfusion and the evidence for any effect on clinical outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Articles were identified by: computer searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents (to July 2002), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 2, 2002) and websites of international health technology assessment agencies. References in the identified trials and review articles were searched and authors contacted to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled parallel group trials in which adult patients, scheduled for non-urgent surgery, were randomised to cell salvage, or to a control group, who did not receive the intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed using criteria proposed by Schulz et al. (Schulz 1995) and Jadad et al. (Jadad 1996). Main outcomes measured were: the number of patients exposed to allogeneic red cell transfusion, and the amount of blood transfused. Other outcomes measured were: re-operation for bleeding, blood loss, post-operative complications (thrombosis, infection, non-fatal myocardial infarction, renal failure), mortality, and length of hospital stay (LOS).

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, the use of cell salvage reduced the rate of exposure to allogeneic RBC transfusion by a relative 40% (relative risk [RR] = 0.60: 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.51 to 0.70). The absolute reduction in risk (ARR) of receiving an allogeneic RBC transfusion was 23% (95%CI = 16% to 30%). In orthopaedic procedures the relative risk (RR) of exposure to RBC transfusion was 0.42 (95%CI = 0.32 to 0.54) compared to 0.78 (95%CI = 0.68 to 0.88) for cardiac procedures. The use of cell salvage resulted in an average saving of 0.64 units of allogeneic RBC per patient (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -0.64: 95%CI = -0.86 to -0.46). Cell salvage did not appear to impact adversely on clinical outcomes.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest cell salvage is efficacious in reducing the need for allogeneic red cell transfusion in adult elective surgery. However, the methodological quality of trials was poor. As the trials were unblinded and lacked adequate concealment of treatment allocation, transfusion practices may have been influenced by knowledge of the patient's treatment status biasing the results in favour of cell salvage.

The effect of intraoperative intravenous fixed-dose heparin during total joint arthroplasty on the incidence of fatal pulmonary emboli

All patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), revision TKA, primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), and revision THA between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 1996, were retrospectively reviewed to determine the incidence of fatal pulmonary emboli. All TKA patients received 1,000 U of intravenous heparin sodium before the tourniquet was inflated and an additional 500 U of intravenous heparin sodium before the inflation of the second tourniquet during bilateral TKA. All THA patients received 1,000 U of intravenous heparin sodium at the time of the skin incision and 500 U of intravenous heparin sodium before preparation of the femoral canal. The overall incidence of fatal pulmonary emboli was extremely low (TKA, 0.096%; THA, 0.16%). With this regimen of intravenous intraoperative heparin, postoperative aspirin, thromboembolic disease hose, and early ambulation, there is no risk of postoperative bleeding, it is inexpensive, and there is no concern on how long to keep the patients on this regimen postoperatively. We recommend this regimen for the prevention of fatal pulmonary emboli after total joint arthroplasty.

A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of cell salvage to minimize perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion in cardiac and orthopedic surgery. International Study of Perioperative Transfusion (ISPOT) Investigators

Concern about risks of allogeneic transfusion has led to an interest in methods for decreasing perioperative transfusion. To determine whether cell salvage reduces patient exposure to allogeneic blood, we performed meta-analyses of randomized trials, evaluating the effectiveness and safety of cell salvage in cardiac or orthopedic elective surgery. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received at least one perioperative allogeneic red cell transfusion. Twenty-seven studies were included in the meta-analyses. Cell salvage devices that do not wash salvaged blood were marginally effective in cardiac surgery patients when used postoperatively (relative risk [RR] = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79-0.92). Devices that wash or do not wash salvaged blood considerably decreased the proportion of orthopedic surgery patients who received allogeneic transfusion (RR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.30-0.51 and RR = 0.35, 95% CI 0.26-0.46, respectively). No studies of cell savers that wash salvaged blood during cardiac surgery were included. Cell salvage did not appear to increase the frequency of adverse events. We conclude that cell salvage in orthopedic surgery decreases the risk of patients' exposure to allogeneic blood transfusion perioperatively. Postoperative cell salvage in cardiac surgery, with devices that do not wash the salvaged blood, is only marginally effective.

IMPLICATIONS

This meta-analysis of all published randomized trials provides the best current estimate of the effectiveness of cell salvage and is useful in guiding clinical practice. We conclude that cell salvage in orthopedic surgery decreases the proportion of patients requiring allogeneic blood transfusion perioperatively, but postoperative cell salvage is only marginally effective in cardiac surgery.

The Bridgeport Hospital experience with autologous transfusion in orthopedic surgery

The transfusion records of 341 orthopedic patients who donated blood preoperatively in the years 1992 and 1993 were audited to review the transfusion practices associated with the surgical procedures. The study sample underwent 182 total knee (TKA), 123 total hip (THA) arthroplasties, and 33 laminectomies with fusion (LAM) and 3 without. Data used were age, gender, predonation hemoglobin concentration (Hbd), initial (Hbi) and final (Hbf) hemoglobin concentration, surgical procedure, surgical blood order (SBO), and estimated blood loss (EBL). We analyzed for means and associations and differences between covariates. The means of EBL (mL), transfused units, donated units, Hbi, (g/dL), Hbd, and Hbf (g/dL) for the most common procedures were: TKA--272, 1.1, 2.1, 10.4, 13.9, and 10.1; THA--951, 2.3, 2.4, 9.4, 13.8, and 9.9; and LAM--589, 1.5, 2.2, 12.0, 14.6, and 11.2. Phlebotomies for procedures with minimal blood loss, as for total knee arthroplasties, result in wastage. Autodonation under such circumstances takes patients to an unnecessary low hemoglobin concentration prior to either retransfusing the blood taken or discarding part of it. The number of preoperative autologous units donated can be reduced if predonation hemoglobin concentration is > 15 g/dL and expected blood loss is not > 2 g.