1.
Validation of three models for prediction of blood transfusion during cesarean delivery admission
Bruno, A., Federspiel, J. J., McGee, P., Pacheco, L., Saade, G., Parry, S., Longo, M., Tita, A., Gyamfi-Bannerman, C., Chauhan, S., et al
American journal of perinatology. 2023
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Prediction of blood transfusion during delivery admission allows for clinical preparedness and risk mitigation. Although prediction models have been developed and adopted into practice, their external validation is limited. We aimed to evaluate the performance of three blood transfusion prediction models in a U.S. cohort of individuals undergoing cesarean delivery. METHODS This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial of tranexamic acid for prevention of hemorrhage at time of cesarean delivery. Three models were considered: a categorical risk tool (California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative (CMQCC)), and two regression models (Ahmadzia et al and Albright et al). The primary outcome was red blood cell transfusion. The CMQCC algorithm was applied to the cohort with frequency of risk category (low, medium, high) and associated transfusion rates reported. For the regression models, the area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) was calculated and a calibration curve plotted to evaluate each model's capacity to predict receipt of transfusion. The regression model outputs were statistically compared. RESULTS Of 10,785 analyzed individuals, 3.9% received a red blood cell transfusion during delivery admission. The CMQCC risk tool categorized 1,970 (18.3%) individuals as low-risk, 5,259 (48.8%) as medium-risk, and 3,556 (33.0%) as high-risk with corresponding transfusion rates of 2.1% (95% CI 1.5-2.9%), 2.2% (95% CI 1.8-2.6%), and 7.5% (95% CI 6.6-8.4%), respectively. The AUC for prediction of blood transfusion using the Ahmadzia and Albright models was 0.78 (95% CI 0.76-0.81) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.77-0.82), respectively (p=0.38 for difference). Calibration curves demonstrated overall agreement between the predicted probability and observed likelihood of blood transfusion. CONCLUSION Three models were externally validated for prediction of blood transfusion during cesarean delivery admission in this U.S. COHORT Overall, performance was moderate; model selection should be based on ease of application until a specific model with superior predictive ability is developed.
2.
Rotational Thromboelastometry for the Transfusion Management of Postpartum Hemorrhage after Cesarean or Vaginal Delivery: A Single-Center Randomized Controlled Trial
Lumbreras-Marquez MI, Singh S, King CH, Nelson CI, Jespersen KN, Fields KG, Wang P, Carusi DA, Farber MK
Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction. 2022;:102470
3.
Impact of "natural" cesarean delivery on peripartum blood loss: A randomized controlled trial
Zafran N, Garmi G, Abdelgani S, Inbar S, Romano S, Salim R
American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM. 2022;:100642
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early skin to skin contact after vaginal delivery increases milk production and may increase oxytocin release, leading to reduction in postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) rate. OBJECTIVE To examine the impact of "natural" cesarean deliveries (NCD) on perioperative maternal blood loss. STUDY DESIGN This is a randomized controlled trial conducted at a single university affiliated medical center, between August 2016 and February 2018. Term singleton gestations scheduled for a planned CD under spinal anesthesia were included. Women were randomized at a ratio of 1:1 to NCD (study group) or traditional CD (control group) during the routine preoperative assessment. Women in the study group watched fetal extraction, had early skin to skin contact, and breastfed until the end of surgery. Neonates in the control group were presented to the mother for few minutes. Blood samples were drawn from all women, during fascia closure, to determine oxytocin levels using an ELISA kit. The Laboratory component was performed after recruitment completion and was accomplished in February 2019. The primary outcome was postpartum hemoglobin (Hb) levels. To detect a difference of 0.5 g/dL between the groups with α = .05 and β = 80%, 214 women were needed. RESULTS Of 214 women that were randomized, 23 were excluded. There were no significant differences in demographic and obstetric variables between the groups. Postpartum Hb levels were 10.1±1.1 and 10.3±1.3 g/dL in the study and control groups, respectively (P = .19). There were no significant differences in rates of PPH and blood transfusion. Maternal pain scores, satisfaction, and exclusive breastfeeding, were comparable. Maternal oxytocin blood levels were 389.5±183.7 and 408.5±233.6 pg/mL in the study and control groups, respectively (P = .96). Incidence of neonatal hypothermia was comparable between the groups (P=.13). CONCLUSIONS NCD does not affect perioperative Hb level or maternal oxytocin blood concentration. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02768142.
4.
Comparison of four methods of blood loss estimation after cesarean delivery
Withanathantrige, M., Goonewardene, M., Dandeniya, R., Gunatilake, P., Gamage, S.
International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics: The Official Organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. 2016;135(1):51-5
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess agreement between four different methods of blood loss estimation after lower-segment cesarean delivery (LSCD). METHODS A secondary analysis was undertaken of a randomized controlled trial of three timings of cord clamping during LSCD performed at a center in Sri Lanka between January 21 and April 30, 2013. Eligible women underwent prepartum LSCD at 37-39weeks of pregnancy. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was assessed by a combined method (direct measurements of spilled blood and sucker bottle volumes, and weighing of surgical towels and drapes before and after use), according to visual assessments by the surgeon and by anesthesiologists, and by measurement of preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin levels. RESULTS Among 156 participants, mean EBL was 502mL (95% CI 370-618) from the combined method, 506mL (412-643) calculated from hemoglobin levels, 484mL (367-621) by the surgeon's estimation, and 491mL (361-612) by anesthesiologists' estimation (P=0.32). Visual assessment of EBL by anesthesiologists had the best intraclass correlation (0.713) and limits of agreement with the combined method. There were no significant differences between the proportion of cases in which anesthesiologists and the surgeon underestimated or overestimated the EBL when compared with the combined method. CONCLUSION EBL should be ideally obtained by the combined method.