-
1.
Blood salvage and autotransfusion during orthotopic liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Hinojosa-Gonzalez, D. E., Salgado-Garza, G., Tellez-Garcia, E., Escarcega-Bordagaray, J. A., Bueno-Gutierrez, L. C., Madrazo-Aguirre, K., Muñoz-Hibert, M. I., Diaz-Garza, K. G., Ramirez-Mulhern, I., Alvarez de la Reguera-Babb, R., et al
Clinical transplantation. 2023;:e15222
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a significant cause of oncologic mortality worldwide. Liver transplantation represents a curative option for patients with significant liver dysfunction and absence of metastases. However, this therapeutic option is associated with significant blood loss and frequently requires various transfusions and intraoperative blood salvage for autotransfusion (IBS-AT) with or without a leukocyte reduction filter. This study aimed to analyze available evidence on long-term oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing liver transplantation for HCC with and without IBS-AT. METHODS Per PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of keywords "Blood Salvage," "Auto-transfusion," "Hepatocellular carcinoma," and "Liver-transplant" was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS. Studies comparing operative and postoperative outcomes were screened and analyzed for review. RESULTS Twelve studies totaling 1704 participants were included for analysis. Length of stay, recurrence rates, and overall survival were not different between IBS-AT group and non IBS-AT group. CONCLUSION IBS-AT use is not associated with increased risk of recurrence in liver transplant for HCC even without leukocyte filtration. Both operative and postoperative outcomes are similar between groups. Comparison of analyzed studies suggest that IBS-AT is safe for use during liver transplant for HCC.
-
2.
Safety of Intraoperative Blood Salvage During Liver Transplantation in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Aijtink, V. J., Rutten, V. C., Meijer, B. E. M., de Jong, R., Isaac, J. L., Polak, W. G., Perera, Mtpr, Sneiders, D., Hartog, H.
Annals of Surgery. 2022;276(2):239-245
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The effects of intraoperative blood salvage (IBS) on time to tumor recurrence, disease-free survival and overall survival in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation were assessed to evaluate the safety of IBS. BACKGROUND IBS is highly effective to reduce the use of allogeneic blood transfusion. However, the safety of IBS during liver transplantation for patients with HCC is questioned due to fear of disseminating malignant cells. METHODS Comprehensive searches through June 2021 were performed in 8 databases. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Robins-I tool. Meta-analysis with the generic inverse variance method was performed to calculate pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for disease-free survival, HCC recurrence and overall survival. RESULTS Nine studies were included (n=1997, IBS n=1200, no-IBS n=797). Use of IBS during liver transplantation was not associated with impaired disease-free survival [HR=0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.66-1.24, P=0.53, IBS n=394, no-IBS n=329], not associated with increased HCC recurrence (HR=0.83, 95% CI=0.57-1.23, P=0.36, IBS n=537, no-IBS n=382) and not associated with impaired overall survival (HR=1.04, 95% CI=0.79-1.37, P=0.76, IBS n=495, no-IBS n=356). CONCLUSIONS Based on available observational data, use of IBS during liver transplantation in patients with HCC does not result in impaired disease-free survival, increased HCC recurrence or impaired overall survival. Therefore, use of IBS during liver transplantation for HCC patients is a safe procedure.
-
3.
Should Cell Salvage be Used in Liver Resection and Transplantation? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Rajendran L, Lenet T, Shorr R, Abou Khalil J, Bertens KA, Balaa FK, Martel G
Annals of surgery. 2022
-
-
-
Free full text
-
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of intraoperative blood salvage and autotransfusion (IBSA) use on red blood cell (RBC) transfusion and postoperative outcomes in liver surgery. BACKGROUND Intraoperative RBC transfusions are common in liver surgery and associated with increased morbidity. IBSA can be utilized to minimize allogeneic transfusion. A theoretical risk of cancer dissemination has limited IBSA adoption in oncologic surgery. METHODS Electronic databases were searched from inception until May 2021. All studies comparing IBSA use to control in liver surgery were included. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently, in duplicate. The primary outcome was intraoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion (proportion of patients and volume of blood transfused). Core secondary outcomes included: overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), transfusion-related complications, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs. Data from transplant and resection studies were analyzed separately. Random effects models were used for meta-analysis. RESULTS Twenty-one observational studies were included (16 transplant, 5 resection, n=3,433 patients). Seventeen studies incorporated oncologic indications. In transplant, IBSA was associated with decreased allogeneic RBC transfusion (MD -1.81, 95% CI[-3.22, -0.40], P=0.01, I2=86%, very-low certainty). Few resection studies reported on transfusion for meta-analysis. No significant difference existed in OS or DFS in liver transplant (HR=1.12[0.75, 1.68], P=0.59, I2=0%; HR=0.93[0.57, 1.48], P=0.75, I2=0%) and liver resection (HR=0.69[0.45, 1.05], P=0.08, I2=0%; HR=0.93[0.59, 1.45], P=0.74, I2=0%). CONCLUSION IBSA may reduce intraoperative allogeneic RBC transfusion without compromising oncologic outcomes. The current evidence base is limited in size and quality, and high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients undergoing oncologic and non-oncologic liver surgery (either resection or transplantation), (21 studies, n= 3,433).
Intervention
Any intraoperative blood salvage and autotransfusion (IBSA) device.
Comparison
No IBSA use.
Outcome
Data from transplant and resection studies were analyzed separately. Despite significant heterogeneity, most studies reported lower rates and volumes of intraoperative allogeneic red blood cell transfusion in patients undergoing IBSA. In transplant, IBSA was associated with decreased allogeneic red blood cell transfusion (mean difference: -1.81, very-low certainty). Few resection studies reported on transfusion for meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in overall survival or disease-free survival in liver transplant and liver resection.
-
4.
Clinical prognosis of intraoperative blood salvage autotransfusion in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Wang Z, Li S, Jia Y, Liu M, Yang K, Sui M, Liu D, Liang K
Frontiers in oncology. 2022;12:985281
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intraoperative blood salvage autotransfusion(IBSA) has been widely used in a variety of surgeries, but the use of IBSA in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) is controversial. Numerous studies have reported that IBSA used during LT for HCC is not associated with adverse oncologic outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to estimate the clinical prognosis of IBSA for patients with H+CC undergoing LT. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for articles describing IBSA in HCC patients undergoing LT from the date of inception until May 1, 2022, and a meta-analysis was performed. Study heterogeneity was assessed by I(2) test. Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plots, Egger's and Begg's test. RESULTS 12 studies enrolling a total of 2253 cases (1374 IBSA and 879 non-IBSA cases) are included in this meta-analysis. The recurrence rate(RR) at 5-year(OR=0.75; 95%CI, 0.59-0.95; P=0.02) and 7-year(OR=0.65; 95%CI, 0.55-0.97; P=0.03) in the IBSA group is slightly lower than non-IBSA group. There are no significant differences in the 1-year RR(OR=0.77; 95% CI, 0.56-1.06; P=0.10), 3-years RR (OR=0.79; 95% CI, 0.62-1.01; P=0.06),1-year overall survival outcome(OS) (OR=0.90; 95% CI, 0.63-1.28; P=0.57), 3-year OS(OR=1.16; 95% CI, 0.83-1.62; P=0.38), 5-year OS(OR=1.04; 95% CI, 0.76-1.40; P=0.82),1-year disease-free survival rate(DFS) (OR=0.80; 95%CI, 0.49-1.30; P=0.36), 3-year DFS(OR=0.99; 95%CI, 0.64-1.55; P=0.98), and 5-year DFS(OR=0.88; 95%CI, 0.60-1.28; P=0.50). Subgroup analysis shows a difference in the use of leukocyte depletion filters group of 5-year RR(OR=0.73; 95%CI, 0.55-0.96; P=0.03). No significant differences are found in other subgroups. CONCLUSIONS IBSA provides comparable survival outcomes relative to allogeneic blood transfusion and does not increase the tumor recurrence for HCC patients after LT. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022295479.
-
5.
Passive Versus Active Intra-Abdominal Drainage Following Pancreatic Resection: Does A Superior Drainage System Exist? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Park LJ, Baker L, Smith H, Lemke M, Davis A, Abou-Khalil J, Martel G, Balaa FK, Bertens KA
World journal of surgery. 2021
Abstract
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a major source of morbidity following pancreatic resection. Surgically placed drains under suction or gravity are routinely used to help mitigate the complications associated with POPF. Controversy exists as to whether one of these drain management strategies is superior. The objective was to identify and compare the incidence of POPF, adverse events, and resource utilization associated with passive gravity (PG) versus active suction (AS) drainage following pancreatic resection. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to May 18, 2020. Outcomes of interest included POPF, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), surgical site infection (SSI), other major morbidity, and resource utilization. Descriptive qualitative and pooled quantitative meta-analyses were performed. One randomized control trial and five cohort studies involving 10 663 patients were included. Meta-analysis found no difference in the odds of developing POPF between AS and PG (p = 0.78). There were no differences in other endpoints including PPH (p = 0.58), SSI (wound p = 0.21, organ space p = 0.05), major morbidity (p = 0.71), or resource utilization (p = 0.72). The risk of POPF or other adverse outcomes is not impacted by drain management following pancreatic resection. Based on current evidence, a suggestion cannot be made to support the use of one drain over another at this time. There is a trend toward increased intra-abdominal wound infections with AS drains (p = 0.05) that merits further investigation.
-
6.
Cardiopulmonary interventions to decrease blood loss and blood transfusion requirements for liver resection
Gurusamy KS, Li J, Vaughan J, Sharma D, Davidson BR
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2012;5:CD007338
Abstract
BACKGROUND Blood loss during liver resection is considered one of the most important factors affecting the peri-operative outcomes of patients undergoing liver resection. OBJECTIVES To determine the benefits and harms of cardiopulmonary interventions to decrease blood loss and to decrease allogeneic blood transfusion requirements in patients undergoing liver resections. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until January 2012 to identify randomised trials. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all randomised clinical trials comparing various cardiopulmonary interventions aimed at decreasing blood loss and allogeneic blood transfusion requirements in patients undergoing liver resection. Trials were included irrespective of whether they included major or minor liver resections of normal or cirrhotic livers, vascular occlusion was used or not, and irrespective of the reason for liver resection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently identified trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using RevMan Analysis. For each outcome we calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on intention-to-treat analysis or available case analysis. For dichotomous outcomes with only one trial included under the outcome, we performed the Fisher's exact test. MAIN RESULTS Ten trials involving 617 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. The interventions included low central venous pressure (CVP), autologous blood donation, haemodilution, haemodilution with controlled hypotension, and hypoventilation. Only one or two trials were included under most comparisons. All trials had a high risk of bias. There was no significant difference in the peri-operative mortality in any of the comparisons: low CVP versus no intervention (3 trials, 0/88 (0%) patients in the low CVP group versus 1/89 (1.1%) patients in the no intervention group); autologous blood donation versus no intervention (1 trial, 0/40 (0%) versus 0/39 (0%)); haemodilution versus no intervention (2 trials, 1/73 (1.4%) versus 3/77 (3.9%) in one of these trials); haemodilution with controlled hypotension versus no intervention (1 trial, 0/10 (0%) versus 0/10 (0%)); haemodilution with bovine haemoglobin (HBOC-201) versus haemodilution with hydroxy ethyl starch (HES) (1 trial, 1/6 (16.7%) versus 0/6 (0%)); hypoventilation versus no intervention (1 trial, 0/40 (0%) versus 0/39 (0%)). None of the trials reported long-term survival or quality of life. The risk ratio of requiring allogeneic blood transfusion was significantly lower in the haemodilution versus no intervention groups (3 trials, 16/115 (weighted proportion = 14.2%) versus 41/118 (34.7%), RR 0.41 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.66), P = 0.0003); and for haemodilution with controlled hypotension versus no intervention (1 trial, 0/10 (0%) versus 10/10 (100%), P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the allogeneic transfusion requirements in the other comparisons which reported this outcome, such as low CVP versus no intervention, autologous blood donation versus control, and hypoventilation versus no intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS None of the interventions seemed to decrease peri-operative morbidity or offer any long-term survival benefit. Haemodilution shows promise in the reduction of blood transfusion requirements in liver resection surgery. However, there is a high risk of type I (erroneously concluding that an intervention is beneficial when it is actually not beneficial) and type II errors (erroneously concluding that an intervention is not beneficial when it is actually beneficial) because of the few trials included, the small sample size in each trial, and the high risk of bias in the trials. Further randomised clinical trials with low risk o
-
7.
The role of cell salvage autotransfusion in abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery
Shantikumar S, Patel S, Handa A
European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 2011;42((5):):577-84.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repairs, both elective and rupture, are associated with significant blood loss often requiring transfusion. Cell-salvage autotransfusion has been developed to reduce the need for allogeneic blood. We review the literature to delineate the role of cell salvage in reducing allogeneic blood use in open AAA repairs. METHODS A systematic search of the English-language literature was performed using the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases up to August 2010. RESULTS Twenty-three studies were identified. Whilst some data are conflicting, cell salvage appears to reduce overall use and exposure to allogeneic blood, and reduces length of intensive care unit and hospital stay after elective AAA repairs. There may be additional benefit by combining cell salvage with other blood-conservation techniques. Use of cell salvage in ruptured AAA repairs consistently reduced blood-product requirements. CONCLUSIONS Cell salvage appears to reduce blood-product use in both elective and rupture AAA repairs. Owing to the heterogeneity in methodology of published data, further study may be required before cell salvage becomes standard practice in open AAA repairs. Copyright 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
-
8.
Cell salvage does not minimize perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion in abdominal vascular surgery: a systematic review
Alvarez GG, Fergusson DA, Neilipovitz DT, Hébert P
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2004;51((5):):425-431.