1.
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Intraoperative Red Blood Cell Transfusion Strategies
Lenet T, Baker L, Park L, Vered M, Zahrai A, Shorr R, Davis A, McIsaac DI, Tinmouth A, Fergusson DA, et al
Annals of surgery. 2021
-
-
-
Free full text
-
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this work was to carry out a meta-analysis of RCTs comparing intraoperative RBC transfusion strategies to determine their impact on postoperative morbidity, mortality, and blood product use. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA RBC transfusions are common in surgery and associated with widespread variability despite adjustment for casemix. Evidence-based recommendations guiding RBC transfusion in the operative setting are limited. METHODS The search strategy was adapted from a previous Cochrane Review. Electronic databases were searched from January 2016 to February 2021. Included studies from the previous Cochrane Review were considered for eligibility from before 2016. RCTs comparing intraoperative transfusion strategies were considered for inclusion. Co-primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and morbidity. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative and perioperative RBC transfusion. Meta-analysis was carried out using random-effects models. RESULTS Fourteen trials (8641 patients) were included. One cardiac surgery trial accounted for 56% of patients. There was no difference in 30-day mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.29] and pooled postoperative morbidity among the studied outcomes when comparing restrictive and liberal protocols. Two trials reported worse composite outcomes with restrictive triggers. Intraoperative (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.43-0.64) and perioperative (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.79) blood transfusions were significantly lower in the restrictive group compared to the liberal group. CONCLUSIONS Intraoperative restrictive transfusion strategies decreased perioperative transfusions without added postoperative morbidity and mortality in 12/14 trials. Two trials reported worse outcomes. Given trial design and generalizability limitations, uncertainty remains regarding the safety of broad application of restrictive transfusion triggers in the operating room. Trials specifically designed to address intraoperative transfusions are urgently needed.
PICO Summary
Population
Adult patients undergoing surgery (14 studies, n= 8,641).
Intervention
Restrictive blood transfusion strategy.
Comparison
Liberal blood transfusion strategy.
Outcome
There was no difference in 30-day mortality relative risk (RR) 0.96, and pooled postoperative morbidity among the studied outcomes when comparing restrictive and liberal protocols. Two trials reported worse composite outcomes with restrictive triggers. Intraoperative (RR 0.53) and perioperative (RR 0.70) blood transfusions were significantly lower in the restrictive group compared to the liberal group.
2.
The safety and efficacy of hypovolemic phlebotomy on blood loss and transfusion in liver surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Park L, Gilbert R, Baker L, Shorr R, Workneh A, Turcotte S, Bertens KA, Abou-Khalil J, Balaa FK, Martel G
HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association. 2019
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hypovolemic phlebotomy (HP) is a novel intervention that involves intraoperative removal of whole blood (7-10 mL/kg) without volume replacement. The subsequent central venous pressure (CVP) reduction is hypothesized to decrease blood loss and the need for blood transfusion. The objective was to conduct a systematic assessment of the safety and efficacy of HP on blood loss and transfusion in the liver surgery literature. METHODS MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Outcomes of interest included blood loss, allogenic red blood cell transfusion, postoperative adverse events, and CVP change. A qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were performed as appropriate. RESULTS Four cohort studies, one case series, and three randomized controlled trials involving 2255 patients were included. Meta-analysis of studies involving liver resections for any indication (n = 6) found no difference in transfusion (OR 0.38, p = 0.12) or incidence of adverse events with HP compared to non-use. Pooling of studies involving liver resections for an underlying pathology (n = 4) revealed HP was associated with significant reduction in transfusion (OR 0.25, p = 0.03) but no differences in blood loss (-173 mL, p = 0.17). CONCLUSION This review suggests HP is safe and associated with decreased transfusion in patients undergoing liver surgery. It supports further investigation.