Lack of Cost-Effectiveness of Preoperative Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents and/or Iron Therapy in Anaemic, Elective Surgery Patients: A Systematic Review and Updated Analysis
OBJECTIVES For anaemic elective surgery patients, current clinical practice guidelines weakly recommend the routine use of iron, but not erythrocyte-stimulating agents (ESAs), except for short-acting ESAs in major orthopaedic surgery. This recommendation is, however, not based on any cost-effectiveness studies. The aim of this research was to (1) systematically review the literature regarding cost effectiveness of preoperative iron and/or ESAs in anaemic, elective surgery patients and (2) update existing economic evaluations (EEs) with recent data. METHODS Eight databases and registries were searched for EEs and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting cost-effectiveness data on November 11, 2020. Data were extracted, narratively synthesized and critically appraised using the Philips reporting checklist. Pre-existing full EEs were updated with effectiveness data from a recent systematic review and current cost data. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were expressed as cost per (quality-adjusted) life-year [(QA)LY] gained. RESULTS Only five studies (4 EEs and 1 RCT) were included, one on intravenous iron and four on ESAs + oral iron. The EE on intravenous iron only had an in-hospital time horizon. Therefore, cost effectiveness of preoperative iron remains uncertain. The three EEs on ESAs had a lifetime time horizon, but reported cost per (QA)LY gained of 20-65 million (GBP or CAD). Updating these analyses with current data confirmed ESAs to have a cost per (QA)LY gained of 3.5-120 million (GBP or CAD). CONCLUSIONS Cost effectiveness of preoperative iron is unproven, whereas routine preoperative ESA therapy cannot be considered cost effective in elective surgery, based on the limited available data. Future guidelines should reflect these findings.
Elective surgery patients with anaemia (5 studies).
Erythrocyte-stimulating agents (ESAs) and oral iron.
The economic evaluation on intravenous iron only had an in-hospital time horizon. Cost effectiveness of preoperative iron remained uncertain. The three economic evaluations on ESAs had a lifetime time horizon, but reported cost per (QA)LY gained of 20-65 million (GBP or CAD). Updating these analyses with current data confirmed ESAs to have a cost per (QA)LY gained of 3.5-120 million (GBP or CAD).
Effectiveness of Iron Supplementation With or Without Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents on Red Blood Cell Utilization in Patients With Preoperative Anaemia Undergoing Elective Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Transfusion medicine reviews. 2021
Patient Blood Management (PBM) is an evidence-based, multidisciplinary, patient-centred approach to optimizing the care of patients who might need a blood transfusion. This systematic review aimed to collect the best available evidence on the effectiveness of preoperative iron supplementation with or without erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) on red blood cell (RBC) utilization in all-cause anaemic patients scheduled for elective surgery. Five databases and two trial registries were screened. Primary outcomes were the number of patients and the number of RBC units transfused. Effect estimates were synthesized by conducting meta-analyses. GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. We identified 29 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 non-RCTs comparing the effectiveness of preoperative iron monotherapy, or iron + ESAs, to control (no treatment, usual care, placebo). We found that: (1) IV and/or oral iron monotherapy may not result in a reduced number of units transfused and IV iron may not reduce the number of patients transfused (low-certainty evidence); (2) uncertainty exists whether the administration route of iron therapy (IV vs oral) differentially affects RBC utilization (very low-certainty evidence); (3) IV ferric carboxymaltose monotherapy may not result in a different number of patients transfused compared to IV iron sucrose monotherapy (low-certainty evidence); (4) oral iron + ESAs probably results in a reduced number of patients transfused and number of units transfused (moderate-certainty evidence); (5) IV iron + ESAs may result in a reduced number of patients transfused (low-certainty evidence); (6) oral and/or IV iron + ESAs probably results in a reduced number of RBC units transfused in transfused patients (moderate-certainty evidence); (7) uncertainty exists about the effect of oral and/or IV iron + ESAs on the number of patients requiring transfusion of multiple units (very low-certainty evidence). Effect estimates of different haematological parameters and length of stay were synthesized as secondary outcomes. In conclusion, in patients with anaemia of any cause scheduled for elective surgery, the preoperative administration of iron monotherapy may not result in a reduced number of patients or units transfused (low-certainty evidence). Iron supplementation in addition to ESAs probably results in a reduced RBC utilization (moderate-certainty evidence).
Patient Blood Management: Recommendations From the 2018 Frankfurt Consensus Conference
Importance: Blood transfusion is one of the most frequently used therapies worldwide and is associated with benefits, risks, and costs. Objective: To develop a set of evidence-based recommendations for patient blood management (PBM) and for research. Evidence Review: The scientific committee developed 17 Population/Intervention/Comparison/Outcome (PICO) questions for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in adult patients in 3 areas: preoperative anemia (3 questions), RBC transfusion thresholds (11 questions), and implementation of PBM programs (3 questions). These questions guided the literature search in 4 biomedical databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Transfusion Evidence Library), searched from inception to January 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology and the Evidence-to-Decision framework by 3 panels including clinical and scientific experts, nurses, patient representatives, and methodologists, to develop clinical recommendations during a consensus conference in Frankfurt/Main, Germany, in April 2018. Findings: From 17607 literature citations associated with the 17 PICO questions, 145 studies, including 63 randomized clinical trials with 23143 patients and 82 observational studies with more than 4 million patients, were analyzed. For preoperative anemia, 4 clinical and 3 research recommendations were developed, including the strong recommendation to detect and manage anemia sufficiently early before major elective surgery. For RBC transfusion thresholds, 4 clinical and 6 research recommendations were developed, including 2 strong clinical recommendations for critically ill but clinically stable intensive care patients with or without septic shock (recommended threshold for RBC transfusion, hemoglobin concentration <7 g/dL) as well as for patients undergoing cardiac surgery (recommended threshold for RBC transfusion, hemoglobin concentration <7.5 g/dL). For implementation of PBM programs, 2 clinical and 3 research recommendations were developed, including recommendations to implement comprehensive PBM programs and to use electronic decision support systems (both conditional recommendations) to improve appropriate RBC utilization. Conclusions and Relevance: The 2018 PBM International Consensus Conference defined the current status of the PBM evidence base for practice and research purposes and established 10 clinical recommendations and 12 research recommendations for preoperative anemia, RBC transfusion thresholds for adults, and implementation of PBM programs. The relative paucity of strong evidence to answer many of the PICO questions supports the need for additional research and an international consensus for accepted definitions and hemoglobin thresholds, as well as clinically meaningful end points for multicenter trials.
Platelet storage duration and its clinical and transfusion outcomes: a systematic review
Critical Care (London, England). 2018;22((1)):185.
BACKGROUND Platelets (PLTs) are usually stored for up to 5 days prior to transfusion, although in some blood services the storage period is extended to 7 days. During storage, changes occur in both PLT and storage medium, which may lead to PLT activation and dysfunction. The clinical significance of these changes remains uncertain. METHODS We performed a systematic review to assess the association between PLT storage time and clinical or transfusion outcomes in patients receiving allogeneic PLT transfusion. We searched studies published in English between January 2000 and July 2017 identified from MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Libraries. RESULTS Of the 18 studies identified, five included 4719 critically ill patients (trauma, post-cardiac surgery and a heterogeneous population of critically ill patients) and 13 included 8569 haematology patients. The five studies in critically ill patients were retrospective and did not find any association between PLT storage time when PLTs were stored for up to 5 days and mortality. There was also no association between older PLTs and sepsis in the two largest studies (n = 4008 patients). Of the 13 studies in haematology patients, seven analysed prolonged storage time up to 6.5 or 7 days. Administration of fresh PLTs (less than 2 or 3 days) was associated with a significant increase in corrected count increment (CCI) compared to older PLTs in seven of the eight studies analysing this outcome. One single centre retrospective study found an increase in bleeding events in patients receiving older PLTs. CONCLUSIONS PLT storage time does not appear to be associated with clinical outcomes, including bleeding, sepsis or mortality, in critically ill patients or haematology patients. The freshest PLTs (less than 3 days) were associated with a better CCI, although there was no impact on bleeding events, questioning the clinical significance of this association. However, there is an absence of evidence to draw definitive conclusions, especially in critically ill patients.
Plasma transfusion in liver transplantation: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical comparison of three virally secured plasmas
BACKGROUND The clinical equivalence of plasma treated to reduce pathogen transmission and untreated plasma has not been extensively studied. A clinical trial was conducted in liver transplant recipients to compare the efficacy of three plasmas. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A randomized, equivalence, blinded trial was performed in four French liver transplantation centers. The three studied (fresh-frozen) plasmas were quarantine (Q-FFP), methylene blue (MB-FFP), and solvent/detergent (S/D-FFP) plasmas. The primary outcome was the volume of plasma transfused during transplantation. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative blood loss, hemostasis variables corrections, and adverse events. RESULTS One-hundred patients were randomly assigned in the MB-FFP, 96 in the S/D-FFP, and 97 in the Q-FFP groups, respectively. The median volumes of plasma transfused were 2254, 1905, and 1798 mL with MB-FFP, S/D-FFP, and Q-FFP, respectively. The three plasmas were not equivalent. MB-FFP was not equivalent to the two other plasmas, but S/D-FFP and Q-FFP were equivalent. The median numbers of transfused plasma units were 10, 10, and 8 units with MB-FFP, S/D-FFP, and Q-FFP, respectively. Adjustment on bleeding risk factors diminished the difference between groups: the excess plasma volume transfused with MB-FFP compared to Q-FFP was reduced from 24% to 14%. Blood loss and coagulation factors corrections were not significantly different between the three arms. CONCLUSION Compared to both Q-FFP and S/D-FFP, use of MB-FFP was associated with a moderate increase in volume transfused, partly explained by a difference in unit volume and bleeding risk factors. Q-FFP was associated with fewer units transfused than either S/D-FFP or MB-FFP. 2012 American Association of Blood Banks.
Plasma transfusion in liver transplantation: a randomized, double blind, multicenter clinical comparison of three virally secured plasmas abstract
Vox Sanguinis. 2012;103((S1):):44. Abstract No. 5A-S33-03.
Detection, evaluation, and management of preoperative anaemia in the elective orthopaedic surgical patient: NATA guidelines
British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2011;106((1):):13-22.
Previously undiagnosed anaemia is common in elective orthopaedic surgical patients and is associated with increased likelihood of blood transfusion and increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. A standardized approach for the detection, evaluation, and management of anaemia in this setting has been identified as an unmet medical need. A multidisciplinary panel of physicians was convened by the Network for Advancement of Transfusion Alternatives (NATA) with the aim of developing practice guidelines for the detection, evaluation, and management of preoperative anaemia in elective orthopaedic surgery. A systematic literature review and critical evaluation of the evidence was performed, and recommendations were formulated according to the method proposed by the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. We recommend that elective orthopaedic surgical patients have a haemoglobin (Hb) level determination 28 days before the scheduled surgical procedure if possible (Grade 1C). We suggest that the patient's target Hb before elective surgery be within the normal range, according to the World Health Organization criteria (Grade 2C). We recommend further laboratory testing to evaluate anaemia for nutritional deficiencies, chronic renal insufficiency, and/or chronic inflammatory disease (Grade 1C). We recommend that nutritional deficiencies be treated (Grade 1C). We suggest that erythropoiesis-stimulating agents be used for anaemic patients in whom nutritional deficiencies have been ruled out, corrected, or both (Grade 2A). Anaemia should be viewed as a serious and treatable medical condition, rather than simply an abnormal laboratory value. Implementation of anaemia management in the elective orthopaedic surgery setting will improve patient outcomes.
Management of bleeding following major trauma: an updated European guideline
Critical Care (London, England). 2010;14((2):):R52.
INTRODUCTION Evidence-based recommendations are needed to guide the acute management of the bleeding trauma patient, which when implemented may improve patient outcomes. METHODS The multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was formed in 2005 with the aim of developing a guideline for the management of bleeding following severe injury. This document presents an updated version of the guideline published by the group in 2007. Recommendations were formulated using a nominal group process, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) hierarchy of evidence and based on a systematic review of published literature. RESULTS Key changes encompassed in this version of the guideline include new recommendations on coagulation support and monitoring and the appropriate use of local haemostatic measures, tourniquets, calcium and desmopressin in the bleeding trauma patient. The remaining recommendations have been reevaluated and graded based on literature published since the last edition of the guideline. Consideration was also given to changes in clinical practice that have taken place during this time period as a result of both new evidence and changes in the general availability of relevant agents and technologies. CONCLUSIONS This guideline provides an evidence-based multidisciplinary approach to the management of critically injured bleeding trauma patients.
Recommendations on the use of recombinant activated factor VII as an adjunctive treatment for massive bleeding - A European perspective
Critical Care. 2006;10((4):):R120, E.
Introduction: Our aim was to develop consensus guidelines for use of recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) in massive hemorrhage. Methods: A guidelines committee derived the recommendations using clinical trial and case series data identified through searches of available databases. Guidelines were graded on a scale of A to E (with A being the highest) according to the strength of evidence available. Consensus was sought among the committee members for each recommendation. Results: A recommendation for the use of rFVIIa in blunt trauma was made (grade B). rFVIIa might also be beneficial in post-partum hemorrhage (grade E), uncontrolled bleeding in surgical patients (grade E), and bleeding after cardiac surgery (grade D). r FVIIa could not be recommended for use in the following: in penetrating trauma (grade B); prophylactically in elective surgery (grade A) or liver surgery (grade B); or in bleeding episodes in patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis (grade B). Efficacy of rFVIIa was considered uncertain in bleeding episodes in patients with Child-Pugh B and C cirrhosis (grade C). Monitoring of rFVIIa efficacy should be performed visually and by assessment of transfusion requirements (grade E), while thromboembolic adverse events are a cause for concern. rFVIIa should not be administered to patients considered unsalvageable by the treating medical team. Conclusion: There is a rationale for using rFVIIa to treat massive bleeding in certain indications, but only adjunctively to the surgical control of bleeding once conventional therapies have failed. Lack of data from randomized, controlled clinical trials, and possible publication bias of the case series data, limits the strength of the recommendations that can be made.