Article

Intraoperative Transfusion of Small Amounts of Blood Heralds Worse Postoperative Outcome in Patients Having Noncardiac Thoracic Operations

Department of Surgery, University of Kentucky, Lexington Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Lexington, Kentucky 40536-0284, USA.
The Annals of thoracic surgery (Impact Factor: 3.65). 06/2011; 91(6):1674-80; discussion 1680. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.01.025
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Massive intraoperative transfusion is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing noncardiac thoracic operations. We examined whether this association carries over to patients who receive only 1 to 2 units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) during their operation.
We queried the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database for patients undergoing noncardiac, nonvascular thoracic operations during a 5-year period. Patient 30-day morbidity (1 or more of 20 complications) and mortality were evaluated. We used propensity-score matching to minimize confounding when estimating the effect of transfusion on postoperative morbidity.
We analyzed 8728 nonvascular thoracic operations in patients from 173 hospitals. Of these, 7875 (90.2%) did not receive intraoperative transfusions. The 579 patients (6.6%) who received 1 to 2 units of intraoperative PRBCs had higher unadjusted rates of wound problems, pulmonary complications, sepsis/shock, composite morbidity, mortality, and length of stay than those who did not receive transfusions. These rates further increased with postoperative transfusion of more than 2 units of intraoperative PRBC. After propensity adjustment, transfusion of 1 or 2 units of PRBCs increased the multivariate risk of composite morbidity, pulmonary complications, systemic sepsis, wound complications, and the postoperative length of stay compared with those who did not receive transfusions.
In patients undergoing noncardiac thoracic operations, there is a dose-dependent adverse effect of intraoperative blood transfusion on outcomes, with even seemingly small amounts of blood (1 or 2 units of PRBCs) increasing morbidity and resource utilization. Clinicians should be cautious with intraoperative transfusions of 1 or 2 units of PRBC for mildly hypovolemic or anemic patients.

0 Followers
 · 
83 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The decision to perform intraoperative blood transfusion is subject to a variety of clinical and laboratory factors. This study examined variation in haemoglobin (Hb) triggers and overall utilization of intraoperative blood transfusion, as well the impact of transfusion on perioperative outcomes.Methods The study included all patients who underwent pancreatic, hepatic or colorectal resection between 2010 and 2013 at Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland. Data on Hb levels that triggered an intraoperative or postoperative transfusion and overall perioperative blood utilization were obtained and analysed.ResultsIntraoperative transfusion was employed in 437 (15·6 per cent) of the 2806 patients identified. Older patients (odds ratio (OR) 1·68), patients with multiple co-morbidities (Charlson co-morbidity score 4 or above; OR 1·66) and those with a lower preoperative Hb level (OR 4·95) were at increased risk of intraoperative blood transfusion (all P < 0·001). The Hb level employed to trigger transfusion varied by sex, race and service (all P < 0·001). A total of 105 patients (24·0 per cent of patients transfused) had an intraoperative transfusion with a liberal Hb trigger (10 g/dl or more); the majority of these patients (78; 74·3 per cent) did not require any additional postoperative transfusion. Patients who received an intraoperative transfusion were at greater risk of perioperative complications (OR 1·55; P = 0·002), although patients transfused with a restrictive Hb trigger (less than 10 g/dl) showed no increased risk of perioperative morbidity compared with those transfused with a liberal Hb trigger (OR 1·22; P = 0·514).Conclusion Use of perioperative blood transfusion varies among surgeons and type of operation. Nearly one in four patients received a blood transfusion with a liberal intraoperative transfusion Hb trigger of 10 g/dl or more. Intraoperative blood transfusion was associated with higher risk of perioperative morbidity.
    British Journal of Surgery 08/2014; 101(11). DOI:10.1002/bjs.9617 · 5.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A study was made to explore the possible association between the perioperative transfusion of 1 - 2 red blood cell units and in-hospital morbidity, 30-day mortality, and long-term survival in patients undergoing heart surgery. A prospective observational study was carried out. The ICU of a university hospital. All patients over 17 years of age that underwent heart surgery and were admitted to the ICU between November 2002 and December 2009 were included. Those patients who did not (n=703) and those who did (n=959) receive the perioperative transfusion of 1 - 2 red blood cell units were assessed. The endpoints were the effect of transfusion on both hospital morbidity and on 30-day mortality. In addition, all patients discharged alive from hospital until 31 December 2011 were subjected to follow-up. The association between transfusion and survival was assessed by means of the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess factors associated with long-term survival. The frequency of both cardiac and non-cardiac perioperative complications was higher in patients receiving transfusion. The 30-day mortality rate was higher in those who received transfusion (1% vs 0.1%, P=.02). Preoperative anemia was associated with a more intensive use of transfusion. Red blood cell transfusion was not found to be a risk factor for long-term mortality (hazar ratio=1.4, 95%CI 0.9-2.1). The perioperative transfusion of 1 - 2 red blood cell units in patients undergoing heart surgery increases both hospital morbidity and the 30-day mortality rate, but does not increase long-term mortality.
    Medicina Intensiva 12/2013; 38(7). DOI:10.1016/j.medin.2013.10.003 · 1.24 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support (ECMO) typically requires multiple blood transfusions and is associated with frequent bleeding complications. Blood transfusions are known to increase morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients, which may extend to patients receiving ECMO. Aiming to reduce transfusion requirements, we implemented a blood conservation protocol in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving ECMO. This was a retrospective study of adults receiving ECMO for ARDS after initiation of a blood conservation protocol that included a transfusion trigger of hemoglobin of less than 7.0 g/dL, use of low-dose anticoagulation targeting an activated partial thromboplastin time of 40 to 60 seconds, and autotransfusion of circuit blood during decannulation. The primary objective was to evaluate transfusion requirements during ECMO support. Clinical outcomes included survival, neurologic function, renal function, bleeding, and thrombotic complications. The analysis included 38 patients; of these, 24 (63.2%) received a transfusion while receiving ECMO. Median hemoglobin was 8.29 g/dL. A median of 1.0 units (range, 250 to 300 mL) was transfused during ECMO support over a median duration of 9.0 days, equivalent to 0.11 U/d (range, 27.5 to 33.3 mL/d). The median activated partial thromboplastin time was 46.5 seconds. Bleeding occurred in 10 patients (26.3%); severe bleeding occurred in 2 patients (5.3%). Twenty-eight patients (73.7%) survived to hospital discharge. Implementation of a blood conservation protocol in adults receiving ECMO for ARDS resulted in lower transfusion requirements and bleeding complications than previously reported in the literature and was associated with comparable survival and organ recovery. Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    The Annals of Thoracic Surgery 12/2014; 99(2). DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.08.039 · 3.63 Impact Factor