Home transfusion: three decades of practice at a tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND: Hospital at Home (HH) provides specialized care at the patients' homes. Keeping patients in familial surroundings can result in better outcomes reducing readmission to hospital, mortality, and costs of care. Home transfusion (HT) can be a key element in HH management but is scarcely deployed due to concerns about safety and cost. We have reviewed our HT practice to assess its feasibility and safety. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We prospectively reviewed data collected from 1985 to 2015, focusing specially on feasibility and procedural safety, looking for adverse events of transfusion. We also assessed the situation in similar hospitals in Spain with a survey about their practice. RESULTS: A total of 613 patients received 2260 blood components in 2126 transfusion episodes. A total of 93% patients received fewer than 10 transfusions. Most patients were treated for blood diseases (32%) or cancers (20%). The rate of adverse effects was 2.68% and decreased significantly with time. Fever was the most common adverse reaction. Patients who received transfusion of more than one blood product in a day were at higher risk of adverse events. No errors or near-miss events were detected, and no patient had to be readmitted to hospital for this cause. The survey on HT practices in similar hospitals showed great variation in practice. CONCLUSION: HT is feasible, sustainable, and safe, when performed on selected patients by dedicated HH units with well-trained staff, under specific protocols.

How long is antibiotic therapy necessary after urgent cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to analyze surgical site infection (SSI) frequency with different duration antibiotic courses to establish the minimum necessary duration. METHODS: This is an observational study of prospective surveillance of 287 consecutive patients (mean age 67.8 years) operated on for acute cholecystitis of grade II severity in the first 72 h. Postoperative antibiotics had been withdrawn before diagnosis of any infection as an inclusion criterion. Patients were classified into three groups, according to therapy duration: group 1 (0-4 days, n = 45, 15.7 %); group 2 (5-7 days, n = 75, 26.1 %); and group 3 (>7 days, n = 167, 58.2 %). A multivariable analysis of risk infection was performed. RESULTS: Overall SSI frequency in groups 1, 2, and 3 was 2.2, 10.7, and 9 %, respectively. Risk analysis showed an increase in both crude and adjusted relative risks of overall infection in group 2 (crude relative risk (RR): 4.80 (0.62-37.13); adjusted RR, 2.03 (0.20-20.91)) and in group 3 (crude RR, 4.04 (0.55-29.79); adjusted RR, 2.35 (0.28-20.05)) by comparison with group 1, although without statistical significance. As a result, treatment lasting 4 days or less was not associated with overall surgical site infection incidence higher than longer treatment. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic treatment over 4 days after early cholecystectomy provides no advantage in decreasing surgical site infection incidence.

Timing of DVT prophylaxis and risk of postoperative knee prosthesis infection.

This multicenter prospective study was performed to determine risk factors for knee prosthesis infection and the effect of timing doses of prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) related to time of surgery on the risk of knee prosthesis infection. A total of 5496 consecutive patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty from 2005 to 2006 in 13 orthopedic centers were prospectively followed up for 6 months, and the incidence of knee prosthesis infection was recorded. A case control study was nested in the cohort. Case patients were matched to uninfected (control) patients, and the timing of perioperative LMWH was recorded as the main risk factor. Fifty patients developed postoperative knee prosthesis infection during the follow-up period, yielding an incidence of prosthesis infection of 0.91% (95% CI, 0.68%-1.20%). Forty-four patients were matched to 106 controls. Case patients received the first LMWH dose ±12 hours from the start of surgery more frequently than their control counterparts (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.73-3.0). After adjusting by main risk factors, no statistical association was found between close perioperative timing of LMWH and risk of prosthesis infection. Diabetes mellitus (adjusted odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.2-8.8) and wound hematoma (adjusted odds ratio, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.1-16.5) were found to be independent risk factors for prosthesis infection.