Clinical Utility of Autologous Salvaged Blood: a Review.

INTRODUCTION: Autologous salvaged blood, commonly referred to as "cell saver" or "cell salvage" blood, is an important method of blood conservation. Understanding the mechanism of action and summarizing the existing evidence regarding the safety, efficiency, and the relative costs of cell salvage may help educate clinicians on how and when to best utilize autotransfusion. METHODS: This review focuses on issues concerning the quality of red blood cells (RBC), efficiency, and the cost effectiveness relative to autotransfusion. The key considerations of safe use and clinical applicability are described along with the challenges for wider dissemination. RESULTS: Cell salvage can reduce requirements for allogeneic transfusions, along with the associated risks and costs. Autologous salvaged RBCs provide high-quality transfusion, since the cells have not been subjected to the adverse effects of storage as occurs with banked blood. The risks for RBC alloimmunization and transfusion-related infectious diseases are also avoided. With a careful selection of cases, salvaged blood can be more cost effective than donor blood. Cell salvage may have a role in cardiac, major vascular, orthopedic, transplant, and trauma surgeries. However, there remain theoretical safety concerns in cases with bacterial contamination or in cancer surgery. CONCLUSION: In addition to other methods of blood conservation used in patient blood management programs, autologous salvaged blood adds value and is cost effective for appropriate surgical cases. Evidence suggests that autologous salvaged blood may be of higher quality and confer a cost reduction compared with the allogeneic banked blood, when used appropriately.

Obstetric intra-operative cell salvage: a review of an established cell salvage service with 1170 re-infused cases.

The use of cell salvage during caesarean section has been increasing steadily, although there are concerns relating to cost, a perceived risk of amniotic fluid embolism, and fetal red cell sensitisation. We present observational data from almost a decade of use of intra-operative cell salvage in obstetrics. By the end of this period, we set up cell salvage collection for > 98% of all caesarean sections. From 2008 to 2017, 1170 women have had a re-infusion of cell salvaged blood with no clinical safety concerns; the median (IQR [range]) volume was 231 (154-306 [80-1690]) ml. During this time there has been a marked reduction in the number of women who were transfused allogeneic blood, as well as the amount of blood transfused. In total, 647 (55%) women have had alloimmunisation testing, with two positive cases. Quality control data indicate that the quality of blood processed from partial first bowls is no worse than that from full bowls. We discuss the costs of providing this service with regard to: staffing costs; single suction; leucodepletion filters; selectivity in the processing of collected blood; and the use of partial first bowls.

Intra-operative cell salvage in pelvic and acetabular fracture surgery: a retrospective comparative study.

AIM OF THE STUDY: To determine if the intraoperative use of cell salvage (CS) led to a decrease in allogeneic blood transfusion by comparing with a control group that did not receive CS. We also looked at the effects of injury severity and surgical approach. METHODS: This was a retrospective study at a major trauma center. One hundred and nineteen patients underwent open reduction and internal fixation of pelvic and acetabular fractures with (59 patients) or without intra-operative blood cell salvage (60 patients). The main outcome measurements were allogeneic blood transfusion during and after surgery with respect to CS, injury severity and surgical approach. RESULTS: We did not find any significant difference in the allogeneic blood transfusion between the CS and non-CS groups (rate-62% vs. 48%, p value 0.12 {significant at < 0.05}, volume 5.56 units vs. 5.58 units, p value 0.33). The rate (71.1% vs. 48.9%, p = 0.02) and volume (7.6 units vs. 4.3 units, p value 0.00057) of post-operative blood transfusion was significantly higher in the more severely injured (ISS > 20), but there was no significant difference between the CS and non-CS groups. No significant difference was seen between either patients who had anterior or posterior surgical approaches. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find CS clearly efficacious clinically or cost effective, even in the more severely injured patients or when different surgical approaches were used. We do not advocate the routine use of CS in pelvic and acetabular surgery, but selectively, based on surgeon and patient preference.

A Retrospective Comparative Study of Different Methods of Blood Management in Total Knee Replacement.

Perioperative blood management is essential to minimize allogeneic blood transfusion in total knee replacement. The effect of preoperative administration of erythropoietin, intraoperative cell saver, tranexamic acid, and restrictive transfusion strategies on allogeneic transfusion is studied in total knee replacement. A retrospective comparative study of 106 patients who underwent total knee replacement in different time periods was performed. Group A (n 1 = 45) underwent restrictive strategies of transfusion between 2009 and 2010. Group B (n 2 = 24) includes patients where erythropoietin of either 10.000 IU or 20.000 IU was given preoperatively. Patients of Group C (n 3 = 21) underwent autologous washed erythrocytes transfusion through a cell saver. Lastly, in Group D (n 4 = 15) tranexamic acid dose of 1 gr IV was given intraoperatively. The preoperative and discharge hemoglobin together with total units of blood transfusion and creatinine levels was studied. Tranexamic acid noted the least units of blood transfusion (mean = 0.82 units/patient, p < 0.001, CI 95%) in contrast to the two regimens of erythropoietin (1.16 units/patient) OrthoPAT (1.43 units/patient) and restrictive strategies (1.92 units/patient). The mean preoperative hemoglobin was 13.37 g/dL with no statistical difference among the groups of patients. The postoperative mean hemoglobin was 10.59 with no statistical difference among the groups of patients too. Additionally, the mean creatinine level was 0.93 mg/dL; however, no statistical difference among the groups of patients was noted. Finally, tranexamic acid seemed to be the most cost-effective regime. In our study, tranexamic acid proved its superiority concerning the postoperative blood transfusion on patients undergoing total knee replacement, in comparison with the other existing methods of perioperative blood management. This is a Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Trial of intraoperative cell salvage versus transfusion in ovarian cancer (TIC TOC): protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynaecological cancer, with more than 7000 new cases registered in the UK in 2014. In patients suitable for surgery, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidance for treatment recommends surgical resection of all macroscopic tumour, followed by chemotherapy. The surgical procedure can be extensive and associated with substantial blood loss which is conventionally replaced with a donor blood transfusion. While often necessary and lifesaving, the use of donor blood is associated with increased risks of complications and adverse surgical outcomes. Intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) is a blood conservation strategy in which red cells collected from blood lost during surgery are returned to the patient thus minimising the use of donor blood. This is the protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial with an embedded qualitative study and feasibility economic evaluation. If feasible, a later definitive trial will test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ICS reinfusion versus donor blood transfusion in ovarian cancer surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Sixty adult women scheduled for primary or interval ovarian cancer surgery at participating UK National Health Service Trusts will be recruited and individually randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive ICS reinfusion or donor blood (as required) during surgery. Participants will be followed up by telephone at 30 days postoperatively for adverse events monitoring and by postal questionnaire at 6 weeks and 3 monthly thereafter, to capture quality of life and resource use data. Qualitative interviews will capture participants' and clinicians' experiences of the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been granted ethical approval by the South West-Exeter Research Ethics Committee (ref: 16/SW/0256). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and will inform the design of a larger trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN19517317.

Safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of intraoperative blood salvage in OPCABG with different amount of bleeding: a single-center, retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of intraoperative blood salvage (IBS) in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) surgery with different amount of bleeding. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 321 patients who underwent OPCABG between December 2012 and December 2016 at our hospital. Patients treated with IBS or allogeneic blood (AB) transfusions were divided into three groups depending on the amount of bleeding respectively: IBS1 or AB1 group (400-600 ml); IBS2 or AB2 group (600-1000 ml); IBS3 or AB3 group (1000-1500 ml). The intraoperative and postoperative conditions, blood transfusion volume, clinical and hematological outcomes, and total blood transfusion cost were examined. RESULTS: The amount of allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in the IBSs groups were significantly lower than that in the ABs groups (P < 0.01). Furthermore, drainage volume 24 h post-surgery (P < 0.05) and white blood cell count (WBC) 2 day post-surgery (P < 0.01) in IBS3 group were significantly higher compared with the AB3 group. Additionally, when IBS cost was 230 USD per set, the total blood transfusion cost in the IBSs groups was significantly higher than that in the ABs groups (P < 0.01); however, when 199 or 184 USD, only the IBS1 group, rather than IBS2 or IBS3, showed significantly higher cost of the total blood transfusion compared with the AB1 group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: When the amount of bleeding was 600-1000 ml, IBS can significantly reduce the demand for allogeneic blood, and has no direct adverse effects on coagulation function and recuperation, and is cost-effective in OPCABG.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Intraoperative Cell Salvage for Obstetric Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness analyses on cell salvage for cesarean delivery to inform national and societal guidelines on obstetric blood management are lacking. This study examined the cost-effectiveness of cell salvage strategies in obstetric hemorrhage from a societal perspective. METHODS: Markov decision analysis modeling compared the cost-effectiveness of three strategies: use of cell salvage for every cesarean delivery, cell salvage use for high-risk cases, and no cell salvage. A societal perspective and lifetime horizon was assumed for the base case of a 26-yr-old primiparous woman presenting for cesarean delivery. Each strategy integrated probabilities of hemorrhage, hysterectomy, transfusion reactions, emergency procedures, and cell salvage utilization; utilities for quality of life; and costs at the societal level. One-way and Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. A threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained was used as a cost-effectiveness criterion. RESULTS: Cell salvage use for cases at high risk for hemorrhage was cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $34,881 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). Routine cell salvage use for all cesarean deliveries was not cost-effective, costing $415,488 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Results were not sensitive to individual variation of other model parameters. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that at the $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained threshold, there is more than 85% likelihood that cell salvage use for cases at high risk for hemorrhage is favorable. CONCLUSIONS: The use of cell salvage for cases at high risk for obstetric hemorrhage is economically reasonable; routine cell salvage use for all cesarean deliveries is not. These findings can inform the development of public policies such as guidelines on management of obstetric hemorrhage.

Cell Saver for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery Reduces Cost.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: To determine if the use of cell saver reduces overall blood costs in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recent studies have questioned the clinical value of cell saver during spine procedures. METHODS: ASD patients enrolled in a prospective, multicenter surgical database who had complete preoperative and surgical data were identified. Patients were stratified into (1) cell saver available during surgery, but no intraoperative autologous infusion (No Infusion group), or (2) cell saver available and received autologous infusion (Infusion group). RESULTS: There were 427 patients in the Infusion group and 153 in the No infusion group. Patients in both groups had similar demographics. Mean autologous infusion volume was 698 mL. The Infusion group had a higher percentage of EBL relative to the estimated blood volume (42.2%) than the No Infusion group (19.6%, p < .000). Allogeneic transfusion was more common in the Infusion group (255/427, 60%) than the No Infusion group (67/153, 44%, p = .001). The number of allogeneic blood units transfused was also higher in the Infusion group (2.4) than the No Infusion group (1.7, p = .009). Total blood costs ranged from $396 to $2,146 in the No Infusion group and from $1,262 to $5,088 in the Infusion group. If the cost of cell saver blood was transformed into costs of allogeneic blood, total blood costs for the Infusion group would range from $840 to $5,418. Thus, cell saver use yielded a mean cost savings ranging from $330 to $422 (allogeneic blood averted). Linear regression showed that after an EBL of 614 mL, cell saver becomes cost-efficient. CONCLUSION: Compared to transfusing allogeneic blood, cell saver autologous infusion did not reduce the proportion or the volume of allogeneic transfusion for patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity. The use of cell saver becomes cost-efficient above an EBL of 614 mL, producing a cost savings of $330 to $422. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

The effectiveness of a de-implementation strategy to reduce low-value blood management techniques in primary hip and knee arthroplasty: a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative autologous blood salvage and preoperative erythropoietin are not (cost) effective to reduce allogeneic transfusion in primary hip and knee arthroplasty, but are still used. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a theoretically informed multifaceted strategy to de-implement these low-value blood management techniques. METHODS: Twenty-one Dutch hospitals participated in this pragmatic cluster-randomized trial. At baseline, data were gathered for 924 patients from 10 intervention and 1040 patients from 11 control hospitals undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty. The intervention included a multifaceted de-implementation strategy which consisted of interactive education, feedback on blood management performance, and a comparison with benchmark hospitals, aimed at orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists. After the intervention, data were gathered for 997 patients from the intervention and 1096 patients from the control hospitals. The randomization outcome was revealed after the baseline measurement. Primary outcomes were use of blood salvage and erythropoietin. Secondary outcomes included postoperative hemoglobin, length of stay, allogeneic transfusions, and use of local infiltration analgesia (LIA) and tranexamic acid (TXA). RESULTS: The use of blood salvage (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.30) and erythropoietin (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.97) reduced significantly over time, but did not differ between intervention and control hospitals (blood salvage OR 1.74 95% CI 0.27 to 11.39, erythropoietin OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.26 to 6.84). Postoperative hemoglobin levels were significantly higher (ß 0.21, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.34) and length of stay shorter (ß -0.36, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.09) in hospitals receiving the multifaceted strategy, compared with control hospitals and after adjustment for baseline. Transfusions did not differ between the intervention and control hospitals (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.78). Both LIA (OR 0.0, 95% CI 0.0 to 0.0) and TXA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.5) were significantly associated with the reduction in blood salvage over time. CONCLUSIONS: Blood salvage and erythropoietin use reduced over time, but not differently between intervention and control hospitals. The reduction in blood salvage was associated with increased use of local infiltration analgesia and tranexamic acid, suggesting that de-implementation is assisted by the substitution of techniques. The reduction in blood salvage and erythropoietin did not lead to a deterioration in patient-related secondary outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.trialregister.nl, NTR4044.

A decision model and cost analysis of intra-operative cell salvage during hepatic resection.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) can reduce allogeneic transfusions but with notable direct costs. This study assessed whether routine use of ICS is cost minimizing in hepatectomy and defines a subpopulation of patients where ICS is most cost minimizing based on patient transfusion risk. METHODS: A decision model from a health systems perspective was developed to examine adoption and non-adoption of ICS use for hepatectomy. A prospectively maintained database of hepatectomy patients provided data to populate the model. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to determine the probability of ICS being cost-minimizing at specified transfusion risks. One-way sensitivity analysis was used to identify factors most relevant to institutions considering adoption of ICS for hepatectomies. RESULTS: In the base case analysis (transfusion risk of 28.8%) the probability that routine utilization of ICS is cost-minimizing is 64%. The probability that ICS is cost-minimizing exceeds 50% if the patient transfusion risk exceeds 25%. The model was most sensitive to patient transfusion risk, variation in costs of allogeneic blood, and number of appropriate cases the device could be used for. CONCLUSIONS: ICS is cost-minimizing for routine use in liver resection, particularly when used for patients with a risk of transfusion of 25% or greater.

[Economic environment and blood transfusion]. / Conséquences de la pression économique sur les pratiques médicales en transfusion sanguine.

The increasing pressure on healthcare resources affects blood donation and transfusion. We attempted a survey of the efficiency of different strategies, actual or proposed to improve the management of blood products. We found an important disconnect between the cost effectiveness ratio of strategies and their uptake by policy makers. In other words, the least efficient strategies are those which increase transfusion safety by increasing the number of biological markers and are those preferred by health authorities in developed countries. Other more efficient strategies are more slowly implemented and included a systematic use of transfusion guidelines, reducing blood losses or increasing pre operative blood levels in elective surgeries.

The efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of intra-operative cell salvage in high-bleeding-risk cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass: a prospective randomized and controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Intra-operative cell salvage (CS) was reported to be ineffective, safe and not cost-effective in low-bleeding-risk cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), but studies in high-bleeding-risk cardiac surgery are limited. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of intra-operative CS in high-bleeding-risk cardiac surgery with CPB. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients were randomly assigned to either with intra-operative CS group (Group CS) or without intra-operative CS group (Group C). Study endpoints were defined as perioperative allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, perioperative impairment of blood coagulative function, postoperative adverse events and costs of transfusion-related. RESULTS: Both the proportion and quantity of perioperative allogeneic RBC transfusion were significantly lower in Group CS than that in Group C (p=0.0002, <0.0001, respectively). The incidence of residual heparin and total impairment of blood coagulative function in the 24 hours after surgery, the incidence of postoperative excessive bleeding, were significantly higher in Group CS than that in Group C (p=0.018, 0.042, 0.034, respectively). Cost of both allogeneic RBC transfusion and total allogeneic blood transfusion were significantly lower in Group CS than that in Group C (p<0.001, =0.002, respectively). Cost of total blood transfusion was significantly higher in Group CS than that in Group C (p =0.001). CONCLUSION: Intra-operative CS in high-bleeding-risk cardiac surgery with CPB is effective, generally safe, and cost-effective in developed countries but not in China.

Retrospective analysis of community hospital red blood cell recovery procedures: improved utilization needed for effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative blood recovery (PBR) is an important component of patient blood management. We analyzed our experience providing PBR for community hospitals to determine procedure types and clinical variables associated with efficacy and cost-effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: PBR cases (>25,000) from January 2008 through December 2012 were analyzed. For each procedure type, the median number of returned red blood cell units (rRBCs) and ratio of cases with at least 1 to less than 1 rRBC unit were calculated. Clinical predictors of rRBC were identified by linear and logistic regression. RESULTS: The overall median rRBC was 0.29 units despite median estimated blood loss (EBL) of 350 mL. Only three of 31 common procedure types had ≥1:<1 rRBC ratios near to or higher than 1. In nine of 31 common procedure types, at least 50% of cases had no rRBC return. Linear regression demonstrated significant association of rRBCs with increased EBL, longer operative duration, surgeon, PBR device type (autoLog vs. CS5), and decreasing age. EBL, autoLog use, high surgeon case volume, vascular procedures, and emergent versus elective procedures associated with higher odds of at least 1 rRBC. CONCLUSION: Discrepancy between rRBC and EBL and high percentages of cases with no rRBC suggests that PBR technique and case selection need optimization. Identification of procedure types and variables associated with PBR efficacy (≥1 rRBC) should improve utilization of PBR. Association of autoLog use with higher rRBC warrants further investigation.

Red blood cell salvage during obstetric hemorrhage.

OBJECTIVE: To describe which obstetric patients lose enough blood during postpartum hemorrhage to receive a reinfusion of intraoperative blood salvage. METHODS: Eight years of intraoperative blood salvage data from a regional tertiary care maternity hospital were analyzed. The volume of blood returned through intraoperative blood salvage was standardized to the volume of red blood cells in an allogeneic red blood cell unit from the blood bank. RESULTS: There were 884 obstetric hemorrhage cases in which intraoperative blood salvage was utilized. Sufficient blood was collected by intraoperative blood salvage to permit reinfusion in 189 of 884 (21%) patients. For patients in whom intraoperative blood salvage blood was reinfused, the mean ± standard deviation number of reinfused shed blood units was 1.2 ± 1.1 units. Although intraoperative blood salvage was most commonly performed on patients who underwent routine cesarean delivery (748/884 patients), only 13% of these patients received an intraoperative blood salvage reinfusion; 73% of the patients undergoing cesarean hysterectomy, 69% of those who had bleeding after cesarean delivery, and 53% of the patients who bled after vaginal delivery received an intraoperative blood salvage reinfusion (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Although intraoperative blood salvage was attempted on many patients, on only 21% of the women was a sufficient amount of intraoperative shed blood collected to proceed with reinfusion. Patients who experienced bleeding or who underwent a cesarean hysterectomy were the most likely to receive a reinfusion of intraoperative blood salvage-processed blood.

Cell salvage in emergency trauma surgery.

BACKGROUND: Trauma is the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45 years. Over the past 20 years, intraoperative autologous transfusions (obtained by cell salvage, also known as intraoperative blood salvage (IBS)) have been used as an alternative to blood products from other individuals during surgery because of the risk of transfusion-related infections such as hepatitis and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In this review, we sought to assess the effects and cost of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic surgery. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect and cost of cell salvage with those of standard care in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We ran the search on 25 November 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE, EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (OvidSP), PubMed, and ISI Web of Science (SCI-Expanded & CPSI-SSH). We also screened reference lists and contacted principal investigators. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing cell salvage with no cell salvage (standard care) in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data from the trial reports. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: Only one small study (n = 44) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results suggested that cell salvage did not affect mortality overall (death rates were 67% (14/21 participants) in the cell salvage group and 65% (15/23) in the control group) (odds ratio (OR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 3.72). For individuals with abdominal injury, mortality was also similar in both groups (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.10).Less donor blood was needed for transfusion within the first 24 hours postinjury in the cell salvage group compared with the control group (mean difference (MD) -4.70 units, 95% CI -8.09 to -1.31). Adverse events, notably postoperative sepsis, did not differ between groups (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.55). Cost did not notably differ between groups (MD -177.81, 95% CI -452.85 to 97.23, measured in GBP in 2002). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for the use of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery remains equivocal. Large, multicentre, methodologically rigorous trials are needed to assess the relative efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of cell salvage in different surgical procedures in the emergency context.

Medical and Economic Advantages of Postoperative Blood Salvage in Total Knee Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Total knee replacement surgery causes large blood loss leading to worsening of the patient's physical capacity, difficulties in rehabilitation and necessity of transfusions. The re-infusion of drainage fluid has been described as an alternative way to improve hematological parameters. The aim of the study was to determine the effectiveness of re-transfusion with regard to the allogeneic transfusion rate, duration of treatment and costs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a prospective randomized study of 101 patients, divided into an RTF group for re-transfusion from the drain and a DRN group for standard drainage. We could not re-transfuse drainage blood in 6 cases. 38 patients (RTF2) received their blood back and the remaining 63 patients (DRN2) did not. Depending on blood loss, laboratory tests and general condition, decisions were made to proceed with allogeneic transfusions. RESULTS: In spite of the re-transfusion, 39.4% of the patients in RTF2 required an additional transfusion, compared to 53.9% of the patients in DRN2 (p=0.15). Mean deterioration in hematological parameters was 72.9% of baseline in RTF2 and 75.0% in DRN2 (p=0.45), mean treatment time was 10.3 days for RTF2 and 11.1 for DRN2 (p=0,24) and mean cost was PLN 5426.5 in RTF versus PLN 5587.21 in DRN (p=0.76). CONCLUSION: The effect of re-transfusion on reducing allogeneic blood usage is not significant, does not alter patients' general condition and lab test results and does not eliminate the need for transfusion or influence the duration of hospital stay and the costs.

Is a preoperative group and save necessary for enhanced recovery joint replacement patients?

AIM: To consider the financial benefit to the authors' trust of omitting a preoperative group and save in enhanced recovery arthroplasty patients, and to estimate the scope for national savings. Patient safety was considered to determine acceptability for routine practice. METHODS: A total of 121 patients receiving a total knee replacement or total hip replacement on the authors' enhanced recovery protocol were selected. Pre- and postoperative haemoglobin levels were obtained. The transfusion team were contacted when the postoperative haemoglobin level was ≤8 g/dl to determine whether blood products had been issued. Costs for group and save were obtained from the pathology department. RESULTS: Mean postoperative reduction in haemoglobin level was 2.6 g/dl (P≤0.001) and 2.1 g/dl (P≤0.001) for total hip replacement and total knee replacement respectively. No patients were transfused. One group and save costs £12.00, and omission of this test in these patients would have saved £1452.00. Potentially, £1 605 408 could have been saved in the 133 784 patients undergoing NHS arthroplasty in 2012. Group and save omission would not affect management of intraoperative haemorrhage where O negative blood would be available. If a transfusion is required postoperatively it would take 100 minutes to issue crossmatched blood - a time delay unlikely to compromise patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that a preoperative group and save could be omitted in arthroplasty patients on this enhanced recovery programme to prevent needless expenditure, but more long-term follow up is required to ensure patients are not put at risk.

Does current evidence support the use of intraoperative cell salvage in reducing the need for blood transfusion in caesarean section?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: An important cause of maternal morbidity and direct maternal death is obstetric haemorrhage at caesarean section. Concerns regarding allogeneic blood safety, limited blood supplies and rising health costs have collectively generated enthusiasm for the utility of methods intended to reduce the use of allogeneic blood transfusion in cases of haemorrhage at caesarean section. This can be achieved by intraoperative cell salvage (IOCS). The aim of this review is to summarize and examine the evidence for the efficacy of IOCS during caesarean section, in women at risk of haemorrhage, in reducing the need for allogeneic blood transfusion. RECENT FINDINGS: The majority of the evidence currently available is from case reports and case series. Although this evidence appears to support the use of IOCS in obstetrics, strong clinical evidence or economic effectiveness from clinical trials are essential to support the routine practice of IOCS in obstetrics. SUMMARY: Current evidence is limited to reported case series and two small controlled studies. Overall, IOCS may reduce the need for allogeneic blood transfusions during caesarean section. Future large randomized trials are required to assess effectiveness, cost effectiveness and safety. The results of the current ongoing SALVO (A randomised controlled trial of intra-operative cell salvage during caesarean section in women at risk of haemorrhage) trial will shed light on these aspects.

Cost savings of red cell salvage during cesarean delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To use decision analysis to evaluate whether and under what conditions routine setup of intraoperative cell salvage during cesarean delivery is cost-saving. METHODS: We developed a decision model to compare costs associated with two strategies for cesarean delivery: 1) routine setup of intraoperative cell salvage; or 2) standard care without intraoperative cell salvage. One-, two-, and three-way sensitivity analyses as well as Monte Carlo simulation were used to assess the robustness of our findings. RESULTS: Among nonselected women undergoing cesarean delivery, our base case estimate was that 3.2% would require red blood cell transfusion. Under this assumption, cell salvage is cost-saving only if each woman requires at least 60 units. Conversely, if only two units on average are required, the probability of transfusion needs to be at least 58% for cell salvage to be cost-saving. In our base case analysis, setup of intraoperative cell salvage during routine cesarean deliveries is not cost-saving, increasing the cost per cesarean delivery by $223.80. We found that cell salvage would be cost-saving only in very high-risk scenarios. For example, severe maternal anemia or abnormal placentation, in which 54% and 75% of women are transfused three and two units per case, respectively, would make cell salvage cost-saving. CONCLUSION: Setup of intraoperative cell salvage during cesarean delivery is cost-saving and should be considered only when there is a predictably high probability of transfusion or when a massive transfusion is reasonably likely.

Perceived barriers among physicians for stopping non-cost-effective blood-saving measures in total hip and total knee arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that the blood-saving measures (BSMs) erythropoietin (EPO) and intra- and postoperative blood salvage are not (cost-)effective in primary elective total hip and knee arthroplasties, they are used frequently in Dutch hospitals. This study aims to assess the impact of barriers associated with the intention of physicians to stop BSMs. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A survey among 400 orthopedic surgeons and 400 anesthesiologists within the Netherlands was performed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify barriers associated with intention to stop BSMs. RESULTS: A total of 153 (40%) orthopedic surgeons and 100 (27%) anesthesiologists responded. Of all responders 67% used EPO, perioperative blood salvage, or a combination. After reading the evidence on non-cost-effective BSMs, 50% of respondents intended to stop EPO and 53% to stop perioperative blood salvage. In general, barriers perceived most frequently were lack of attention for blood management (90% of respondents), department priority to prevent transfusions (88%), and patient characteristics such as comorbidity (81%). Barriers significantly associated with intention to stop EPO were lack of interest to save money and the impact of other involved parties. Barriers significantly associated with intention to stop perioperative blood salvage were concerns about patient safety, lack of alternatives, losing experience with the technique, and lack of interest to save money. CONCLUSION: Physicians experience barriers to stop using BSMs, related to their own technical skills, patient safety, current blood management policy, and lack of interest to save money. These barriers should be targeted in strategies to make BSM use cost-effective.