Extensive cell salvage and postoperative outcomes following thoracoabdominal and descending aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Cell salvage (CS) reduces intraoperative blood transfusion. However, it may cause deformity of the red blood cells and loss of coagulation factors, which may lead to unwanted sequelae. Thus, we hypothesized that extensive CS would lead to adverse outcomes after descending/thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (D/TAAA) repair. METHODS: Between 1991 and 2017, 2012 patients undergoing D/TAAA repair were retrospectively reviewed. After we excluded patients without reported intraoperative CS amount, patients were enrolled in the study (N = 1474) and divided into 2 groups: low CS (salvaged units <40, N = 983) and high CS (salvaged units ≥40, N = 491). Analyses were performed to verify the extensive CS as the risk factor for adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Preoperative demographics showed that the high-CS group had a significantly greater incidence of male patients (72% vs 58%), heritable aortic disease (24% vs 17%), redo (27% vs 20%), greater glomerular filtration rate (mL/min/1.73 m2, 75 vs 66) and more extensive aneurysms (TAAA extent II-IV). The high-CS group had significantly more postoperative complications compared with the low-CS group, including respiratory failure, renal failure, cardiac complications, neurologic deficits, bleeding, and 30-day mortality. Multivariable analysis confirmed high CS was an independent risk factor for renal failure along with long bypass time, older age, and extent of repairs. There was an incremental risk of renal failure and 30-day mortality proportional to salvaged cell unit (P < .001 in both). CONCLUSIONS: Increased salvaged cell units were associated with adverse postoperative outcomes after D/TAAA repairs. Risk of renal failure and mortality increased proportionally to the salvaged cell units.

Cell salvage during coronary artery bypass surgery and allogenic blood exposure.

AIM: Our primary aim was to assess the impact of intraoperative cell saver usage on patient exposure to allogenic blood transfusion during elective coronary artery bypass. The secondary endpoint was the impact of cell savage on the units of blood and blood products transfused perioperatively. METHODS: A prospective observational cohort study with a historical cohort as a control group was performed in a single tertiary care center. One hundred and twenty-four patients undergoing primary on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting were included. Intraoperative cell salvage was performed in 60 patients (study group) but not in the control group (n = 64). Transfusion data, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, and postoperative complications were evaluated in the cell saver and control groups. RESULTS: The number of patients exposed to allogenic red blood cell transfusion was significantly less in the study group (55% vs. 82.8%; p = 0.001) and the units per patient was also less in the study group (1.10 ± 1.7 vs. 2.25 ± 2.289 units; p = 0.002). However, there was no significant difference in terms of units of purified plasma fraction, platelets, or cryoprecipitate transfused. Intensive care unit stay, total hospital stay, number of reexplorations, complications, readmissions, and 28-day mortality were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative cell salvage with a cell saver in patients undergoing primary elective coronary artery bypass decreases the proportion of patients exposed to allogenic red cell transfusions and the number of units of red blood cells transfused.

Efficacy of cell saver use in living-donor liver transplant.

OBJECTIVES: Liver transplant currently is the best treatment option for end-stage liver disease. During liver transplant, there is major blood loss due to surgery and primary disease. By using a cell saver, the need for blood transfusion is markedly reduced. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of cell saver use on morbidity and mortality in living-donor liver transplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 178 living-donor liver transplants, performed from 2005 to 2013 in our center. Child-Turcotte-Pugh A patients, deceased-donor liver transplants, and liver transplants performed for fulminant hepatic failure were not included in this study. Intraoperative blood transfusion was done in all patients to keep hemoglobin level between 10 and 12 g/dL. Cell saver was used in all liver transplants except in patients with malignancy, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C. RESULTS: We included 126 patients in the study. Cell saver was used in 84 liver transplants (66%). In 42 patients (34%), liver transplant was performed without a cell saver. In living-donor liver transplant with cell saver use, 10 mL/kg blood (range, 2-50 mL/kg blood) was transfused from the cell saver; in addition, 5 to 10 mL/kg allogeneic blood was transfused. In living-donor liver transplant without cell saver, 20 to 25 mL/kg allogeneic blood was transfused. CONCLUSIONS: During liver transplant, major blood transfusion is needed because of surgery and primary disease. Cell saver use markedly decreases the need for allogeneic blood transfusion and avoids adverse events of massive transfusion.

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.

Comparison of results of autologous versus homologous blood transfusion in open-heart surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine a method to decrease the use of homologous blood during openheart surgery using a simple blood-conservation protocol. We removed autologous blood from the patient before bypass and used isovolumetric substitution. We present the results of this protocol on morbidity and mortality of surgery patients from two distinct time periods. METHODS: Patients from the two surgical phases were enrolled in this retrospective study in order to compare the outcomes using autologous or homologous blood in open-heart surgery. A total of 323 patients were included in the study. The autologous transfusion group (group 1) comprised 163 patients and the homologous transfusion group (group 2) 160 patients. In group 1, autologous bloods were prepared via a central venous catheter that was inserted into the right internal jugular vein in all patients, using the isovolumetric replacement technique. The primary outcome was postoperative In-hospital mortality and mortality at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included the length of stay in hospital and in intensive care unit (ICU), time for extubation, re-intubations, pulmonary infections, pneumothorax, pleural effusions, atrial fibrillation, other arrhythmias, renal disease, allergic reactions, mediastinitis and sternal dehiscence, need for inotropic support, and low cardiac-output syndrome (LCOS). RESULTS: The mean ages of patients in groups 1 and 2 were 64.2 ± 10.3 and 61.5 ± 11.6 years, respectively. Thirty-eight of the patients in group 1 and 30 in group 2 were female. There was no in-hospital or 30-day mortality in either group. The mean extubation time, and ICU and hospital stays were significantly shorter in group 1. Furthermore, postoperative drainage amounts were less in group 1. There were significantly fewer patients with postoperative pulmonary complications, pneumonia, atrial fibrillation and renal disease. The number of patients who needed postoperative inotropic support and those with low cardiac output was also significantly less in group 1. CONCLUSION: Autologous blood transfusion is a safe and effective method in carefully selected patients undergoing cardiac surgery. It not only prevents transfusion-related co-morbidities and complications but also enables early extubation time and shorter ICU and hospital stay. Furthermore, it reduces the cost of surgery.

Effect of autotransfusion system on tumor recurrence and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

AIM: To investigate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of continuous autotransfusion system (CATS) during liver transplantation of hepatocellular carcinoma patients. METHODS: Eighty-three hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who underwent liver transplantation with intraoperative CATS (n = 24, CATS group) and without (n = 59, non-CATS group) between April 2006 and November 2011 at the Liver Transplant Institute of Inonu University were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative HCC recurrence was monitored by measuring alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels at 3-mo intervals and performing imaging analysis by thoracoabdominal multidetector computed tomography at 6-month intervals. Inter-group differences in recurrence and correlations between demographic, clinical, and pathological data were assessed by ANOVA and χ(2) tests. Overall and disease-free survivals were calculated by the univariate Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Of the 83 liver transplanted HCC patients, 89.2% were male and the overall mean age was 51.3 ± 8.9 years (range: 18-69 years). The CATS and non-CATS groups showed no statistically significant differences in age, sex ratio, body mass index, underlying disease, donor type, graft-to-recipient weight ratio, Child-Pugh and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores, number of tumors, tumor size, AFP level, Milan and University of California San Francisco selection criteria, tumor differentiation, macrovascular invasion, median hospital stay, recurrence rate, recurrence site, or mortality rate. The mean follow-up time of the non-CATS group was 17.9 ± 12.8 mo, during which systemic metastasis and/or locoregional recurrence developed in 25.4% of the patients. The mean follow-up time for the CATS group was 25.8 ± 15.1 mo, during which systemic metastasis and/or locoregional recurrence was detected in 29.2% of the patients. There was no significant difference between the CATS and non-CATS groups in recurrence rate or site. Additionally, no significant differences existed between the groups in overall or disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: CATS is a safe procedure and may decrease the risk of tumor recurrence in HCC patients.

Should intraoperative cell-salvaged blood be used in patients with suspected or known malignancy?

PURPOSE: Intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) is used as an alternative to allogeneic blood transfusion in an attempt to avoid or minimize the risks associated with allogeneic blood. Intraoperative cell salvage is generally avoided in surgeries where malignancy is confirmed or suspected due to concern for potential metastasis or cancer recurrence. The application of post-processing methods for ICS is hypothesized to eliminate this potential risk. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine the in vitro experimental evidence as it pertains to the removal of tumour cells from ICS blood and to review the clinical studies where ICS blood has been used in patients with malignancy. SOURCE: A search of the English literature for relevant articles published from 1973 to 2012 was undertaken using MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Bibliographies were cross-referenced to locate further studies. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Leukoreduction filters are an effective method for removal of malignant cells from ICS blood. Small non-randomized clinical studies to date do not show evidence of an increased rate of metastasis or cancer recurrence. Although a theoretical risk of disease recurrence persists, the decision to use autologous ICS blood must be weighed against the known risks of allogeneic blood transfusion. CONCLUSION: Transfusion of autologous blood harvested via ICS should be considered a viable option for reduction or avoidance of allogeneic product during many oncologic surgeries and may be a lifesaving option for those patients who refuse allogeneic blood products.

Intraoperative cell salvage in radical prostatectomy does not appear to increase long-term biochemical recurrence, metastases, or mortality.

BACKGROUND: Blood management strategies help to conserve allogeneic red blood cells, a finite resource. Intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) is an effective method of allogeneic avoidance. However, concerns persist about the safety of ICS in surgical oncology cases, including radical prostatectomy (RP). Previous findings do not support these concerns. We hypothesized that ICS would not increase rates of long-term prostate cancer recurrence characterized by biochemical failure, disease dissemination, or mortality. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing RP by a single urologist over two 3-month periods 1 year apart were analyzed retrospectively. Patients in the first period had preoperative autologous donation (PAD) but not ICS (PAD group), whereas those in the second period had ICS only (ICS group). Variables assessed included patient demographics, prostate-specific antigen levels at surgery and end of follow-up, clinical stage, operative time, surgical margin status, pathologic stage and grade, Gleason score sum, length of hospital stay, biochemical recurrence, metastases, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 116 consecutive patients were analyzed. Of these, 32 patients in the PAD group and 42 patients in the ICS group had follow-up of at least 4.75 years. There was a significantly higher rate of biochemical failure (34.4% vs. 9.5%; p = 0.02) and metastases (12.5% vs. 0%; p = 0.03) in the PAD group versus the ICS group; there was no significant difference in mortality (9.4% vs. 0%; p = 0.08). CONCLUSION: ICS appears to be a safe and effective method of allogeneic blood conservation in patients undergoing RP. The findings suggest that there is no increased risk of biochemical failure, disease dissemination, or mortality at 5 years post-RP as a result of ICS use.