Jehovah's Witnesses may not have identical outcomes with nontransfused non-witnesses after cardiac surgery

Bloodless medicine: current strategies and emerging treatment paradigms

BACKGROUND

Advances in our understanding of the risks associated with allogeneic blood transfusions (ABTs) and the growing number of patients who wish to avoid ABTs have led to the emergence of new treatment paradigms for "bloodless" medicine and surgery.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Here, we review prior studies and summarize current strategies for bloodless care used at our institution. We advocate three basic principles: 1) diagnosing and aggressively treating anemia, 2) minimizing blood loss from laboratory testing and invasive procedures, and 3) identifying and managing bleeding diatheses. Anemia is treated with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents as well as iron, folate, and B12 when indicated. Low-volume phlebotomy tubes are used for laboratory testing. Autologous blood salvage is used for childbirth and surgical patients who have the potential for substantial bleeding.

RESULTS

Although there have been few retrospective studies and no prospective studies to guide management, prior studies suggest that outcomes for surgical patients managed without ABTs are comparable to those of historic controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the emerging evidence that patients who avoid ABTs do as well if not better than patients who accept ABTs, further efforts are needed to determine whether all patients could benefit from bloodless strategies. Bloodless approaches in selected patients could reduce risks, improve outcomes, and decrease costs for all patients.

Bloodless medicine: what to do when you can't transfuse

A better understanding of risks associated with allogeneic blood transfusions (ABTs), along with a growing population of patients who do not accept transfusions, have led to the emergence of new treatment paradigms with “bloodless medicine.” In this chapter, we review prior studies describing management and outcomes in patients who refuse transfusion (referred to as “bloodless patients” herein) and summarize the approaches used at our institution. Bloodless management for surgical patients includes treatment of preoperative anemia, use of autologous blood salvage, and minimizing blood loss with procedures. Other adjuncts for both medical and surgical patients include minimizing blood loss from laboratory testing using pediatric phlebotomy tubes and conservative testing. Anemia can be treated with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, as well as iron, folate, and B12 when indicated. Although there are limited retrospective studies and no prospective studies to guide management, prior reports suggest that outcomes for surgical patients managed without ABTs are comparable to historic controls. A recent risk-adjusted, propensity-matched, case-control study of outcomes of all hospitalized patients who refused ABT at a large academic health center showed that bloodless management was not an independent predictor of adverse outcomes. Surprisingly, there was a lower overall mortality in the bloodless group and discharge hemoglobin levels were similar for both bloodless and control groups. Further research is now needed to optimize therapy and identify novel interventions to manage bloodless patients. Lessons learned from bloodless patients are likely to benefit all patients given recent evidence suggesting that patients who avoid ABTs do as well, if not better, than those who accept transfusions.

Risk-adjusted clinical outcomes in patients enrolled in a bloodless program

BACKGROUND

Although clinical outcomes have been reported for patients who do not accept allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT), many previous studies lack a control group, fail to use risk adjustment, and focus exclusively on cardiac surgery.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We report a risk-adjusted, propensity score-matched, retrospective case-control study of clinical outcomes for inpatients who did not accept ABT (bloodless, n = 294) and those who did accept ABT (control, n = 1157). Multidisciplinary specialized care was rendered to the bloodless patients to conserve blood and optimize clinical outcomes. Differences in hemoglobin (Hb), mortality, five morbid outcomes, and hospital charges and costs were compared. Subgroups of medical and surgical patients were analyzed, and independent predictors of outcome were determined by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, mortality was lower in the bloodless group (0.7%) than in the control group (2.7%; p = 0.046), primarily attributed to the surgical subgroup. After risk adjustment, bloodless care was not an independent predictor of the composite adverse outcome (death or any morbid event; p = 0.91; odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.53). Discharge Hb concentrations were similar in the bloodless (10.8 ± 2.7 g/dL) and control (10.9 ± 2.3 g/dL) groups (p = 0.42). Total and direct hospital costs were 12% (p = 0.02) and 18% (p = 0.02) less, respectively, in the bloodless patients, a difference attributed to the surgical subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Using appropriate blood conservation measures for patients who do not accept ABT results in similar or better outcomes and is associated with equivalent or lower costs. This specialized care may be beneficial even for those patients who accept ABT.