Factor Concentrate-Based Approaches to Blood Conservation in Cardiac Surgery: European Perspectives in 2020

The use of FEIBA for refractory bleeding in cardiac surgery - a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Significant blood loss during cardiac surgery is associated with a significant increase in morbidity and mortality. Factor Eight Inhibitor Bypassing Activity (FEIBA), a hemostatic bypassing agent mainly used in hemophiliac patients, has also been used for intractable surgical bleeding during cardiac surgical procedures in non-hemophiliac patients. However, concerns exist that its use may be linked to increased incidence of perioperative adverse effects including thrombotic complications.

AREAS COVERED

A systematic literature search was performed on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for all studies that reported the administration of FEIBA for treatment of bleeding during adult cardiac surgery in non-hemophiliac patients. After selecting of title and abstracts, two authors assessed the methodological quality of the full-text articles prior to final inclusion in the manuscript.

EXPERT OPINION

The safety profile of FEIBA was determined through an aggregate count of adverse events. Major complications included renal failure, re-operation for unresolved bleeding, postoperative mortality, and thromboembolic events. Overall, there is insufficient robust evidence to make a definitive conclusion about the safety or efficacy of using of FEIBA as a hemostatic agent in the setting of cardiac surgery.

Challenges in Patient Blood Management for Cardiac Surgery: A Narrative Review

About 15 years ago, Patient Blood Management (PBM) emerged as a new paradigm in perioperative medicine and rapidly found support of all major medical societies and government bodies. Blood products are precious, scarce and expensive and their use is frequently associated with adverse short- and long-term outcomes. Recommendations and guidelines on the topic are published in an increasing rate. The concept aims at using an evidence-based approach to rationalize transfusion practices by optimizing the patient's red blood cell mass in the pre-, intra- and postoperative periods. However, elegant as a concept, the implementation of a PBM program on an institutional level or even in a single surgical discipline like cardiac surgery, can be easier said than done. Many barriers, such as dogmatic ideas, logistics and lack of support from the medical and administrative departments need to be overcome and each center must find solutions to their specific problems. In this paper we present a narrative overview of the challenges and updated recommendations for the implementation of a PBM program in cardiac surgery.

Perioperative Factor Concentrate Use is Associated With More Beneficial Outcomes and Reduced Complication Rates Compared With a Pure Blood Product-Based Strategy in Patients Undergoing Elective Cardiac Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to compare factor concentrate (FC)-based and blood product-based hemostasis management of coagulopathy in cardiac surgical patients in terms of postoperative bleeding, required blood products, and outcome.

DESIGN

Retrospective, propensity score-matched analysis.

SETTING

Single, tertiary, academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred eighteen matched pairs of 433 consecutive patients scheduled for cardiac surgery in two isolated periods with distinct strategies of hemostasis management.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients received either blood product-based (period I) or FC-based (period II) hemostasis management to treat perioperative coagulopathy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients treated with FC management experienced less postoperative blood loss (907 v 1,153 mL, p = 0.014) and required less red blood cell and fresh frozen plasma transfusion (2.3 v 3.7 units p < 0.0001, and 2.0 v 3.4 units p < 0.0001, respectively) compared with subjects in the blood product-based management group. The frequency of Stage 3 acute kidney injury and 30-day mortality rate were significantly higher in the blood product-based group than in the FC management group (6.8% v 0.8%, p = 0.016, and 7.2% v 0.8%, p = 0.022, respectively). FC management-related thromboembolic events were not registered. The FC strategy was associated with a 2.19-fold decrease in the odds of massive postoperative bleeding (p < 0.0001), a 2.56-fold decrease in the odds of polytransfusion (p < 0.0001), and a 13.16-fold decrease in the odds of early postoperative death (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

FC-based versus blood product-based management is associated with reduced blood product needs and fewer complications, and was not linked to a higher frequency of thromboembolic events or a decrease in long-term survival in cardiac surgical patients developing perioperative coagulopathy and bleeding.

Controversies in the Clinical Practice of Patient Blood Management

Patient blood management (PBM) has been proposed as a standard of care in modern perioperative medicine. PBM-related interventions usually are implemented as bundles, but randomized controlled trials on the implementation of PBM as a bundle are missing. This special article focuses on the current evidence and controversies in the clinical practice of PBM and on emerging data related to specific PBM-related interventions in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Strong evidence for many PBM-related interventions is limited because of missing studies or the poor quality of published findings and study endpoints. Restrictive blood transfusion and timely interventions to maintain hemoglobin concentration and to reduce blood loss potentially might result in improved patient outcome, although the latter has yet to be proven.