No Effect of a Bipolar Sealer on Total Blood Loss or Blood Transfusion in Nonseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty-A Prospective Study With Matched Retrospective Controls

Bipolar vs. monopolar sealer in decreasing blood loss and transfusion rate in patients undergoing two-stage exchange in infected total knee arthroplasty: propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Two-stage revision in infected total knee arthroplasty increases the risk of blood loss and the need for transfusion. The present study aimed to test the hemostatic efficacy of a bipolar sealer to reduce blood loss and transfusion requirements after the first stage in patients affected by peri-prosthetic knee infections.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients undergoing 2-stage arthroplasty for infected TKA using a bipolar sealer (Haemodiss, Kylix, Naples, IT) were compared with 24 patients of a historical control group in which conventional electrocautery was used. Transfusion data, clinical information, and operative data were evaluated. The primary outcome measure was estimated blood loss at the time of the lowest hemoglobin level (nadir). The secondary outcome measures were the transfusion requirement and the number of units transfused.

RESULTS

The total blood loss was significantly lower in the prospective bipolar sealer group than the control group (1.19 (IQR 1.03-1.93) vs. 1.75 (IQR 1.13-2.07) L; p = 0.022). The transfusion rate was 8% in the bipolar sealer group, whereas 33% in the control group (p = 0.036). Furthermore, the mean number of blood units transfused was higher in the control group (0.4 ± 0.7 vs. 0.08 ± 0.3; p < 0.01). The Baseline Hematocrit and Operative time were directly associated with blood loss, whereas the bipolar use represented inverse predictor using multiple linear regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

After the first stage of a two-stage exchange for periprosthetic knee infection, several factors influence postoperative blood loss, including preoperative HCT level and operative time. The bipolar sealer effectively supports hemostasis, thus reducing blood loss and the need for transfusions.

Clinical Outcomes and Experience of a Multiyear Consecutive Case Series of Total Knee Arthroplasty Procedures Conducted with a Bipolar Sealer System for Hemostasis

Maximizing hemostasis during total knee replacement procedures remains a key challenge in current practice. Bipolar sealer technology achieves intraoperative hemostasis through tissue sealing and coagulation with adjustable radio frequency energy and a saline-irrigated tip. Optimal surgical site hemostasis is important to avoid potential complications such as hemarthrosis, wound drainage, increased pain, delayed discharge, and readmissions. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the bipolar sealer device in primary knee replacement in the largest consecutive series to date. A consecutive, treatment-control series of subjects who underwent a primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) utilizing a bipolar sealer for hemostasis, one subgroup with concomitant tranexamic acid (TXA) administration (n = 1599) and one subgroup without TXA administration (n = 3582), compared with a control group of primary TKA under tourniquet only (n = 667). Statistical analyses were performed through two-tailed unpaired t-tests. There was less total postoperative drain output and a lower overall transfusion rate in the bipolar sealer group (807ml ± 428) (2.5%) than the tourniquet only group (1290 ± 658, p = 0.001) (8.4%, p = 0.0001), respectively. Drainage output in bipolar sealer + TXA (450 ± 297 ml) was lower than the other two groups (bipolar sealer 807 ± 428 mL, p = 0.0001; tourniquet only 1290 ± 658 ml, p = 0.0001). The bipolar sealer group had a higher hematocrit at postoperative day 1 (POD1) (bipolar sealer: 33.1 ± 4.3 cc, tourniquet only: 32.5 ± 4.3 cc, p = 0.001) and at discharge (POD2, bipolar sealer: 31.5 ± 3.7 cc, tourniquet only: 30.2 ± 3.9 cc, p = 0.0001). There were zero reported serious adverse events related to hemostasis management in any group. The bipolar sealer system is a safe and effective instrument to achieve intraoperative hemostasis during primary TKA. The bipolar sealer group required significantly fewer postoperative blood product transfusions and maintained a higher hematocrit concentration at the time of discharge compared with subjects treated solely with tourniquet mediated hemostasis. Addition of TXA to local hemostasis methods may further reduce blood loss and transfusion requirements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:  This is a Level III study.

Patients Who Undergo Early Aseptic Revision TKA Within 90 Days of Surgery Have a High Risk of Re-revision and Infection at 2 Years: A Large-database Study

BACKGROUND

Early aseptic revision within 90 days after primary TKA is a devastating complication. The causes, complications, and rerevision risks of aseptic revision TKA performed during this period are poorly described.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the likelihood of re-revision within 2 years after early aseptic TKA revision within 90 days compared with that of a control group of patients undergoing primary TKA? (2) What are the indications for early aseptic TKA revision within 90 days? (3) What are the differences in revision risk between different indications for early aseptic revision TKA?

METHODS

Patients who underwent unilateral aseptic revision TKA within 90 days of the index procedure were identified in a national insurance claims database (PearlDiver Technologies) using administrative codes. The exclusion criteria comprised revision for infection, history of bilateral TKA, and age younger than 18 years. The PearlDiver database was selected for its large and geographically diverse patient base and the availability of outpatient follow-up data that are unavailable in other databases focused on inpatient care. A total of 481 patients met criteria for early aseptic revision TKA, with 14% (67) loss to follow-up at 2 years. This final cohort of 414 patients was compared with a control group of patients who underwent primary TKA without revision within 90 days. For the control group, 137,661 patients underwent primary TKA without early revision, with 13% (18,138) loss to follow-up at 2 years. Among these patients, 414 controls were matched using a one-to-one propensity score method; no differences in age, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index score were observed between the groups. Indications for initial revision and 2-year re-revision were recorded. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess survival between the early revision and control groups.

RESULTS

Two-year survivorship free from additional revision surgery was lower in the early aseptic revision cohort compared with the control (78% [95% confidence interval 77% to 79%] versus 98% [95% CI 96% to 99%]; p < 0.001). Among early revisions, 10% (43 of 414) of the patients underwent re-revision for periprosthetic infection with an antibiotic spacer within 2 years. The reasons for early aseptic revision TKA were instability/dislocation (37% [153 of 414]), periprosthetic fracture (23% [96 of 414]), aseptic loosening (23% [95 of 414]), pain (11% [45 of 414]), and arthrofibrosis (6% [25 of 414]). Early revision for pain was associated with higher odds of re-revision than early revisions performed for other all other reasons (44% [20 of 45] versus 29% [100 of 344]; odds ratio 2.0 [95% CI 1.0 to 3.7]; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Acute early aseptic revision TKA carries a high risk of re-revision at 2 years and a high risk of subsequent periprosthetic joint infection. Patients who undergo an early revision should be carefully counseled regarding the very high risk of repeat revision and discouraged from having early revision unless the indications are absolutely clear and compelling. Early aseptic revision for pain alone carries an unacceptably high risk of repeat revision and should not be performed. Adjunctive measures for infection prophylaxis should be strongly considered. Specific interventions to reduce surgical complications in this subset of patients have not been adequately studied; additional investigation of strategies to minimize the risk of reoperation or infection is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Is bipolar sealer superior than standard electrocautery for blood loss control after primary total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether bipolar sealer (BS) is superior to standard electrocautery in patients with primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis involving comparative studies (S) to evaluate whether administration with BS (I) was associated with less blood loss (O) than standard electrocautery (C) after primary TKA (P).

METHODS

PubMed (1950-January 2017), EMBASE (1974-January 2017), the Cochrane Library (January 2017 Issue 3), and the Google database (1950-January 2017) were systematically searched. Studies were included in accordance with Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Setting including criteria. Only the patients prepared for primary TKA and administrated with BS as the intervention group and standard electrocautery as control group were included in this meta-analysis. Outcomes include need for transfusion, total blood loss, blood loss in drainage, hemoglobin at discharge, hemoglobin drop, and length of hospital stay. Continuous outcomes and discontinuous outcomes were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) with corresponding confidence intervals (CIs), respectively. Stata 13.0 software was used for relevant data calculation.

RESULTS

A total of 7 clinical trials with 718 patients (398 patients in BS group and 320 in standard electrocautery group) were finally included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that administration with BS was associated with little reduction of total blood loss (WMD = -123.80, 95%CI -236.56 to -11.04, P = .031). There was no significant difference between the need for transfusion, blood loss in drainage, hemoglobin at discharge, hemoglobin drop, and length of hospital stay (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current meta-analysis, we found no evidence to support the routine use of bipolar sealer in the management of blood loss in primary TKA. Since the poor quality of the included studies, more randomized controlled trials are still needed to further identify the efficacy of BS after primary TKA.

Blood management in fast-track orthopedic surgery: an evidence-based narrative review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Innovations able to maintain patient safety while reducing the amount of transfusion add value to orthopedic procedures. Opportunities for improvement arise especially in elective procedures, as long as room for planning is available. Although many strategies have been proposed, there is no consensus about the most successful combination. The purpose of this investigation is to identify information to support blood management strategies in fast-track total joint arthroplasty (TJA) pathway, to (i) support clinical decision making according to current evidence and best practices, and (ii) identify critical issues which need further research.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We identified conventional blood management strategies in elective orthopedic procedures. We performed an electronic search about blood management strategies in fast-track TJA. We designed tables to match every step of the former with the latter. We submitted the findings to clinicians who operate using fast-track surgery protocols in TJA at our research hospital.

RESULTS

Preoperative anemia detection and treatment, blood anticoagulants/aggregants consumption, transfusion trigger, anesthetic technique, local infiltration analgesia, drainage clamping and removals, and postoperative multimodal thromboprophylaxis are the factors which can add best value to a fast-track pathway, since they provide significant room for planning and prediction.

CONCLUSION

The difference between conventional and fast-track pathways does not lie in the contents of blood management, which are related to surgeons/surgeries, materials used and patients, but in the way these contents are integrated into each other, since elective orthopedic procedures offer significant room for planning. Further studies are needed to identify optimal regimens.

Blood management in total knee arthroplasty: state-of-the-art review

Total blood loss from primary total knee arthroplasty may exceed 2 L with greater blood loss during revision procedures. Blood loss and allogeneic transfusion are strongly associated with adverse outcomes from surgery including postoperative mortality, thromboembolic events and infection. Strategies to reduce blood loss and transfusion rates improve patient outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. Interventions are employed preoperatively, intraoperatively and postoperatively. The strongest predictor for allogeneic blood transfusion is preoperative anaemia. Over 35% of patients are anaemic when scheduled for primary and revision knee arthroplasty, defined as haemoglobin <130 g/L for men and women, and the majority of cases are secondary to iron deficiency. Early identification and treatment of anaemia can reduce postoperative transfusions and complications. Anticoagulation must be carefully managed perioperatively to balance the risk of thromboembolic event versus the risk of haemorrhage. Intraoperatively, tranexamic acid reduces blood loss and is recommended for all knee arthroplasty surgery; however, the optimal route, dose or timing of administration remains uncertain. Cell salvage is a valuable adjunct to surgery with significant expected blood loss, such as revision knee arthroplasty. Autologous blood donation is not recommended in routine care, sealants may be beneficial in select cases but further evidence of benefit is required, and the use of a tourniquet remains at the discretion of the surgeon. Postoperatively, restrictive transfusion protocols should be followed with a transfusion threshold haemoglobin of 70 g/L, except in the presence of acute coronary syndrome. Recent studies report no allogeneic transfusions after primary knee arthroplasty surgery after employing blood conservation strategies. The current challenge is to select and integrate different blood conserving interventions to deliver an optimal patient pathway with a multidisciplinary approach.

The efficacy and safety of using a bipolar sealer to prevent blood loss in spine surgery: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs was to evaluate the effect of using a bipolar sealer to prevent surgical bleeding in spine surgery.

METHODS

In June 2017, the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane controlled trials register, Web of Science, Google, and Chinese Wanfang databases were used to identify RCTs and non-RCTs comparing the effects of intraoperative placement of a bipolar sealer versus standard electrocautery with regard to blood loss and blood transfusion. Stata 12.0 software was used to perform the meta-analysis. Weighted mean differences with 95% confidential intervals (CIs) were used for continuous outcomes, and relative risks with 95% CIs were used for discontinuous outcomes. After testing for publication bias and heterogeneity across studies, the data were aggregated and assessed with a random effects model when necessary.

RESULTS

In total, 6 clinical trials with 560 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that the use of a bipolar sealer decreased the estimated blood loss (MD = -165.06, 95% CI -236.73 to -93.40, P < 0.001), the need for a blood transfusion (RR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.68, P < 0.001), the transfusion units used (MD = -0.41, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.21, P < 0.001), the operative time (MD = -12.98, 95% CI -21.82 to -4.15, P = 0.004) and the length of hospital stay (MD = -2.77, 95% CI -5.45 to -0.10, P = 0.042). No significant difference was observed for the occurrence of infection (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.39, P = 0.192).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current meta-analysis, the use of a bipolar sealer is superior to standard electrocautery for reducing intraoperative blood loss and is therefore recommend for use during spine surgery.

Perioperative blood management strategies for patients undergoing total knee replacement: Where do we stand now?

Total knee replacement (TKR) is one of the most common surgeries over the last decade. Patients undergoing TKR are at high risk for postoperative anemia and furthermore for allogeneic blood transfusions (ABT). Complications associated with ABT including chills, rigor, fever, dyspnea, light-headedness should be early recognized in order to lead to a better prognosis. Therefore, perioperative blood management program should be adopted with main aim to reduce the risk of blood transfusion while maximizing hemoglobin simultaneously. Many blood conservation strategies have been attempted including preoperative autologous blood donation, acute normovolemic haemodilution, autologous blood transfusion, intraoperative cell saver, drain clamping, pneumatic tourniquet application, and the use of tranexamic acid. For practical and clinical reasons we will try to classify these strategies in three main stages/pillars: Pre-operative optimization, intra-operative and post-operative protocols. The aim of this work is review the strategies currently in use and reports our experience regarding the perioperative blood management strategies in TKR.