A multidisciplinary panel of physicians was convened by Network for Advancement of Transfusion Alternatives to review the evidence on the efficacy and safety of i.v. iron administration to increase haemoglobin levels and reduce blood transfusion in patients undergoing surgery, and to develop a consensus statement on perioperative use of i.v. iron as a transfusion alternative. After conducting a systematic literature search to identify the relevant studies, critical evaluation of the evidence was performed and recommendations formulated using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group methodology. Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six observational studies in orthopaedic and cardiac surgery were evaluated. Overall, there was little benefit found for the use of i.v. iron. At best, i.v. iron supplementation was found to reduce the proportion of patients requiring transfusions and the number of transfused units in observational studies in orthopaedic surgery but not in cardiac surgery. The two RCTs had serious limitations and the six observational limited by the selection of the control groups. Thus, the quality of the available evidence is considered moderate to very low. For patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery and expected to develop severe postoperative anaemia, the panel suggests i.v. iron administration during the perioperative period (weak recommendation based on moderate/low-quality evidence). For all other types of surgery, no evidence-based recommendation can be made. The panel recommends that large, prospective, RCTs be undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of i.v. iron administration in surgical patients. The implementation of some general good practice points is suggested.

Pre-operative anaemia in patients undergoing major surgical procedures has been linked to poor outcomes. Therefore, early detection and treatment of pre-operative anaemia is recommended. However, to effectively implement a pre-operative anaemia management protocol, an estimation of its prevalence and main causes is needed. We analysed data from 3342 patients (44.5% female) scheduled for either: elective orthopaedic surgery (n = 1286); cardiac surgery (n = 691); colorectal cancer resection (n = 735); radical prostatectomy (n = 362); gynaecological surgery (n = 203) or resection of liver metastases (n = 122). For both sexes, anaemia was defined by a haemoglobin level < 130 g.l ; absolute iron deficiency by ferritin < 30 ng.ml (< 100 ng.ml , if transferrin saturation < 20% or C-reactive protein > 5 mg.l ); iron sequestration by transferrin saturation < 20% and ferritin > 100 ng.ml ; and low iron stores by transferrin saturation > 20% and ferritin 30-100 ng.ml . The overall prevalence of anaemia was 36%, with differences according to the type of surgery. Laboratory parameters allowing classification of iron status were available for 2884 patients. Among those with anaemia (n = 986), 677 (69%) were women, 608 (62%) presented with absolute iron deficiency, 101 (10%) with iron sequestration; and 150 (5%) with low iron stores. Iron status alterations were similar in women with haemoglobin < 130 g.l or < 120 g.l . For those who were not anaemic (n = 1898), corresponding figures were 656 (35%), 621 (33%), 165 (9%) and 518 (27%), respectively. Anaemia was present in one-third of patients undergoing major elective procedures. Over two-thirds of anaemic patients presented with absolute iron deficiency or iron sequestration. Over half of non-anaemic patients presented with absolute iron deficiency or low iron stores. We consider these data useful for planning pre-operative management of patients scheduled for major elective surgery.

No abstract

No abstract

Measurement of haemoglobin (Hb) concentration provides a reliable indication of the presence and severity of anaemia. However, other laboratory parameters are usually requested as well, leading to an increase in socio-sanitary costs. Accordingly, this study was undertaken to ascertain the reliability of point-of-care Hb determination with the portable photometer HemoCue-B haemoglobin (HBH) and to evaluate its utility for the initial diagnosis of anaemia. Hb was measured (x3) in 20 venous blood samples diluted with saline (v/v; 1 : 0, 2 : 1, 1 : 1, 2 : 1 and 3 : 1) to obtain a wide range of Hb and in venous and capillary blood samples from 247 primary health care patients. All HBH results were compared with those yielded by the reference cell counter Pentra 120 Retic (ABX). In diluted samples, Hb values obtained with either method were not significantly different (ABX-HBH, -0.01 +/- 0.32 g/dl; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.028 g/dl) and showed an excellent Pearson's coefficient of correlation (r = 0.992; P < 0.01). HBH provides accurate values if at least 4 mul of blood is loaded into the cuvette. There were no significant differences between Hb measured in venous (v) and capillary (c) blood samples in primary care patients. Eighteen anaemic patients were detected by ABX measurements (7.3%; 15 female/3 male), 18 by HBHv (specificity, 100%; sensitivity, 100%) and 25 by HBHc (eight false positives; one false negative; specificity, 94.4%; sensitivity, 96.5%). Compared with ABX, HBH provides accurate and precise measurements for a wide range of Hb and its use in primary health care seems to be a good method for the initial diagnosis of anaemia.