Bleeding after cardiac surgery is a common and serious complication leading to transfusion of multiple blood products and resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. Despite the publication of numerous guidelines and consensus statements for patient blood management in cardiac surgery, research has revealed that adherence to these guidelines is poor, and as a result, a significant variability in patient transfusion practices among practitioners still remains. In addition, although utilization of point-of-care (POC) coagulation monitors and the use of novel therapeutic strategies for perioperative hemostasis, such as the use of coagulation factor concentrates, have increased significantly over the last decade, they are still not widely available in every institution. Therefore, despite continuous efforts, blood transfusion in cardiac surgery has only modestly declined over the last decade, remaining at ≥50% in high-risk patients. Given these limitations, and in response to new regulatory and legislature requirements, the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists (SCA) has formed the Blood Conservation in Cardiac Surgery Working Group to organize, summarize, and disseminate the available best-practice knowledge in patient blood management in cardiac surgery. The current publication includes the summary statements and algorithms designed by the working group, after collection and review of the existing guidelines, consensus statements, and recommendations for patient blood management practices in cardiac surgery patients. The overall goal is creating a dynamic resource of easily accessible educational material that will help to increase and improve compliance with the existing evidence-based best practices of patient blood management by cardiac surgery care teams.
Pulmonary embolization of a precipitate containing calcium phosphate resulted in the death of two patients. The pH of the amino acid component, transient elevation of calcium and phosphorus concentrations during mixing, and the lack of agitation during automated preparation of the formulation were identified as the etiologic factors producing the fatal precipitate.
BACKGROUND
Although numerous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of cardiac surgery for blood refusal patients, few studies match to controls, and fewer examine cost. This historical cohort study aims to compare costs and outcomes after cardiac surgery in Jehovah's Witness patients who refuse blood transfusion with a group of matched patients accepting transfusion.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
A retrospective database review was performed to find all patients having cardiac surgery who refused blood products from January 2005 to July 2012 at Duke University Medical Center. These 45 patients were closely matched 1:2 with controls who accepted transfusion based on characteristics likely to influence transfusion. Cost from day of surgery to hospital discharge and other outcome data (length of stay [LOS], discharge hemoglobin [Hb], acute kidney injury) were analyzed retrospectively.
RESULTS
Forty‐five Witnesses having cardiac surgery were temporally matched to two controls having the same surgery. Median euroSCORE was the same in both groups (6.0, p = 0.9981). In the matched‐pairs comparison of cost, there was no significant difference in total cost for Witnesses and controls. There was no difference in intensive care unit LOS (median, 1 day, both groups) or total LOS (median, 9 days for Witnesses vs. 7 days for controls). Mean Hb at discharge was higher in Witnesses than in controls (11.7 g/dL vs. 9.8 g/dL, p < 0.001). Thirty‐day mortality was zero in both groups.
CONCLUSION
Utilizing applicable blood conservation measures, cardiac surgery may be performed with similar outcomes and cost from day of surgery to discharge compared to controls in select patients without blood transfusion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.