scholarly journals Techniques for blood loss estimation in major non-cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre Tran ◽  
Jordan Heuser ◽  
Timothy Ramsay ◽  
Daniel I. McIsaac ◽  
Guillaume Martel
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Loss Estimation ◽  
Blood Loss Estimation

scholarly journals Comparison of common perioperative blood loss estimation techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lara Gerdessen ◽  
Patrick Meybohm ◽  
Suma Choorapoikayil ◽  
Eva Herrmann ◽  
Isabel Taeuber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Loss Estimation ◽  
Visual Methods ◽  
Mixed Effect ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Blood Loss Estimation ◽  
Colorimetric Methods

Abstract Estimating intraoperative blood loss is one of the daily challenges for clinicians. Despite the knowledge of the inaccuracy of visual estimation by anaesthetists and surgeons, this is still the mainstay to estimate surgical blood loss. This review aims at highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of currently used measurement methods. A systematic review of studies on estimation of blood loss was carried out. Studies were included investigating the accuracy of techniques for quantifying blood loss in vivo and in vitro. We excluded nonhuman trials and studies using only monitoring parameters to estimate blood loss. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate systematic measurement errors of the different methods. Only studies that were compared with a validated reference e.g. Haemoglobin extraction assay were included. 90 studies met the inclusion criteria for systematic review and were analyzed. Six studies were included in the meta-analysis, as only these were conducted with a validated reference. The mixed effect meta-analysis showed the highest correlation to the reference for colorimetric methods (0.93 95% CI 0.91–0.96), followed by gravimetric (0.77 95% CI 0.61–0.93) and finally visual methods (0.61 95% CI 0.40–0.82). The bias for estimated blood loss (ml) was lowest for colorimetric methods (57.59 95% CI 23.88–91.3) compared to the reference, followed by gravimetric (326.36 95% CI 201.65–450.86) and visual methods (456.51 95% CI 395.19–517.83). Of the many studies included, only a few were compared with a validated reference. The majority of the studies chose known imprecise procedures as the method of comparison. Colorimetric methods offer the highest degree of accuracy in blood loss estimation. Systems that use colorimetric techniques have a significant advantage in the real-time assessment of blood loss.

scholarly journals The effects of pre- and postoperative fibrinogen levels on blood loss after cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 292-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chantal Gielen ◽  
Olaf Dekkers ◽  
Theo Stijnen ◽  
Jan Schoones ◽  
Anneke Brand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis

Safety of gelatin solutions for the priming of cardiopulmonary bypass in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Perfusion ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 350-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Idris Ghijselings ◽  
Dirk Himpe ◽  
Steffen Rex
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Bypass ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Postoperative Bleeding ◽  
Postoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Transfusion Requirements ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety of gelatin versus hydroxyethyl starches (HES) and crystalloids when used for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-priming in cardiac surgery. MEDLINE (Pubmed), Embase and CENTRAL were searched. We included only randomized, controlled trials comparing CPB-priming with gelatin with either crystalloids or HES-solutions of the newest generation. The primary endpoint was the blood loss during the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included perioperative transfusion requirements, postoperative kidney function, postoperative ventilation times and length of stay on the intensive care unit. Sixteen studies were identified, of which only ten met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 824 adult patients: 4 studies compared gelatin with crystalloid, and 6 studies gelatin with HES priming. Only 2 of the studies comparing HES and gelatin reported postoperative blood loss after 24 hours. No significant difference in postoperative blood loss was found when results of both studies were pooled (SMD -0.12; 95% CI: -0.49, 0.25; P=0.52). Likewise, the pooled results of 3 studies comparing gelatin and crystalloids as a priming solution could not demonstrate significant differences in postoperative bleeding after 24 hours (SMD -0.07; 95% CI: -0.40, 0.26; P=0.68). No differences regarding any of the secondary outcomes could be identified. This systematic review suggests gelatins to have a safety profile which is non-inferior to modern-generation tetrastarches or crystalloids. However, the grade of evidence is rated low owing to the poor methodological quality of the included studies, due to inconsistent outcome reporting and lack of uniform endpoint definitions.

The Effect of Desmopressin on Reducing Blood Loss in Cardiac Surgery – A Meta-Analysis of Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trials

1995 ◽  
Vol 74 (04) ◽  
pp. 1064-1070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Cattaneo ◽  
Alan S Harris ◽  
Ulf Strömberg ◽  
Pier Mannuccio Mannucci
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Postoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Transfusion Requirements ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Excessive Blood Loss

SummaryThe effect of desmopressin (DDAVP) on reducing postoperative blood loss after cardiac surgery has been studied in several randomized clinical trials, with conflicting outcomes. Since most trials had insufficient statistical power to detect true differences in blood loss, we performed a meta-analysis of data from relevant studies. Seventeen randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were analyzed, which included 1171 patients undergoing cardiac surgery for various indications; 579 of them were treated with desmopressin and 592 with placebo. Efficacy parameters were blood loss volumes and transfusion requirements. Desmopressin significantly reduced postoperative blood loss by 9%, but had no statistically significant effect on transfusion requirements. A subanalysis revealed that desmopressin had no protective effects in trials in which the mean blood loss in placebo-treated patients fell in the lower and middle thirds of distribution of blood losses (687-1108 ml/24 h). In contrast, in trials in which the mean blood loss in placebo-treated patients fell in the upper third of distribution (>1109 ml/24 h), desmopressin significantly decreased postoperative blood loss by 34%. Insufficient data were available to perform a sub-analysis on transfusion requirements. Therefore, desmopressin significantly reduces blood loss only in cardiac operations which induce excessive blood loss. Further studies are called to validate the results of this meta-analysis and to identify predictors of excessive blood loss after cardiac surgery.

scholarly journals Correction: Hill, A.; et al. Effects of Vitamin C on Organ Function in Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2103

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 3910
Author(s):  
Aileen Hill ◽  
Kai Clasen ◽  
Sebastian Wendt ◽  
Ádám Majoros ◽  
Christian Stoppe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Vitamin C ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Organ Function

The authors thank the readers for pointing out the issues [...]

Antifibrinolytics reduces blood loss in thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lowell Leow ◽  
Josiah Ng ◽  
Hai Dong Luo ◽  
Andrew M. T. L. Choong ◽  
Harish Mithiran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Thoracic Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Posterolateral Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110164
Author(s):  
Elsayed Said ◽  
Mohamed E. Abdel-Wanis ◽  
Mohamed Ameen ◽  
Ali A. Sayed ◽  
Khaled H. Mosallam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: Arthrodesis has been a valid treatment option for spinal diseases, including spondylolisthesis and lumbar spinal stenosis. Posterolateral and posterior lumbar interbody fusion are amongst the most used fusion techniques. Previous reports comparing both methods have been contradictory. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish substantial evidence on which fusion method would achieve better outcomes. Methods: Major databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes of interest between posterolateral fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). We extracted data on clinical outcome, complication rate, revision rate, fusion rate, operation time, and blood loss. We calculated the mean differences (MDs) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome and the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We retrieved 8 studies meeting our inclusion criteria, with a total of 616 patients (308 PLF, 308 PLIF). The results of our analysis revealed that patients who underwent PLIF had significantly higher fusion rates. No statistically significant difference was identified in terms of clinical outcomes, complication rates, revision rates, operation time or blood loss. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a comparison between PLF and PLIF based on RCTs. Although PLIF had higher fusion rates, both fusion methods achieve similar clinical outcomes with equal complication rate, revision rate, operation time and blood loss at 1-year minimum follow-up.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document