Hospital halves use of blood transfusion in hip surgery
Roger Dobson Abergavenny
A hospital that introduced a stringent transfusion policy has substantially
reduced the amount of blood it uses.
The proportion of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft who
received a transfusion fell from 57% to 45% and of patients undergoing hip
replacement from 52% to 26%, with no increase in length of stay in hospital,
according to a report of an audit of the use of blood after the introduction of
the policy at the South Manchester University Hospital (J R Soc Med
2002;95:450-2).
The new policy for red blood cell transfusion, brought in at the end of 1999,
included a standard blood ordering schedule and a transfusion trigger of a
haemoglobin concentration of <8 g/dl in the absence of symptoms.
To investigate the impact of the trigger on practice, researchers audited
transfusion requirements in surgery for six months before and after the
guidelines were brought in.
They audited four elective surgical procedures associated with substantial
transfusion requirements400 coronary artery bypass grafts, 107 total hip
replacements, 85 colectomies, and 159 transurethral prostatectomies.
"This study showed a reduction in red-cell transfusions after introduction of
a transfusion policy. This reduction was evident in cardiac surgery and was
particularly impressive in orthopaedic surgery, with transfusions halved and
haemoglobin concentrations at discharge substantially lower. Inpatient stay was
not increased by the more stringent transfusion policyindeed, in the [coronary
artery bypass graft] and hip replacement groups it declined," says the report.
Although transfusion practice for colectomy did not seem to change after
introduction of the transfusion trigger, haemoglobin concentrations at discharge
were lower after the introduction of the policysuggesting, says the report,
that surgeons were more willing to withhold transfusion.
"Blood is often given inappropriately with consequent risks for patients and
wastage of limited and expensive resources. There are several reasons why a
reduction in homologous blood use is desirable. Aside from the obvious avoidance
of complications, withholding unnecessary transfusions may spare patients the
immunomodulatory effect of homologous blood, which is suspected by some of
increasing susceptibility to bacterial infection or cancer recurrence. There is
also growing concern about future availability of blood stocks in view of the
impending routine testing of all homologous blood products for the agent of
variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease," says the report.
It adds: "Although other factors cannot be excluded, we suggest that the
reductions in red-cell transfusion were in large part attributable to the new
transfusion policy."
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"