Search

Patient blood management (PBM) offers significantly improved outcomes for almost all medical and surgical patient populations, pregnant women, and individuals with micronutrient deficiencies, anemia, or bleeding. It holds enormous financial benefits for hospitals and payers, improves performance of health care providers, and supports public authorities to improve population health. Despite this extraordinary combination of benefits, PBM has hardly been noticed in the world of health care. In response, the World Health Organization (WHO) called for its 194 member states, in its recent Policy Brief, to act quickly and decidedly to adopt national PBM policies. To further support the WHO's call to action, this article addresses 3 aspects in more detail. The first is the urgency from a health economic perspective. For many years, growth in health care spending has outpaced overall economic growth, particularly in aging societies. Due to competing economic needs, the continuation of disproportionate growth in health care spending is unsustainable. Therefore, the imperative for health care leaders and policy makers is not only to curb the current spending rate relative to the gross domestic product (GDP) but also to simultaneously improve productivity, quality, safety of patient care, and the health status of populations. Second, while PBM meets these requirements on an exceptional scale, uptake remains slow. Thus, it is vital to identify and understand the impediments to broad implementation. This includes systemic challenges such as the so-called "waste domains" of failure of care delivery caused by malfunctions of health care systems, failure of care coordination, overtreatment, and low-value care. Other impediments more specific to PBM are the misperception of PBM and deeply rooted cultural patterns. Third, understanding how the 3Es-evidence, economics, and ethics-can effectively be used to motivate relevant stakeholders to take on their respective roles and responsibilities and follow the urgent call to implement PBM as a standard of care.

Objective To develop a standardized approach to the implementation and performance of acute normovolemic hemodilution (ANH) in order to reduce the incidence of bleeding and allogeneic blood transfusion in high-risk surgical bleeding-related cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Design A 2-round modified RAND-Delphi consensus process. Participants Seven physicians from multiple geographic locations and clinical disciplines including anesthesiology and cardiac surgery and 1 cardiac surgery perfusionist participated in the survey. One registered nurse, specializing in Patient Blood Management, participated in the discussion but did not participate in the survey. Methods A modified RAND-Delphi method was utilized that integrated evidence review with a face-to-face expert multidisciplinary panel meeting, followed by repeated scoring using a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was determined as a result from the second round survey, as follows: median rating of 1-3: ANH acceptable; median rating of 7-9: ANH not acceptable; median rating of 4-6: use clinical judgment. Results Evidentiary review identified 18 key peer-reviewed manuscripts for discussion. Through the consensus-building process, 39 statements including 26 contraindications to ANH and 10 CPB patient variables were assessed. In total, 22 statements were accepted or modified for the second scoring round. Conclusions Consensus was reached on 6 conditions in which ANH would or would not be acceptable, showing that development of a standardized approach for the use of ANH in high-risk surgical bleeding and allogeneic blood transfusion is clearly possible. The recommendations developed by this expert panel may help guide the management and inclusion of ANH as an evidence and consensus-based blood conservation modality.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a pandemic. Global health care now faces unprecedented challenges with widespread and rapid human-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and high morbidity and mortality with COVID-19 worldwide. Across the world, medical care is hampered by a critical shortage of not only hand sanitizers, personal protective equipment, ventilators, and hospital beds, but also impediments to the blood supply. Blood donation centers in many areas around the globe have mostly closed. Donors, practicing social distancing, some either with illness or undergoing self-quarantine, are quickly diminishing. Drastic public health initiatives have focused on containment and “flattening the curve” while invaluable resources are being depleted. In some countries, the point has been reached at which the demand for such resources, including donor blood, outstrips the supply. Questions as to the safety of blood persist. Although it does not appear very likely that the virus can be transmitted through allogeneic blood transfusion, this still remains to be fully determined. As options dwindle, we must enact regional and national shortage plans worldwide and more vitally disseminate the knowledge of and immediately implement patient blood management (PBM). PBM is an evidence-based bundle of care to optimize medical and surgical patient outcomes by clinically managing and preserving a patient’s own blood. This multinational and diverse group of authors issue this “Call to Action” underscoring “The Essential Role of Patient Blood Management in the Management of Pandemics” and urging all stakeholders and providers to implement the practical and commonsense principles of PBM and its multiprofessional and multimodality approaches.

Blood transfusion is given according to haemoglobin thresholds aimed at restoration of arterial oxygen-carrying capacity. Patient survival after severe haemorrhagic shock depends on restoration of microvascular perfusion, tissue oxygen delivery, endothelial function and organ integrity. We investigated a novel crystalloid fluid designed for tissue oxygen delivery, Oxsealife® , with components that generate microvascular nitric oxide and scavenge reactive oxygen species generated during ischaemia-reperfusion injury. The amount of dissolved oxygen in blood progressively increased during step-wise in vitro haemodilution with this fluid, suggesting that the oxygen solubility coefficient of blood is dynamic, not static. We performed a pilot safety and efficacy study to compare resuscitation with this novel crystalloid vs. whole blood transfusion in a swine haemorrhagic shock model with animals bled to an arterial lactate oxygen debt target. Despite contributing no haemoglobin, viscosity nor oncotic potential, resuscitation with Oxsealife after severe haemorrhagic shock restored central haemodynamic parameters comparable to stored allogeneic blood transfusion. Tissue perfusion, oxygenation and metabolic outcomes were equivalent between treatment groups. Increased consumption of bicarbonate in animals given Oxsealife suggested greater capillary recruitment and enhanced clearance of acidic tissue metabolites. Serum markers of organ function, animal activity during recovery and histological analysis of tissue morphology and endothelial glycocalyx integrity confirmed functional recovery from haemorrhagic shock. We conclude that recovery of tissue oxygen delivery and organ function after haemorrhagic shock may not be dependent on treatments that increase haemoglobin levels. Oxsealife shows promise for treatment of severe haemorrhagic shock and may reduce the requirement for allogeneic blood products.

Patient Blood Management is the timely application of evidence-based medical and surgical concepts designed to maintain hemoglobin concentration, optimize hemostasis, and minimize blood loss to improve patient outcomes. Conceptually similar to a "bundle" strategy, it is designed to improve clinical care using comprehensive evidence-based treatment strategies to manage patients with potential or ongoing critical bleeding, bleeding diathesis, critical anemia, and/ or a coagulopathy. Patient Blood Management includes multimodal strategies to screen, diagnose and properly treat anemia, coagulopathies and minimize bleeding, using goal-directed therapy and leverages a patient's physiologic ability to adapt to anemia while definitive treatment is undertaken. Allogeneic blood component transfusion is one traditional therapeutic modality out of many for managing blood loss and anemia and, while it may be the best choice in certain situations, other effective and more appropriate options are available and should be used in conjunction or alone. Therefore, comprehensive Patient Blood Management is the new standard of care to prevent and manage anemia and optimize hemostasis and has been recommended by the World Health Organization, the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the European Society of Anaesthesiology and the Australian National Blood Authority. While there is a plethora of expert consensus and good practice guidelines published for blood component transfusion from multiple professional organizations and societies, there remains a need for more comprehensive and broader standards of patient medical management to proactively reduce the risk of exposure to allogeneic transfusions. In 2010, the Society for Advancement of Blood Management published the first comprehensive standards to address the administrative and clinical components of an effective, patient-centered Patient Blood Management program. Recognizing the need to reduce inappropriate transfusions, some professional organizations have placed their emphasis on transfusion guidelines. In contrast, the focus of the Society for Advancement of Blood Management Standard is on the centrality of the patient and the full spectrum of therapeutic strategies needed to improve clinical outcomes in patients at risk for blood loss or anemia, thereby reducing avoidable transfusions as well. The Standards are meant not to replace, but to complement transfusion guidelines by more completely addressing the need for a multi-modal clinical approach with the goal to improve patient outcomes. Compared to adult programs, Pediatric Patient Blood Management programs are currently not commonly accepted as standard of care for pediatric patients. This is partly due to the fact that, until recently, there was a paucity of robust evidence-based literature and expert consensus guidelines on pediatric PBM. Managing pediatric bleeding and blood product transfusion presents a unique set of challenges. The main goal of transfusion is to correct or avoid imminent inadequate oxygen carrying capacity caused by inadequate red blood cell mass. Determining when, what, and how much to transfuse can be difficult. Neonates, infants, children, and adolescents each have specific considerations based on age, weight, physiology, and pharmacology. In this edition of Pediatric Anaesthesia we provide, in abbreviated format, the 4th edition of the Administrative and Clinical Standards for Patient Blood Management; Pediatric Version, first published in 2010 with the addition of a new Pediatric section in 2016. These Standards provide guidance for implementing a comprehensive Pediatric Patient Blood Management program at both pediatric and adult medical institutions. While every hospital may not be equipped to have a dedicated Pediatric Patient Blood Management program, this document highlights important universal clinical strategies that can be implemented to optimize pediatric bleeding management and minimize allogeneic blood product exposure through the use of multi-modal therapeutic strategies that have their central emphasis on the patient rather than the transfusion. Important strategies include: treatment of preoperative anemia, standardized transfusion algorithms, the use of restrictive transfusion thresholds, goal-directed therapy based on point of care and viscoelastic testing, antifibrinolytics, and avoidance of hemodilution and hypothermia as supported by evidence. For the full version, please go to https://www.sabm.org/publications.

Vigilance is essential in the perioperative period. When blood is not an option for the patient, especially in a procedure/surgery that normally holds a risk for blood transfusion, complexity is added to the management. Current technology and knowledge has made avoidance of blood transfusion a realistic option but it does require a concerted patient-centered effort from the perioperative team. In this article, we provide suggestions for a successful, safe, and bloodless journey for patients. The approaches include preoperative optimization as well as intraoperative and postoperative techniques to reduce blood loss, and also introduces current innovative substitutes for transfusions. This article also assists in considering and maneuvering through the legal and ethical systems to respect patients' beliefs and ensuring their safety.

BACKGROUND: The relationships between the ratios of transfused allogeneic blood products and clinical outcomes in patients with acute intraoperative hemorrhage are poorly defined. METHODS: To better define these ratios, we undertook a single-center, observational cohort study of all surgical patients (≥18 years) who received rapid transfusion defined by a critical administration threshold of 3 or more units of red blood cells (RBCs) intraoperatively within 1 hour between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess relationships between ratios of plasma to RBCs and platelets to RBCs at 3, 12, and 24 hours and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was hospital mortality, with secondary outcomes of intensive care unit and hospital-free days. RESULTS: The study included 2,385 patients, of whom 14.9% had a plasma to RBC ratio of 1.0+, and 47.6% had a platelet to RBC ratio of 1.0+. Higher plasma to RBC and platelet to RBC ratios were observed for patients who underwent cardiac, transplant, and vascular surgery and in patients with greater derangements in hemostatic laboratory values. Ratios did not differ by patient age or severity of illness. Higher ratios were not associated with improved clinical outcomes. Mortality differed by platelet to RBC but not plasma to RBC ratio, with the highest mortality observed with a platelet to RBC ratio of 0.1-0.9 at 24 hours (odds ratio, 3.34 [1.62-6.88]) vs no platelets (P=.001). Higher plasma to RBC ratios were associated with decreased hospital-free days, although differences in clinical outcomes were not significant after exclusion of patients receiving only RBCs without component therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Transfusion ratios in surgical patients with critical intraoperative hemorrhage were largely related to surgical and hemostatic features rather than baseline patient characteristics. Higher ratios were not associated with improved outcomes.

Summary As COVID–19 disease escalates globally, optimising patient outcome during this catastrophic healthcare crisis is the number one priority. The principles of patient blood management are fundamental strategies to improve patient outcomes and should be given high priority in this crisis situation. The aim of this expert review is to provide clinicians and healthcare authorities with information regarding how to apply established principles of patient blood management during the COVID–19 pandemic. In particular, this review considers the impact of the COVID–19 pandemic on blood supply and specifies important aspects of donor management. We discuss how preventative and control measures implemented during the COVID–19 crisis could affect the prevalence of anaemia, and highlight issues regarding the diagnosis and treatment of anaemia in patients requiring elective or emergency surgery. In addition, we review aspects related to patient blood management of critically ill patients with known or suspected COVID–19, and discuss important alterations of the coagulation system in patients hospitalised due to COVID–19. Finally, we address special considerations pertaining to supply‐demand and cost‐benefit issues of patient blood management during the COVID–19 pandemic.

Purpose of review Red cell transfusions are commonly used in management of hemorrhage in trauma patients. The appropriate indications and criteria for transfusion are still debated. Here, we summarize the recent findings on the use of red cell transfusion in trauma setting. Recent findings Recent evidence continues to support the long-established link between allogeneic transfusion and worse clinical outcomes, reinstating the importance of more judicious use of allogeneic blood and careful consideration of benefits versus risks when making transfusion decisions. Studies support restrictive transfusion strategies (often based on hemoglobin thresholds of 7-8 g/dl) in most patient populations, although some argue more caution in specific populations (e.g. patients with traumatic brain injury) and more studies are needed to determine if these patients benefit from less restrictive transfusion strategies. It should be remembered that anemia remains an independent risk factor for worse outcomes and red cell transfusion does not constitute a lasting treatment. Anemia should be properly assessed and managed based on the cause and using hematinic medications as indicated. Summary Although the debate on hemoglobin thresholds for transfusion continues, clinicians should not overlook proper management of the underlying issue (anemia).

Background Early administration of the antifibrinolytic drug tranexamic acid reduces death from bleeding in trauma and postpartum haemorrhage. We examined how the effectiveness and safety of antifibrinolytic drugs varies by the baseline risk of death as a result of bleeding. Methods We performed an individual patient-level data meta-analysis of randomised trials including more than 1000 patients that assessed antifibrinolytics in acute severe bleeding. We identified trials performed between January 1, 1946 and July 5, 2018 (PROSPERO, number 42016052155). Results Two randomised trials were selected where 28 333 patients received tranexamic acid treatment within 3 h after the onset of acute bleeding. Baseline characteristics to estimate the risk of death as a result of bleeding were divided into four categories: Low (0–5%), intermediate (6–10%), high (11–20%), and very high (>20%). Most patients had a low baseline risk of death as a result of bleeding (23 008 [81%]). Deaths as a result of bleeding occurred in all baseline risk categories with 240 (1%), 202 (8%), 232 (14%), and 357 (30%) deaths in the low-, intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk categories, respectively. The effectiveness of tranexamic acid did not vary by baseline risk when given within 3 h after bleeding onset (P=0.51 for interaction term). There was no increased risk of vascular occlusive events with tranexamic acid and it did not vary by baseline risk categories (P=0.25). Conclusions Tranexamic acid appears to be safe and effective regardless of baseline risk of death. Because many deaths are in patients at low and intermediate risk, tranexamic acid use should not be restricted to the most severely injured or bleeding patients.

A case of a patient with severe factor XI (FXI) deficiency who presented for her seventh labor and delivery is presented. The nature of FXI deficiency, its prevalence, and issues related to genetic screening are discussed. Published literature on the topic is reviewed, including criteria that were developed to assess bleeding, laboratory tools used to estimate bleeding risk, and available treatments. Within the context of this challenging clinical dilemma, specific recommendations are provided for the antepartum, intrapartum, and postpartum stages of pregnancy. These include recommendations that take into account both FXI levels and history of any abnormal bleeding. While there are effective treatments available, it is important to consider that institutional multidisciplinary protocols are needed to manage this complex disorder. More work is needed to define the best management protocols.

Anemia is a common and often ignored condition in surgical patients. Anemia is usually multifactorial and iron deficiency and inflammation are commonly involved. An exacerbating factor in surgical patients is iatrogenic blood loss. Anemia has been repeatedly shown to be an independent predictor of worse outcomes. Patient blood management (PBM) provides a multimodality framework for prevention and management of anemia and related risk factors. The key strategies in PBM include support of hematopoiesis and improving hemoglobin level, optimizing coagulation and hemostasis, use of interdisciplinary blood conservation modalities, and patient-centered decision making throughout the course of care.

The publication of the Clinical Randomization of an Antifibrinolytic in Significant Hemorrhage-2 (CRASH-2) study and its intense dissemination prompted a renaissance for the use of the antifibrinolytic agent tranexamic acid (TXA) in acute trauma hemorrhage. Subsequent studies led to its widespread use as a therapeutic as well as prophylactic agent across different clinical scenarios involving bleeding, such as trauma, postpartum, and orthopedic surgery. However, results from the existing studies are confounded by methodological and statistical ambiguities and are open to varied interpretations. Substantial knowledge gaps remain on dosing, pharmacokinetics, mechanism of action, and clinical applications for TXA. The risk for potential thromboembolic complications with the use of TXA must be balanced against its clinical benefits. The present article aims to provide a critical reappraisal of TXA use over the last decade and a "thought exercise" in the potential downsides of TXA. A more selective and individualized use of TXA, guided by extended and functional coagulation assays, is advocated in the context of the evolving concept of precision medicine.

Over 7 years ago, the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation (ABIM) created the national Choosing Wisely campaign with the purpose of encouraging active dialogue between health care providers and patients, focusing on appropriateness, quality care, and resource management. This special communication from the Society for the Advancement of Blood Management (SABM) serves to highlight the society's recent participation in the Choosing Wisely campaign, encouraging sensible dialogue between clinicians and our patients with the intent to promote patient-centered, evidence-based care. The article addresses the rationale and supportive data for the 5 SABM Choosing Wisely recommendations.

Despite the exhaustive search for an acceptable substitute to erythrocyte transfusion, neither chemical-based products such as perfluorocarbons nor hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers have succeeded in providing a reasonable alternative to allogeneic blood transfusion. However, there remain scenarios in which blood transfusion is not an option, due to patient's religious beliefs, inability to find adequately cross-matched erythrocytes, or in remote locations. In these situations, artificial oxygen carriers may provide a mortality benefit for patients with severe, life-threatening anemia. This article provides an up-to-date review of the history and development, clinical trials, new technology, and current standing of artificial oxygen carriers as an alternative to transfusion when blood is not an option.

A massive transfusion protocol is increasingly used in trauma patients. However, the ideal ratio of plasma to other factors has been the subject of significant debate.1–5 The current published data and clinical practice are based primarily on retrospective database analyses. The Pragmatic Randomized

The measurement of hemoglobin concentration in the blood (Hb) plays a central role in the detection, evaluation, and management of chronic and acute anemia. The gold standard for laboratory determination of Hb is hemoglobin cyanide (HiCN).1 HiCN testing is not routinely used in hospitals due to its complexity, so cyanide-free central laboratory hematology analyzers (e.g., Coulter, Sysmex) have become the clinical standard.2 It is tempting to assume that satellite CO-Oximeters (e.g., ABL, Radiometer, Denmark; Nova, Nova Biomedical, Waltham, MA) used for arterial blood gas measurement in the operating room or critical care unit are interchangeable with hematology analyzers, but in fact they are not. Pulse CO-Oximetry is the multiwavelength technology contained in the first devices to have received Food and Drug Administration 510(k) clearance for the continuous, noninvasive monitoring of total hemoglobin (SpHb; Masimo, Irvine, CA). Generally speaking, SpHb monitoring is not yet as accurate as laboratory hemoglobin (lab-Hb), and it is therefore not intended today as a replacement for lab-Hb. The focus should instead be on the value-added benefits of supplementing intermittent, delayed lab-Hb values with continuous, real-time visibility of whether Hb is stable, increasing, or decreasing. The purpose of this article is to provide a perspective on the appropriate role and evaluation of SpHb and the value-added benefits of continuous Hb monitoring. We offer an alternative viewpoint to balance the 3 separate but similar opinions published earlier in Anesthesia & Analgesia by Drs. Rice, Gravenstein, and Morey.3–5 These authors propose “what is required of a noninvasive hemoglobin monitor and whether the conventional statistics adequately answer our questions about clinical accuracy.” In doing so, Rice et al. concluded that the accuracy of SpHb monitoring “is not good enough to make the (a) transfusion decision.” In the present article, clinical advisors to Masimo Corporation respond to these evaluations with a measured perspective on the value-added clinical decision process that this technology will bring to patient management and safety. It is also time to review and reassess the fundamental assumptions regarding lab-Hb and its use in making clinical decisions. Given that it is noninvasive and its ability to provide continuous, real-time data that can be correlated at bedside with events happening to the patient, SpHb monitoring offers a new paradigm and opens up new possibilities for improved patient care.

Despite numerous guidelines on the management of anaemia in surgical patients, there is no pragmatic guidance for the diagnosis and management of anaemia and iron deficiency in the postoperative period. A number of experienced researchers and clinicians took part in a two-day expert workshop and developed the following consensus statement. After presentation of our own research data and local policies and procedures, appropriate relevant literature was reviewed and discussed. We developed a series of best-practice and evidence-based statements to advise on patient care with respect to anaemia and iron deficiency in the postoperative period. These statements include: a diagnostic approach to iron deficiency and anaemia in surgical patients; identification of patients appropriate for treatment; and advice on practical management and follow-up that is easy to implement. Available data allow the fulfilment of the requirements of Pillar 1 of Patient Blood Management. We urge national and international research funding bodies to take note of these recommendations, particularly in terms of funding large-scale prospective, randomised clinical trials that can most effectively address the important clinical questions and this clearly unmet medical need.

In major surgery, the implementation of multidisciplinary, multimodal and individualized strategies, collectively termed Patient Blood Management, aims to identify modifiable risks and optimise patients' own physiology with the ultimate goal of improving outcomes. Among the various strategies utilized in Patient Blood Management, timely detection and management of preoperative anaemia is most important, as it is in itself a risk factor for worse clinical outcome, but also one of the strongest predisposing factors for perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion, which in turn increases postoperative morbidity, mortality and costs. However, preoperative anaemia is still frequently ignored, with indiscriminate allogeneic blood transfusion used as a ‘quick fix'. Consistent with reported evidence from other medical specialties, this imprudent practice continues to be endorsed by non-evidence based misconceptions, which constitute serious barriers for a wider implementation of preoperative haemoglobin optimisation. We have reviewed a number of these misconceptions, which we unanimously consider should be promptly abandoned by health care providers and replaced by evidence-based strategies such as detection, diagnosis and proper treatment of preoperative anaemia. We believe that this approach to preoperative anaemia management may be a viable, cost-effective strategy that is beneficial both for patients, with improved clinical outcomes, and for health systems, with more efficient use of finite health care resources.

Purpose of review Anaemia is a global health problem with particularly high prevalence in the perioperative setting and it can significantly affect the patient outcomes. This review addresses new findings on the significance of anaemia and patient blood management (PBM) strategies to prevent and manage anaemia. Recent findings Studies support the independent deleterious effects of anaemia on mortality, morbidity and quality of life as well as its role as a risk factor for transfusion. Although improved understanding of iron regulators such as hepcidin is expected to revolutionize the field, simple algorithms are useful tools for more effective management of anaemia relying on currently available therapies (such as intravenous iron and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents). Other PBM strategies such as optimization of haemostasis and avoidance of blood loss are effective in preventing anaemia or its exacerbation and improving the outcomes of patients. In addition, more attention should be given to hospital-acquired anaemia (HAA) and its avoidable causes, such as unnecessary diagnostic phlebotomies. Summary Despite the high prevalence of anaemia and the significant toll it takes on patients, simple and effective strategies are available to detect, diagnose and treat it.

BACKGROUND: Blood transfusion is used to treat acute anemia with the goal of increasing blood oxygen-carrying capacity as determined by hematocrit (Hct) and oxygen delivery (DO2). However, increasing Hct also increases blood viscosity, which may thus lower DO2 if the arterial circulation is a rigid hydraulic system as the resistance to blood flow will increase. The net effect of transfusion on DO2 in this system can be analyzed by using the relationship between Hct and systemic blood viscosity of circulating blood at the posttransfusion Hct to calculate DO2 and comparing this value with pretransfusion DO2. We hypothesized that increasing Hct would increase DO2 and tested our hypothesis by mathematically modeling DO2 in the circulation. METHODS: Calculations were made assuming a normal cardiac output (5 L/min) with degrees of anemia ranging from 5% to 80% Hct deficit. We analyzed the effects of transfusing 0.5 or more units of 300 cc of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) at an Hct of 65% and calculated microcirculatory DO2 after accounting for increased blood viscosity and assuming no change in blood pressure. Our model accounts for O2 diffusion out of the circulation before blood arriving to the nutritional circulation and for changes in blood flow velocity. The immediate posttransfusion DO2 was also compared with DO2 after the transient increase in volume due to transfusion has subsided. RESULTS: Blood transfusion of up to 3 units of PRBCs increased DO2 when Hct (or hemoglobin) was 60% lower than normal, but did not increase DO2 when administered before this threshold. CONCLUSIONS: After accounting for the effect of increasing blood viscosity on blood flow owing to increasing Hct, we found in a mathematical simulation of DO2 that transfusion of up to 3 units of PRBCs does not increase DO2, unless anemia is the result of an Hct deficit greater than 60%. Observations that transfusions occasionally result in clinical improvement suggest that other mechanisms possibly related to increased blood viscosity may compensate for the absence of increase in DO2.

Despite current recommendations on the management of pre-operative anaemia, there is no pragmatic guidance for the diagnosis and management of anaemia and iron deficiency in surgical patients. A number of experienced researchers and clinicians took part in an expert workshop and developed the following consensus statement. After presentation of our own research data and local policies and procedures, appropriate relevant literature was reviewed and discussed. We developed a series of best-practice and evidence-based statements to advise on patient care with respect to anaemia and iron deficiency in the peri-operative period. These statements include: a diagnostic approach for anaemia and iron deficiency in surgical patients; identification of patients appropriate for treatment; and advice on practical management and follow-up. We urge anaesthetists and peri-operative physicians to embrace these recommendations, and hospital administrators to enable implementation of these concepts by allocating adequate resources.

In times of escalating health-care cost, it is of great importance to carefully assess the cost-effectiveness and appropriateness of the most resource-consuming health interventions. A long-standing and common clinical practice that has been underestimated in cost and overestimated in effectiveness is the transfusion of allogeneic blood products. Studies show that this intervention comes with largely underestimated service cost and unacceptably high utilisation variability for matched patients, thus adding billions of unnecessary dollars to the health-care expenditure each year. Moreover, a large and increasing body of literature points to a dose-dependent increase of morbidity and mortality and adverse long-term outcomes associated with transfusion whereas published evidence for benefit is extremely limited. This means that transfusion may be a generator for increased hospital stay and possible re-admissions, resulting in additional billions in unnecessary expenditure for the health system. In contrast to this, there are evidence-based and cost-effective treatment options available to pre-empt and reduce allogeneic transfusions. The patient-specific rather than a product-centred application of these multiple modalities is termed patient blood management (PBM). From a health-economic perspective, the expeditious implementation of PBM programmes is clearly indicated. Both patients and payers could benefit from this concept that has recently been endorsed through the World Health Assembly resolution WHA63.12.

Patient blood management(1,2) incorporates patient-centered, evidence-based medical and surgical approaches to improve patient outcomes by relying on the patient's own (autologous) blood rather than allogeneic blood. Particular attention is paid to preemptive measures such as anemia management. The emphasis on the approaches being "patient-centered" is to distinguish them from previous approaches in transfusion medicine, which have been "product-centered" and focused on blood risks, costs, and inventory concerns rather than on patient outcomes. Patient blood management(3) structures its goals by avoiding blood transfusion(4) with effective use of alternatives to allogeneic blood transfusion.(5) These alternatives include autologous blood procurement, preoperative autologous blood donation, acute normovolemic hemodilution, and intra/postoperative red blood cell (RBC) salvage and reinfusion. Reviewed here are the available pharmacologic tools for anemia and blood management: erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), iron therapy, hemostatic agents, and potentially, artificial oxygen carriers.

In developed countries, rates of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) requiring transfusion have been increasing. As a result, anesthesiologists are being increasingly called upon to assist with the management of patients with severe PPH. First responders, including anesthesiologists, may adopt Patient Blood Management (PBM) recommendations of national societies or other agencies. However, it is unclear whether national and international obstetric societies' PPH guidelines account for contemporary PBM practices. We performed a qualitative review of PBM recommendations published by the following national obstetric societies and international groups: the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, United Kingdom; The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada; an interdisciplinary group of experts from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland, an international multidisciplinary consensus group, and the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians. We also reviewed a PPH bundle, published by The National Partnership for Maternal Safety. On the basis of our review, we identified important differences in national and international societies' recommendations for transfusion and PBM. In the light of PBM advances in the nonobstetric setting, obstetric societies should determine the applicability of these recommendations in the obstetric setting. Partnerships among medical, obstetric, and anesthetic societies may also help standardize transfusion and PBM guidelines in obstetrics.

Anemia remains a global health issue. This review addresses the recent findings on anemia in surgical patients and its significance in perioperative setting.The prevalence of anemia in surgical populations is high, ranging from one-third of population to nearly 100%. Anemia is an independent, modifiable risk factor for a growing list of unfavorable events, complications and diminished functional outcomes (lasting for months following discharge), as well as a major predisposing factor for allogeneic blood transfusions. Therefore, timely screening and diagnosis of anemia prior to elective surgeries is of great importance. Nonetheless, studies suggest that many opportunities to properly manage anemia in perioperative setting are lost. Patient blood management provides a framework of evidence-based strategies to effectively reduce the risk of occurrence of anemia and treat it with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes. Studies on the clinical impact of patient blood management strategies are emerging.Active screening for anemia and proper management of it in perioperative setting is essential. Several strategies to prevent anemia - including elimination of unnecessary diagnostic blood draws - are effective and reasonable approaches.

Conditions leading to iron overload range from rare hereditary disorders to more common medical conditions associated with chronic blood transfusions. Iron overload has deleterious effects on various vital organs (eg, liver, heart, and endocrine glands). Serum ferritin (in conjunction with transferrin saturation) is the most widely used test to evaluate iron burden and to screen for iron overload. The management plan should be adjusted to account for iron overload and potential consequences of liver, heart, and other organ involvement.

To describe the recent developments in the strategies to reduce allogeneic blood transfusions with emphasis on the impact on clinical outcomes.Concerns over the safety, efficacy, and supply of allogeneic blood continue to necessitate its judicious use as the standard of care. Patient blood management is emerging as a multidisciplinary, multimodality strategy to address anemia and decrease bleeding with the goal of reduced transfusions and improved patient outcomes. Common risk factors for transfusion include anemia, blood loss, and inappropriate transfusion decisions. Several approaches are available to mitigate these. Recent data continue to support the effectiveness of various hematinics, hemostatic agents and devices, as well as intermittent discontinuation of anticoagulant therapy. Use of autotransfusion techniques, particularly cell salvage, is the other strategy with accumulating data supporting its safety and efficacy. Finally, implementation of evidence-based transfusion guidelines will help to target allogeneic blood to those patients who are likely to benefit from it and thus reduce or eliminate unnecessary exposure to blood.Patient blood management is the timely use of safe and effective medical and surgical techniques designed to prevent anemia and decrease bleeding in an effort to improve patient outcome.

Anemia is an common condition in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, and it is often present in one quarter to half of patients at admission. Several studies have indicated that anemia is a major risk factor for worse outcomes, including increased risk of mortality and major morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Anemia is a leading reason for use of allogeneic blood transfusions. Harmful effects of anemia are often attributed to the reduced oxygen carrying capacity of blood, reduced viscosity and the resulting impaired rheologic characteristics of blood, underlying comorbidities, and the side effects of treatments given for anemia, namely, allogeneic blood transfusions. Patients undergoing cardiac surgery may be at increased risk of anemia given the often-existing cardiac comorbidities and the negative impacts of cardiopulmonary bypass. However, whether less restrictive transfusion practices are justified in patients undergoing cardiac surgery is still a matter of debate. The prevalence of anemia often increases during hospital stay, and it can persist for a long time beyond hospital discharge. Given the associated risks and available management strategies, clinicians should remain vigilant to detect and treat anemia throughout the course of care for patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

In consenting Jehovah's Witness patients and others for whom blood is contraindicated or not available, hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier (HBOC)-201 may enable survival in acutely anemic patients while underlying conditions are treated.Survival factors were identified in a multicenter, unblinded series of severely anemic "compassionate use" patients receiving available standard treatment plus consultant-supported HBOC-201 administration by novice users. Predictors of outcome were sought and compared between survivors and nonsurvivors. A compound variable, hemoglobin-duration deficit product was used to describe the interactive clinical effects of severity and duration of anemia. Mortality,correlations between patient characteristics, and survival to hospital discharge were determined from patient records.Fifty-four patients (median age 50 years) with life-threatening anemia (median hemoglobin concentration at time of request = 4 g/dL) received 60 to 300 g HBOC-201.Twenty-three patients (41.8%) were discharged. Intraoperative blood loss (45%), malignancy(18%), and acute hemolysis (13%) were the prevailing reasons for anemia. Time from onset of anemia (or = 8 g/dL) to HBOC-201 infusion was shorter for survivors than nonsurvivors (3.2 vs 4.4 days, P = 0.027). Mean hemoglobin levels before HBOC-201 infusion in survivors and nonsurvivors were 4.5 and 3.8 g/dL, respectively (P = 0.120). No serious adverse event was attributed to HBOC-201. The hemoglobin-duration deficit product separated survivors from nonsurvivors. Cancer and renal disease were associated with nonsurvival.Earlier, compared with later, administration by inexperienced users of HBOC-201 to patients with anemia was associated with improved chances of survival of acutely bleeding and hemolyzing patients. Survival was more likely if the duration and magnitude of low hemoglobin was minimized before treatment with HBOC-201.

A multidisciplinary panel consisting of experts chosen by the 2 chairs of the group representing experts in anesthesiology, blood banking, hematology, critical care medicine, and various surgical disciplines (trauma, cardiac, pediatric, neurologic, obstetrics, and vascular) convened in January 2008 to discuss hemostasis and management of the bleeding patient across different clinical settings, with a focus on perioperative considerations. Although there are many ways to define hemostasis, one clinical definition would be control of bleeding without the occurrence of pathologic thrombotic events (i.e., when balance among procoagulant, anticoagulant, fibrinolytic, and antifibrinolytic activities is achieved). There are common hemostatic challenges that include lack of scientific evidence and standardized guidelines for the use of therapeutic drugs, need for reliable and rapid laboratory tools for measuring hemostasis, and individual variability. Clinically meaningful and accurate real-time laboratory data reflecting a patient's hemostatic status are needed to guide treatment decisions. Current available routine laboratory tests of hemostasis (e.g., platelet count, prothrombin time/international normalized ratio, and activated partial thromboplastin time) do not reflect the complexity of in vivo hemostasis and can mislead the clinician. Although point-of-care coagulation monitoring tests including measures of thromboelastography/elastometry provide insight into overall hemostatic status, they are time-consuming to perform, complex to interpret, and require trained personnel. There is a particular need to develop laboratory tests that can measure the effects of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents for individual patients, predict bleeding complications, and guide therapy when and if treatment with blood products or pharmacologic drugs is required. Formation of an organization comprised of specialists who treat bleeding patients will foster multidisciplinary collaborations and promote discussions of the current state of hemostasis treatment and future priorities for hemostasis research. Controlled trials with clinically meaningful end points and suitable study populations, as well as observational studies, investigator-initiated studies, and large registry and database studies are essential to answer questions in hemostasis. Because of the complexities of maintaining hemostatic balance, advances in hemostasis research and continuing communication across specialties are required to improve patient care and outcomes.