Lars Stangenberg1, Thomas Curran2, Fahad Shuja2, Robert Rosenberg3, Feroze Mahmood4, Marc L Schermerhorn5. 1. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass; Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral-, Gefäss- und Thoraxchirurgie, Kantonsspital Baselland, Liestal, Switzerland. 2. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. 3. Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral-, Gefäss- und Thoraxchirurgie, Kantonsspital Baselland, Liestal, Switzerland. 4. Division of Vascular Anesthesia and Perioperative Echocardiography, Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. 5. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. Electronic address: mscherme@bidmc.harvard.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Preoperative testing for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) often includes blood typing and antibody screen (T&S). In our institutional experience, however, transfusion for CEA is rare. We assessed transfusion rate and risk factors in a national clinical database to identify a cohort of patients in whom T&S can safely be avoided with the potential for substantial cost savings. METHODS: With use of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, transfusion events and timing were established for all elective CEAs in 2012-2013. Comorbidities and other characteristics were compared for patients receiving intraoperative or postoperative transfusion and those who did not. After random assignment of the total data to either a training or validation set, a prediction model for transfusion risk was created and subsequently validated. RESULTS: Of 16,043 patients undergoing CEA in 2012-2013, 276 received at least one transfusion before discharge (1.7%); 42% of transfusions occurred on the day of surgery. Preoperative hematocrit <30% (odds ratio [OR], 57.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 29.6-111.1), history of congestive heart failure (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.1), dependent functional status (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5-5.1), coagulopathy (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.7-3.6), creatinine concentration ≥1.2 mg/dL (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.6-3.3), preoperative dyspnea (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-3.1), and female gender (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3) predicted transfusion. A risk prediction model based on these data produced a C statistic of 0.85; application of this model to the validation set demonstrated a C statistic of 0.81. In the validation set, 93% of patients received a score of 6 or less, corresponding to an individual predicted transfusion risk of 5% or less. Omitting a T&S in these patients would generate a substantial annual cost saving for National Surgical Quality Improvement Program hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas T&S are commonly performed for patients undergoing CEA, transfusion after CEA is rare and well predicted by a transfusion risk score. Avoidance of T&S in this low-risk population provides a substantial cost-saving opportunity without compromise of patient care.
OBJECTIVE: Preoperative testing for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) often includes blood typing and antibody screen (T&S). In our institutional experience, however, transfusion for CEA is rare. We assessed transfusion rate and risk factors in a national clinical database to identify a cohort of patients in whom T&S can safely be avoided with the potential for substantial cost savings. METHODS: With use of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, transfusion events and timing were established for all elective CEAs in 2012-2013. Comorbidities and other characteristics were compared for patients receiving intraoperative or postoperative transfusion and those who did not. After random assignment of the total data to either a training or validation set, a prediction model for transfusion risk was created and subsequently validated. RESULTS: Of 16,043 patients undergoing CEA in 2012-2013, 276 received at least one transfusion before discharge (1.7%); 42% of transfusions occurred on the day of surgery. Preoperative hematocrit <30% (odds ratio [OR], 57.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 29.6-111.1), history of congestive heart failure (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.1), dependent functional status (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5-5.1), coagulopathy (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.7-3.6), creatinine concentration ≥1.2 mg/dL (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.6-3.3), preoperative dyspnea (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-3.1), and female gender (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3) predicted transfusion. A risk prediction model based on these data produced a C statistic of 0.85; application of this model to the validation set demonstrated a C statistic of 0.81. In the validation set, 93% of patients received a score of 6 or less, corresponding to an individual predicted transfusion risk of 5% or less. Omitting a T&S in these patients would generate a substantial annual cost saving for National Surgical Quality Improvement Program hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas T&S are commonly performed for patients undergoing CEA, transfusion after CEA is rare and well predicted by a transfusion risk score. Avoidance of T&S in this low-risk population provides a substantial cost-saving opportunity without compromise of patient care.
Authors: Jeffrey L Carson; Michael L Terrin; Helaine Noveck; David W Sanders; Bernard R Chaitman; George G Rhoads; George Nemo; Karen Dragert; Lauren Beaupre; Kevin Hildebrand; William Macaulay; Courtland Lewis; Donald Richard Cook; Gwendolyn Dobbin; Khwaja J Zakriya; Fred S Apple; Rebecca A Horney; Jay Magaziner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James C Iannuzzi; Ankur Chandra; Kristin N Kelly; Aaron S Rickles; John R T Monson; Fergal J Fleming Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2014-01-18 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Càndid Villanueva; Alan Colomo; Alba Bosch; Mar Concepción; Virginia Hernandez-Gea; Carles Aracil; Isabel Graupera; María Poca; Cristina Alvarez-Urturi; Jordi Gordillo; Carlos Guarner-Argente; Miquel Santaló; Eduardo Muñiz; Carlos Guarner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-01-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James C Iannuzzi; Kate C Young; Michael J Kim; David L Gillespie; John R T Monson; Fergal J Fleming Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2013-05-14 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: H J M Barnett; D W Taylor; R B Haynes; D L Sackett; S J Peerless; G G Ferguson; A J Fox; R N Rankin; V C Hachinski; D O Wiebers; M Eliasziw Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-08-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas F X O'Donnell; Katie E Shean; Sarah E Deery; Thomas C F Bodewes; Mark C Wyers; Kerry L O'Brien; Robina Matyal; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2017-07-26 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Alexander B Pothof; Thomas C F Bodewes; Thomas F X O'Donnell; Sarah E Deery; Katie Shean; Peter A Soden; Gert J de Borst; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2017-08-16 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Lisa Eisler; Stanford Chihuri; Lawrence G Lenke; Lena S Sun; David Faraoni; Guohua Li Journal: Transfusion Date: 2021-11-10 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Michiel H F Poorthuis; Reinier A R Herings; Kirsten Dansey; Johanna A A Damen; Jacoba P Greving; Marc L Schermerhorn; Gert J de Borst Journal: Stroke Date: 2021-10-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Aviv Spillinger; Meredith Allen; Patrick Karabon; Houmehr Hojjat; Kerolos Shenouda; Inaya Hajj Hussein; Jeffrey T Jacob; Peter F Svider; Adam J Folbe Journal: J Neurol Surg B Skull Base Date: 2021-05-31