Literature DB >> 29239963

In Vitro Evaluation of a Novel Image Processing Device to Estimate Surgical Blood Loss in Suction Canisters.

Gerhardt Konig1, Jonathan H Waters2,3, Eric Hsieh4, Bridget Philip5, Vicki Ting6, Gaurav Abbi7, Mazyar Javidroozi8, Griffeth W Tully4, Gregg Adams9.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinicians are tasked with monitoring surgical blood loss. Unfortunately, there is no reliable method available to assure an accurate result. Most blood lost during surgery ends up on surgical sponges and within suction canisters. A novel Food and Drug Administration-cleared device (Triton system; Gauss Surgical, Inc, Los Altos, CA) to measure the amount of blood present on sponges using computer image analysis has been previously described. This study reports on performance of a complementary Food and Drug Administration-cleared device (Triton Canister System; Gauss Surgical, Inc, Los Altos, CA) that uses similar image analysis to measure the amount of blood in suction canisters.
METHODS: Known quantities of expired donated whole blood, packed red blood cells, and plasma, in conjunction with various amounts of normal saline, were used to create 207 samples representing a wide range of blood dilutions commonly seen in suction canisters. Each sample was measured by the Triton device under 3 operating room lighting conditions (bright, medium, and dark) meant to represent a reasonable range, resulting in a total of 621 measurements. Using the Bland-Altman method, the measured hemoglobin (Hb) mass in each sample was compared to the results obtained using a standard laboratory assay as a reference value. The analysis was performed separately for samples measured under each lighting condition. It was expected that under each separate lighting condition, the device would measure the various samples within a prespecified clinically significant Hb mass range (±30 g per canister).
RESULTS: The limits of agreement (LOA) between the device and the reference method for dark (bias: 4.7 g [95% confidence interval {CI}, 3.8-5.6 g]; LOA: -8.1 g [95% CI, -9.7 to -6.6 g] to 17.6 g [95% CI, 16.0-19.1 g]), medium (bias: 3.4 g [95% CI, 2.6-4.1 g]; LOA: -7.4 g [95% CI, -8.7 to -6.1 g] to 14.2 g [95% CI, 12.9-15.5 g]), and bright lighting conditions (bias: 4.1 g [95% CI, 3.2-4.9 g]; LOA: -7.6 g [95% CI, -9.0 to -6.2 g] to 15.7 g [95% CI, 14.3-17.1 g]) fell well within the predetermined clinically significant limits of ±30 g. Repeated measurements of the samples under the various lighting conditions were highly correlated with intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.995 (95% CI, 0.993-0.996; P < .001), showing that lighting conditions did not have a significant impact on measurements. Hb mass bias was significantly associated with hemolysis level (Spearman ρ correlation coefficient, -0.137; P = .001) and total canister volume (Spearman ρ correlation coefficient, 0.135; P = .001), but not ambient illuminance.
CONCLUSIONS: The Triton Canister System was able to measure the Hb mass reliably with clinically acceptable accuracy in reconstituted blood samples representing a wide range of Hb concentrations, dilutions, hemolysis, and ambient lighting settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29239963      PMCID: PMC5884116          DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002692

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  20 in total

1.  Decay in blood loss estimation skills after web-based didactic training.

Authors:  Paloma Toledo; Stanley T Eosakul; Kristopher Goetz; Cynthia A Wong; William A Grobman
Journal:  Simul Healthc       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.929

2.  Recommendations for the transfusion management of patients in the peri-operative period. II. The intra-operative period.

Authors:  Giancarlo Maria Liumbruno; Francesco Bennardello; Angela Lattanzio; Pierluigi Piccoli; Gina Rossetti
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.443

Review 3.  Measurement of blood loss: review of the literature.

Authors:  Mavis N Schorn
Journal:  J Midwifery Womens Health       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.388

4.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 5.  Strategies to reduce the use of blood products: a US perspective.

Authors:  Aryeh Shander; Mazyar Javidroozi
Journal:  Curr Opin Anaesthesiol       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.706

6.  Use of a novel visual aid to improve estimation of obstetric blood loss.

Authors:  Lisa C Zuckerwise; Christian M Pettker; Jessica Illuzzi; Cheryl R Raab; Heather S Lipkind
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Unreliability of intraoperative estimated blood loss in extended sagittal synostectomies.

Authors:  Mitchel Seruya; Albert K Oh; Michael J Boyajian; John S Myseros; Amanda L Yaun; Robert F Keating
Journal:  J Neurosurg Pediatr       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.375

8.  Clinical evaluation of a novel system for monitoring surgical hemoglobin loss.

Authors:  Allen A Holmes; Gerhardt Konig; Vicki Ting; Bridget Philip; Thomas Puzio; Siddarth Satish; Jonathan H Waters
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 5.108

9.  Practice parameter for the use of red blood cell transfusions: developed by the Red Blood Cell Administration Practice Guideline Development Task Force of the College of American Pathologists.

Authors:  T L Simon; D C Alverson; J AuBuchon; E S Cooper; P J DeChristopher; G C Glenn; S A Gould; C R Harrison; J D Milam; K J Moise; F R Rodwig; L A Sherman; I A Shulman; L Stehling
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 5.534

10.  Hemoglobin estimation by the HemoCue® portable hemoglobin photometer in a resource poor setting.

Authors:  Bernard Nkrumah; Samuel Blay Nguah; Nimako Sarpong; Denise Dekker; Ali Idriss; Juergen May; Yaw Adu-Sarkodie
Journal:  BMC Clin Pathol       Date:  2011-04-21
View more
  6 in total

1.  Perioperative blood loss: estimation of blood volume loss or haemoglobin mass loss?

Authors:  Sebastian Jaramillo; Mar Montane-Muntane; Pedro L Gambus; David Capitan; Ricard Navarro-Ripoll; Annabel Blasi
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 3.443

2.  Triton sponge and canister app for estimating surgical blood loss.

Authors:  Abhijit S Nair; Vibhavari Naik; Narahari Busa; Basanth K Rayani
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2019 Oct-Dec

3.  The visually estimated blood volume in scaled canisters based on a simulation study.

Authors:  Lara Gerdessen; Vanessa Neef; Florian J Raimann; Kai Zacharowski; Florian Piekarski
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 2.217

4.  A better method for the dynamic, precise estimating of blood/haemoglobin loss based on deep learning of artificial intelligence.

Authors:  Yu-Jie Li; Li-Ge Zhang; Hong-Yu Zhi; Kun-Hua Zhong; Wen-Quan He; Yang Chen; Zhi-Yong Yang; Lin Chen; Xue-Hong Bai; Xiao-Lin Qin; Dan-Feng Li; Dan-Dan Wang; Jian-Teng Gu; Jiao-Lin Ning; Kai-Zhi Lu; Ju Zhang; Zheng-Yuan Xia; Yu-Wen Chen; Bin Yi
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-10

5.  Do we visually estimate intra-operative blood loss better with white or green sponges and is the deviation from the real blood loss clinically acceptable? Results from a simulated scenario study.

Authors:  Florian Piekarski; Lara Gerdessen; Elke Schmitt; Linda Tanner; Florian Wunderer; Vanessa Neef; Patrick Meybohm; Kai Zacharowski; Florian Jürgen Raimann
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Comparison of common perioperative blood loss estimation techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lara Gerdessen; Patrick Meybohm; Suma Choorapoikayil; Eva Herrmann; Isabel Taeuber; Vanessa Neef; Florian J Raimann; Kai Zacharowski; Florian Piekarski
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2020-08-19       Impact factor: 2.502

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.