J B Gilbert1, S B Malkowicz, A J Wein. 1. Department of Surgery (Urology), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of using cell saver suction during radical prostatectomy to decrease the risk of random donor transfusions in patients predonating blood, as well as to compare costs. METHODS: From March 1992 to October 1993, two consecutive groups of 86 patients underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy. The first group utilized predonated blood alone, and the second group utilized cell saver suction and predonated blood. The two groups were compared with respect to their transfusion records, preoperative and discharge hemoglobins, and estimated blood losses to determine the usefulness of cell saver suction during radical retropubic prostatectomy. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference in the rate of random donor blood transfusions between these two evenly matched groups of patients. The risk of receiving random donor transfusions was decreased to 5% by having 4 U of blood predonated by or for the patient prior to radical prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: For patients who are able to predonate blood, cell saver suction is neither cost-effective nor useful in decreasing the risk of receiving random donor blood transfusions.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of using cell saver suction during radical prostatectomy to decrease the risk of random donor transfusions in patients predonating blood, as well as to compare costs. METHODS: From March 1992 to October 1993, two consecutive groups of 86 patients underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy. The first group utilized predonated blood alone, and the second group utilized cell saver suction and predonated blood. The two groups were compared with respect to their transfusion records, preoperative and discharge hemoglobins, and estimated blood losses to determine the usefulness of cell saver suction during radical retropubic prostatectomy. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference in the rate of random donor blood transfusions between these two evenly matched groups of patients. The risk of receiving random donor transfusions was decreased to 5% by having 4 U of blood predonated by or for the patient prior to radical prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: For patients who are able to predonate blood, cell saver suction is neither cost-effective nor useful in decreasing the risk of receiving random donor blood transfusions.
Authors: Thomas Frietsch; Andrea U Steinbicker; Audrey Horn; Matthes Metz; Gerald Dietrich; Markus A Weigand; Jonathan H Waters; Dania Fischer Journal: Transfus Med Hemother Date: 2022-05-11 Impact factor: 4.040