Volume 8 Supplement 2

Anemia in Critical Care: Etiology, Treatment and Prevention

Open Access

Autologous blood donation

Critical Care20048(Suppl 2):S49

https://doi.org/10.1186/cc2408

Published: 14 June 2004

Abstract

Although preoperative autologous blood donation is employed in elective surgery, this is declining because of the increasingly safe allogeneic blood supply. However, it continues to be used because of the public's perception of allogeneic blood risks and increasing blood shortages. Patients may donate a unit of blood (450 ± 45 ml) as often as twice weekly, up to 72 hours before surgery. Preoperative autologous blood is most beneficial in procedures that cause significant blood loss. It has been determined that preoperative autologous blood donation is poorly cost-effective; the use of this procedure must be based on evidence that it is safe and of value for the patient.

Keywords

autologous blood donationblood transfusionelective surgery

Introduction

Preoperative autologous blood donation (PAD) was developed and promoted [1] in the surgical arena in response to medical and legal pressures to minimize exposure to allogeneic blood. The role of PAD in surgery continues to evolve, based on improved blood safety, increased blood costs, and emerging pharmacologic alternatives to blood transfusion [2]. PAD became accepted as a standard practice in certain elective surgical settings, such as total joint replacement surgery, so that by 1992 more than 6% of the blood transfused in the USA was autologous [3]. Subsequently, improvements in blood safety have led to a decline not only in the use of PAD (Table 1) but also in interest in exploring other autologous blood procurement strategies. Nevertheless, public perception of blood safety and the reluctance to accept allogeneic blood transfusion in the elective transfusion setting [4], along with emerging blood inventory shortages, render the application of autologous blood procurement strategies a subject of ongoing debate.
Table 1

Collection and transfusion of autologous blood in the USA

 

Year

Source

1980

1986

1989

1992

1994

1997

1999

2001

Collected

        

   Autologous

28

206

655

1117

1013

611

651

619

   Percentage of total

0.25%

1.5%

4.8%

8.5%

7.8%

4.9%

4.7%

4.0%

   Total

11,174

13,807

13,554

13,169

12,908

12,550

13,649

14,259

Transfused

        

   Autologous

N/A

N/A

369

566

482

421

367

359

   Percentage of total

  

3.1%

5.0%

4.3%

3.7%

3.0%

2.6%

   Total

9934

12,159

12,059

11,307

11,107

11,476

12,389

13,361

Values are expressed as thousands of units, unless otherwise stated. N/A, Not available. Adapted with permission from [3].

Efficacy

Patients undergoing PAD may donate a unit (450 ± 45 ml, or up to 10.5 ml/kg body weight) of blood as often as twice weekly, until 72 hours before surgery. Under routine conditions, patients usually donate once weekly. Oral iron supplements are routinely prescribed. This iatrogenic blood loss is accompanied by a response in endogenous erythropoietin (EPO) levels that, although increased significantly over basal levels, remain within the normal range. The erythropoietic response that occurs under these conditions is therefore modest [5]. A summary of prospective, controlled trials of patients undergoing such blood loss via autologous phlebotomy is presented in Table 2[611], along with calculated estimates of red blood cell (RBC) volume expansion (erythropoiesis in excess of basal rates). With routine PAD, erythropoiesis of 220–351 ml (11–19% RBC expansion) [6, 7], or the equivalent of 1–1.75 blood units, occurs in excess of basal erythropoiesis, which indicates the efficacy of this blood conservation practice.
Table 2

Erythropoiesis during autologous blood donation

 

Blood removed (donated)

Blood produced

 

Patients (n)

Baseline RBCs (ml)

Requested/donated units

RBCs (ml)

RBCs (ml)

Expansion (%)

Iron therapy

Reference

'Standard phlebotomy'

       

   108

1884

3/2.7

522

351

19%

po

[6]

   22

1936

3/2.8

590

220

11%

None

[7]

   45

1991

3/2.9

621

331

17%

po

[7]

   41

1918

3/2.9

603

315

16%

po + iv

[7]

'Aggressive phlebotomy'

       

   30

2075

≥ 3/3.0

540

397

19%

None

[8]

   30

2024

≥ 3/3.1

558

473

23%

po

[8]

   30

2057

≥ 3/2.9

522

436

21%

iv

[8]

   24

2157

6/4.1

683

568

26%

po

[9,10]

   23

2257

6/4.6

757

440

19%

po

[11]

Values are expressed as means. iv, intravenous; po, oral; RBC, red blood cell. Data from Goodnough and coworkers [5].

For patients subjected to more aggressive phlebotomy (up to 2 units weekly), the endogenous EPO response is more substantial [811]. In one clinical trial [9], a linear-logarithmic relationship was demonstrated between change in hemoglobin level and the endogenous EPO response [12]. EPO-mediated erythropoiesis in this setting is 397–568 ml (19–26% RBC expansion) [811], or the equivalent of 2–3 blood units. When recombinant human EPO therapy is administered during PAD, the equivalent of 5 blood units is generated [10, 13].

Patient selection

Preoperative autologous collections are most beneficial to those patients who are undergoing procedures with substantial anticipated blood loss, such as orthopedic joint replacement, vascular surgery, cardiac or thoracic surgery, and radical prostatectomy. Autologous blood is unnecessary for procedures that seldom require transfusion, such as transurethral resection of the prostate, cholecystectomy, herniorrhaphy, vaginal hysterectomy, and uncomplicated obstetric delivery [14]. A hospital's maximal surgical blood order schedule for blood cross-match can provide estimates of transfusion rates for specific procedures; the generally accepted cutoff at which transfusion is 'unlikely' and autologous blood procurement should not be recommended is 10% [15].

Collection of units should be scheduled as far in advance of surgery as possible for liquid blood storage (up to 42 days), to allow compensatory erythropoiesis [5] to correct the induced anemia. If the erythropoietic response to autologous blood phlebotomy is not able to maintain the patient's level of hematocrit during the donation interval, then the pre-deposit of autologous blood may actually be harmful. A study of patients undergoing hysterectomy [16] found that PAD resulted in perioperative anemia and an increased likelihood of any blood transfusion.

Even though national trends indicate a decline in PAD for all surgical patients in the USA, this practice remains a standard of care for patients undergoing total joint replacement surgery. A multicenter retrospective audit of 9482 patients undergoing these procedures [17] found that 60% underwent PAD. For non-anemic patients, PAD reduced allogeneic blood exposure by two thirds as compared with patients who did not undergo PAD. For anemic (hemoglobin <13 g/dl) patients, PAD reduced allogeneic blood exposure by only one third.

For procedures such as total joint replacement surgery, discard rates of up to 50% of collected units are common [17]. When autologous blood is collected for procedures that seldom require transfusion, such as vaginal hysterectomies, up to 90% of units collected for these procedures are wasted [16]. The additional costs associated with the collection of autologous units and the inherent 'wastage' of these units, along with advances in the safety of allogeneic blood, now render the pre-donation of autologous blood poorly cost-effective [18]. Cost-effectiveness models serve to illustrate the potential risks associated with autologous blood donation; even a very remote risk for death in patients with ischemic heart disease may entirely negate the benefits of having autologous blood available before coronary artery bypass grafting [19]. Key factors include the estimated postoperative lifespan of the patient and the likelihood of transfusion [20, 21]. In a study of autologous blood donation before coronary artery bypass grafting [19], the preoperative donation of 2 units was estimated to have a cost of US$500,000 per quality-adjusted life year. In comparison, most commonly accepted medical and surgical interventions have a cost of less than US$50,000 per quality-adjusted life year. The risk for exposure to a hepatitis virus or to HIV has declined by at least an order of magnitude since the calculation of this estimate, and the current cost-effectiveness would be significantly worse.

Some suggestions to make autologous blood programs less costly include abbreviating the donor interview for autologous collection, utilizing only whole blood and discontinuing component production, limiting the use of frozen autologous blood, applying the same transfusion guidelines for autologous and allogeneic blood, and testing only the first donated autologous blood unit for infectious disease markers. Attempts to stratify patients into groups at high and low risk for transfusion, based on the baseline level of hemoglobin and on the type of procedure, show some promise. In a study using a point score system, 80% of patients undergoing total joint replacement procedures were identified to be at low risk (<10%) for transfusion, so that autologous blood procurement for these patients would not be recommended [22].

Safety considerations

Autologous blood donation and the transfusion of autologous blood are each associated with risks. One in 16,783 autologous donations is associated with an adverse reaction severe enough to require hospitalization, which is 12 times the risk associated with community donations by healthy individuals [23]. Ischemic events have also been reported to occur in association with autologous blood donation [24]. The transfusion of autologous blood has many of the same complications as transfusion of allogeneic units, including bacterial contamination, hemolysis due to errors in the administration of units, and volume overload. Because mortality from allogeneic blood transfusion is now more likely due to administrative error [25] than to blood-transmitted infection [3], the risks associated with banked autologous blood units are similar to those with banked allogeneic blood units. As summarized above, some advantages and disadvantages of PAD are listed in Table 3.
Table 3

Advantages and disadvantages of autologous blood donation

Advantages

Disadvantages

Prevents transfusion-transmitted disease

Risk of bacterial contamination or volume overload remains

Prevents red cell alloimmunization

Does not eliminate risk of administrative error with ABO incompatibility

Supplements the blood supply

More costly than allogeneic blood

Provides compatible blood for patients with alloantibodies

Wastage of blood not transfused

Prevents some adverse transfusion reactions

Causes perioperative anemia and increased likelihood of transfusion

Data from Goodnough and coworkers [2].

Conclusion

Increased attention to the costs and safety of health care delivery has caused the relative benefits and costs of both blood transfusion and conservation to be scrutinized. The prospective identification of surgical candidates who will need transfusion and will therefore truly benefit from blood conservation must be based on factors specific to the patient, such as the baseline hematocrit and the anticipated blood loss during surgery. The decision to employ blood-sparing technology may no longer be based on the safety of the blood supply, but on evidence that blood conservation is safe and of value for individual patients.

Abbreviations

EPO: 

EPO = erythropoietin

PAD: 

PAD = preoperative autologous blood donation

RBC: 

RBC = red blood cell.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Professor of Medicine and Pathology and Immunology,Transfusion Services, Washington University School of Medicineand Director,Barnes-Jewish Hospital

References

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: Transfusion alert: use of autologous blood. Transfusion 1995, 35: 703-711. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1995.35895357904.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Goodnough LT, Brecher ME, Kanter MH, AuBuchon JP: Transfusion medicine. Second of two parts: blood conservation. N Engl J Med 1999, 340: 525-533. 10.1056/NEJM199902183400706View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Goodnough LT, Brecher ME, Kanter MH, AuBuchon JP: Transfusion medicine. First of two parts: blood transfusion. N Engl J Med 1999, 340: 438-447. 10.1056/NEJM199902113400606View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Finucane ML, Slovic P, Mertz CK: Public perception of the risk of blood transfusion. Transfusion 2000, 40: 1017-1022. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.2000.40081017.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Goodnough LT, Skikne B, Brugnara C: Erythropoietin, iron, and erythropoiesis. Blood 2000, 96: 823-833.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kasper SM, Gerlich W, Buzello W: Preoperative red cell production in patients undergoing weekly autologous blood donation. Transfusion 1997, 37: 1058-1062. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1997.371098016445.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Kasper SM, Lazansky H, Stark C, Klimek M, Laubinger R, Borner U: Efficacy of oral iron supplementation is not enhanced by additional intravenous iron during autologous blood donation. Transfusion 1998, 38: 764-770. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1998.38898375516.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Weisbach V, Skoda P, Rippel R, Lauer G, Glaser A, Zingsem J, Zimmermann R, Eckstein R: Oral or intravenous iron as an adjuvant to autologous blood donation in elective surgery: a randomized, controlled study. Transfusion 1999, 39: 465-472. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1999.39050465.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Goodnough LT, Rudnick S, Price TH, Ballas SK, Collins ML, Crowley JP, Kosmin M, Kruskall MSLBA, Menitove JE, Silberstein LE, Smith KJ, Wallas CH, Abels R, von Tress M: Increased preoperative collection of autologous blood with recombinant human erythropoietin therapy. N Engl J Med 1989, 321: 1163-1168.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodnough LT, Price TH, Rudnick S, Soegiarso RW: Preoperative red cell production in patients undergoing aggressive autologous blood phlebotomy with and without erythropoietin therapy. Transfusion 1992, 32: 441-445. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1992.32592327718.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodnough LT, Price TH, Friedman KD, Johnston M, Ciavarella D, Khan N, Sacher R, Vogler WR, Wissel M, Abels RI: A phase III trial of recombinant human erythropoietin therapy in nonanemic orthopedic patients subjected to aggressive removal of blood for autologous use: dose, response, toxicity, and efficacy. Transfusion 1994, 34: 66-71. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1994.34194098608.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Goodnough LT, Price TH, Parvin CA, Friedman KD, Vogler WR, Khan N, Sacher R, Johnston M, Wissel M, Ciavarella D: Erythropoietin response to anaemia is not altered by surgery or recombinant human erythropoietin therapy. Br J Haematol 1994, 87: 695-699.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Goodnough LT, Monk TG, Andriole GL: Current concepts: erythropoietin therapy. N Engl J Med 1997, 336: 933-938. 10.1056/NEJM199703273361307View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Renner SW, Howanitz PJ, Bachner P: Preoperative autologous blood donation in 612 hospitals. A College of American Pathologists' Q-Probes study of quality issues in transfusion practice. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1992, 116: 613-619.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Mintz PD, Nordine RB, Henry JB, Webb WR: Expected hemotherapy in elective surgery. N Y State J Med 1976, 76: 532-537.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kanter MH, van Maanen D, Anders KH, Castro F, Win MW, Clark K: A study of an educational intervention to decrease inappropriate preoperative autologous blood donation: its effectiveness and the effect on subsequent transfusion rates in elective hysterectomy. Transfusion 1999, 39: 801-807. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1999.39080801.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Bierbaum BE, Callaghan JJ, Galante JO, Rubash HE, Tooms RE, Welch RB: An analysis of blood management in patients having a total hip or knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 1999, 81: 2-10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Etchason J, Petz L, Keeler E, Calhoun L, Kleinman S, Snider C, Fink A, Brook R: The cost effectiveness of preoperative autologous blood donations. N Engl J Med 1995, 332: 719-724. 10.1056/NEJM199503163321106View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Birkmeyer JD, AuBuchon JP, Littenberg B, O'Connor GT, Nease RF Jr, Nugent WC, Goodnough LT: Cost-effectiveness of preoperative autologous donation in coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 1994, 57: 161-169.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Birkmeyer JD, Goodnough LT, AuBuchon JP, Noordsij PG, Littenberg B: The cost-effectiveness of preoperative autologous blood donation for total hip and knee replacement. Transfusion 1993, 33: 544-551. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1993.33793325048.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Healy JC, Frankforter SA, Graves BK, Reddy RL, Beck JR: Preoperative autologous blood donation in total-hip arthroplasty: a cost-effective analysis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1994, 118: 465-470.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Larocque BJ, Gilbert K, Brien WF: Prospective validation of a point score system for predicting blood transfusion following hip or knee replacement. Transfusion 1998, 38: 932-937. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1998.381098440857.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Popovsky MA, Whitaker B, Arnold NL: Severe outcomes of allogeneic and autologous blood donation: frequency and characterization. Transfusion 1995, 35: 734-737. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1995.35996029156.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Goodnough LT, Monk TG: Evolving concepts in autologous blood procurement and transfusion: case reports of perisurgical anemia complicated by myocardial infarction. Am J Med 1996, 101: 33S-37S. 10.1016/S0002-9343(96)00167-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Linden JV, Wagner K, Voytovich AE, Sheehan J: Transfusion errors in New York State: an analysis of 10 years' experience. Transfusion 2000, 40: 1207-1213. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.2000.40101207.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© BioMed Central Ltd 2004