Billote D B, Abdoue A G, Wixson R L
Department of Anesthesiology, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, IL, USA.
J Clin Anesth. 2000 Feb;12(1):31-5. doi: 10.1016/s0952-8180(99)00129-4.
To compare, by model simulation, acute normovolemic hemodilution (ANH) and preoperative autologous blood donation (PABD) to predict their efficacy in current clinical practice. To discuss their similarities and offer guidelines based on expected operative blood loss.
Model simulation using data obtained from total hip arthroplasty procedures.
University medical center.
91 patients who participated in PABD undergoing single, primary, total hip replacement surgeries from January to December 1997.
A nonanemic (Hb baseline 14 g/dL), average-sized patient (estimated blood volume 5,000 mL) who donated two units by either PABD or ANH was assumed for model simulation. The Hb-final, as a function of 250-mL blood loss increments after retransfusion of two autologous units, was calculated for each technique and compared to a control (nondonor) to predict the effectiveness of PABD and ANH in conserving red cell mass. Data from hip arthroplasties over a 12-month period were used to determine the parameters for the model. Results were subjected to regression analysis and tested for parallelism of slopes, with p < 0.05 accepted to indicate a statistical difference.
The difference in Hb-final between PABD and ANH was not statistically different over a wide range of blood loss. When compared to control, there was no difference in Hb-final measurements in the estimated blood loss (EBL) range of less than 1,000 mL. ANH and PABD provide some benefit when EBL is greater than 1,500 mL in nonanemic, average-sized patients. As blood loss increases, the benefit of autologous collection becomes more clinically evident.
PABD exemplifies a "chronic" form of ANH in current clinical practice and offers little advantage over ANH as a blood conservation technique for high-blood-loss operations. When surgical blood loss is predictably mild to moderate (range 250 to 1,000 mL), neither blood conservation technique is necessary.
通过模型模拟比较急性等容血液稀释(ANH)和术前自体血捐献(PABD),以预测它们在当前临床实践中的效果。讨论它们的相似之处,并根据预期手术失血量提供指导原则。
使用全髋关节置换手术获得的数据进行模型模拟。
大学医学中心。
1997年1月至12月期间参与PABD并接受单次、初次全髋关节置换手术的91例患者。
模型模拟假定为一名非贫血(血红蛋白基线14 g/dL)、中等身材(估计血容量5000 mL)的患者,通过PABD或ANH捐献两个单位的血液。计算每种技术在回输两个自体单位血液后,血红蛋白最终值随250 mL失血量增加的变化情况,并与对照组(未捐献者)进行比较,以预测PABD和ANH在保存红细胞量方面的有效性。使用12个月期间髋关节置换手术的数据来确定模型参数。对结果进行回归分析,并检验斜率的平行性,p < 0.05表示有统计学差异。
在广泛的失血量范围内,PABD和ANH之间的血红蛋白最终值差异无统计学意义。与对照组相比,估计失血量(EBL)小于1000 mL时,血红蛋白最终测量值无差异。对于非贫血、中等身材的患者,当EBL大于1500 mL时,ANH和PABD有一定益处。随着失血量增加,自体采血的益处变得在临床上更加明显。
在当前临床实践中,PABD是ANH的一种“慢性”形式,作为高失血量手术的血液保护技术,与ANH相比优势不大。当手术失血量可预测为轻度至中度(范围250至1000 mL)时,两种血液保护技术都不必要。