Barrett-Lee J, Vatish J, Vazirian-Zadeh M, Waterland P
Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust , UK.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2018 Apr;100(4):322-325. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2018.0033. Epub 2018 Feb 27.
Introduction Studies show that rates of blood transfusion associated with general surgical laparoscopy are low. Currently, there are no national guidelines in the UK regarding blood group and antibody screening (G&S) for patients undergoing emergency laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to assess whether using G&S before emergency laparoscopic general surgery routinely is worthwhile by identifying rates of perioperative transfusion. Methods Data were collected retrospectively on all emergency laparoscopic procedures at a single district general hospital between January 2014 and 31 December 2016. Emergency laparoscopic general surgical cases were included and gynaecological cases excluded. Records were reviewed to ascertain whether G&S was performed, whether antibodies were detected and whether patients were transfused. Results A total of 562 emergency laparoscopic cases were performed. The median age was 28 years (range: 6-95 years). Laparoscopic appendicectomy (n=446), diagnostic laparoscopy (n=47) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (n=25) were the most common procedures. Of the total patient cohort, 514 (91.5%) and 349 (70.1%) had a first and second G&S respectively while 30 (5.3%) had no G&S. Four patients (0.71%) had antibodies detected. One patient (0.18%) received a transfusion. This patient had undergone laparoscopic repair of a perforated duodenal ulcer and there was no major intraoperative haemorrhage but he was transfused perioperatively for chronic anaemia. Conclusions These results demonstrate a low rate of blood transfusion in emergency laparoscopic general surgery. The majority of these patients had a low risk of major intraoperative haemorrhage and we therefore argue that G&S was not warranted. We propose a more targeted approach to the requirement for preoperative G&S and the use of O negative blood in the event of acute haemorrhage from major vessel injury.
引言 研究表明,普通外科腹腔镜手术的输血率较低。目前,英国没有关于急诊腹腔镜手术患者血型和抗体筛查(G&S)的国家指南。本研究的目的是通过确定围手术期输血率来评估常规在急诊腹腔镜普通外科手术前进行G&S是否值得。方法 回顾性收集了2014年1月至2016年12月31日期间一家单一地区综合医院所有急诊腹腔镜手术的数据。纳入急诊腹腔镜普通外科病例,排除妇科病例。审查记录以确定是否进行了G&S、是否检测到抗体以及患者是否接受了输血。结果 共进行了562例急诊腹腔镜手术。中位年龄为28岁(范围:6 - 95岁)。腹腔镜阑尾切除术(n = 446)、诊断性腹腔镜检查(n = 47)和腹腔镜胆囊切除术(n = 25)是最常见的手术。在整个患者队列中,分别有514例(91.5%)和349例(70.1%)进行了首次和第二次G&S,而30例(5.3%)未进行G&S。4例患者(0.71%)检测到抗体。1例患者(0.18%)接受了输血。该患者接受了十二指肠溃疡穿孔的腹腔镜修复术,术中无大出血,但因慢性贫血在围手术期接受了输血。结论 这些结果表明急诊腹腔镜普通外科手术的输血率较低。这些患者中的大多数术中大出血风险较低,因此我们认为没有必要进行G&S。我们建议对术前G&S的要求采用更有针对性的方法,并在大血管损伤急性出血时使用O型阴性血。