Skip to main content
Blood Transfusion logoLink to Blood Transfusion
. 2018 Feb 16;17(1):16–26. doi: 10.2450/2018.0213-17

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of Patient Blood Management

Adina Kleinerüschkamp 1, Patrick Meybohm 1,, Niels Straub 2, Kai Zacharowski 1, Suma Choorapoikayil 1
PMCID: PMC6343592  PMID: 29517965

Abstract

Background

Patient blood management (PBM) is a multidisciplinary concept focused on the management of anaemia, minimisation of iatrogenic blood loss and rational use of allogeneic blood products. The aims of this study were: (i) to analyse post-operative outcome in patients with liberal vs restrictive exposure to allogeneic blood products and (ii) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PBM in patients undergoing surgery.

Materials and methods

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed to compare post-operative complications in predominantly non-transfused patients (restrictive transfusion group) and patients who received one to three units of red blood cells (liberal transfusion group). Outcome measures included sepsis with/without pneumonia, acute renal failure, acute myocardial infarction and acute stroke. In a second step, a health economic model was developed to calculate cost-effectiveness of PBM (PBM-arm vs control-arm) for simulated cohorts of 10,000 cardiac and non-cardiac surgical patients based on the results of the meta-analysis and costs.

Results

Out of 478 search results, 22 studies were analysed in the meta-analysis. The pooled relative risk of any complication in the restrictive transfusion group was 0.43 for non-cardiac and 0.34 for cardiac surgical patients. In the simulation model, PBM was related to reduced complications (1,768 vs 1,245) and complication-related deaths (411 vs 304) compared to standard care. PBM-related costs of therapy exceeded costs of the control arm by € 150 per patient. However, total costs, including hospitalisation, were higher in the control-arm for both non-cardiac (€ 2,885.11) and cardiac surgery patients (€ 1,760.69). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio including hospitalisation showed savings of € 30,458 (non-cardiac and cardiac surgery patients) for preventing one complication and € 128,023 (non-cardiac and cardiac surgery patients) for prevention of one complication-related death in the PBM-arm.

Discussion

Our results indicate that PBM may be associated with fewer adverse clinical outcomes compared to control management and may, thereby, be cost-effective.

Keywords: patient blood management, transfusion, outcome, cost-effectiveness-analysis, health economics

Introduction

Recent evidence indicates that anaemia, bleeding and exposure to allogeneic blood products are independent risk factors for increased peri-operative morbidity and mortality15. Despite the undeniable importance of allogeneic blood products to compensate for life-threatening blood loss, transfusion of red blood cells (RBC) is associated with an increased risk of complications and prolonged length of stay (LOS) in hospital6,7. In this respect, patient blood management (PBM) is an evidence-based concept focused on management of (pre-operative) anaemia, minimisation of iatrogenic blood loss and a rational transfusion strategy.

The costs of PBM measures and transfusion have been analysed in various institutions; however, the cost-effectiveness of PBM has been mostly determined based on the cost of blood acquisition. In a cohort of 281 patients, anaemia treatment costs amounted to £ 16,695 of which £ 12,625 were offset by reduced RBC transfusions and savings in acquisition costs8. Ejaz and colleagues examined a restrictive transfusion strategy in 3,027 patients undergoing abdominal surgery and showed that RBC utilisation costs could be reduced by up to $ 94,516 per year9. Similar effects were observed within the ONTraC-blood conservation programme, in which reduced RBC transfusion and shorter LOS lead to a total estimated savings of 14,950,000 Canadian dollars10. Although the introduction of PBM is initially cost-intensive, successful implantation leads to cost redistribution for allogeneic blood components in favour of blood-sparing techniques11.

To the best of our knowledge, the cost-effectiveness of PBM compared to control treatment with regard to post-operative complications and prolonged hospitalisation has not yet been evaluated. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical and economic impact of PBM considering the risk of post-operative complications.

Materials and methods

Meta-analysis and effect estimates

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed to compare outcomes in cardiac and non-cardiac surgery patients exposed to 0 or 1 unit of RBC (restrictive transfusion group) and patients exposed to 1 to 3 units of RBC (liberal transfusion group). Our search included articles published between January 1st, 2004 and December 31st, 2014 with the following filters activated: species (humans), languages (English), and age (≥19 years). Articles were eligible if they: (i) investigated the association between allogeneic transfusion and outcome in surgical patients; (ii) had an observational period of 30–65 days or used terms such as “acute” or “in-hospital” referring to adverse events; and (iii) reported the number of units of RBC transfused. Outcomes of interest were defined as follows: septic complications (sepsis, septic shock), pulmonary complications (pneumonia, respiratory infection, chest infection), renal complications (renal failure, kidney injury, renal insufficiency, requirement for dialysis), cardiac complications (myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest, low cardiac index), and neurological complications (neurological deficit, stroke, transient ischaemic attack, coma, paralysis) (Online Supplementary Content, Table SI). In addition, a non-systematic literature search was conducted by hand for mortality (in-hospital or 30 days) and LOS associated with each complication. Since data did not allow any further differentiation, mortality and LOS were assumed to be independent of: (i) prior assignment to the therapy groups or exposure to RBC and (ii) type of surgery (cardiac or non-cardiac).

The meta-analysis was performed with OpenMetaAnalyst, free software from the Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health (CESH), Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.

Health economic model

A decision tree model (Online Supplementary Content, Figure S1)12,13 representing probabilities of complications and consequential mortality rates was developed to calculate the cost-effectiveness of PBM (PBM-arm) and control treatment (control-arm) with a simulated cohort of 10,000 randomised patients. The following clinical endpoints were analysed for cardiac and non-cardiac surgery patients: sepsis with or without pneumonia, acute renal failure, acute myocardial infarction, acute stroke and no complications. Endpoints of the model excluded each other, i.e. patients could not experience more than one event. The time horizon of our model was a hospitalisation period of up to 30 days. The model was constructed using the health economic decision modelling software TreeAge Pro 2015 (TreeAge Software Inc., Williamstown, MA, USA).

Published data on sepsis in cardiac surgery were scant. However pneumonia is often associated with sepsis and was therefore categorised as a subcategory of sepsis allowing an estimation of the probability of sepsis in cardiac patients1416. To calculate the probability of sepsis with pneumonia in cardiac patients, data on sepsis in non-cardiac patients were combined with data on pneumonia in cardiac patients. The probability of sepsis without pneumonia was calculated as the difference between estimated effects for sepsis and pneumonia in cardiac with respect to non-cardiac patients. Mortality from sepsis without pneumonia was derived from pooled data on mortality due to sepsis (total). Mortality from sepsis with pneumonia was calculated considering the probabilities of both circumstances (sepsis with or without pneumonia). Mortality rates differed greatly in both scenarios which were specifically addressed in sensitivity analyses. With regard to renal complications only mortality from acute kidney injury stage 2 (AKIN-2) or risk-injury-failure-loss-and-end-stage renal disease stage 1 (RIFLE-I)17 was considered to avoid an overestimation. The mortality rate in the absence of complications was considered to be 0.78%5. Data on LOS due to post-operative complications were pooled according to the weighting of mortality rates in the meta-analysis. In the case of pneumonia (sepsis with pneumonia) the pooled LOS in the intensive care unit (ICU) exceeded the LOS in hospital. Therefore, the proportional LOS in the ICU was calculated for septic complications, regardless of the occurrence of pneumonia. For renal complications only data on LOS related to AKIN-2 or RIFLE-I were considered. The average LOS in the absence of complications was determined as 7.2 days of which 1 day was assumed to be spent in the ICU based on the data for surgical patients supplied by the Information System of the Federal Health Monitoring for Germany18.

Cost estimates

Therapy costs per patient for both groups were derived from a systematic cost-analysis at Frankfurt University Hospital11. Briefly, the total cost for a RBC transfusion was € 147.43, which included the cost of a RBC unit (€ 90.50), materials (2 monovettes, adapter for the luer taper, material for transfusion and bedside testing; € 0.86), tests for ABO and Rhesus D (€ 8.16), a Coombs’ test (€ 5.83), cross-matching (€ 11.66) and working time for physicians (18 min) and nurses (23 min) (€ 30.42). Therapy costs in the PBM-arm, including material costs (€ 0.18), diagnosis of iron-deficiency anaemia (€ 109.00), treatment with iron (Ferinject® [Vifor France, Neully-sur-Seine, France]; € 117.59) and working time for physicians (17 min) and nurses (15 min) (€ 25.10), came to a total of € 251.87. Furthermore, the cost of volume therapy ranged between € 1.22 (for 1,000 mL of Sterofundin®ISO [B. Braun Melsungen AG, Melsungen, Germany]) and € 3.92 (for 500 mL of Tetraspan® [B. Braun Melsungen AG]), intensified haemoglobin monitoring and optimisation of haemostatic parameters including warming cost roughly € 21.79, cell salvage roughly € 155.99 and administration of tranexamic acid (500 mg) € 3.6611.

Hospitalisation costs of each endpoint were calculated on the basis of literature data on LOS and costs per day on normal wards and in the ICU19,20. Proportional costs of ICU days correspond on a percentage basis to the data on LOS in the ICU. Mean costs per day were calculated for the four most common diagnosis-related groups in cardiac surgery at Frankfurt University Hospital (F06F: coronary artery bypass surgery; F03F: cardiac valve surgery with cardio-pulmonary bypass; F03E: cardiac valve surgery with cardio-pulmonary bypass including complicating procedures; F07A: other surgery with cardio-pulmonary bypass;, age <1 year or complicating procedures) and relevant data were obtained from the hospital’s reimbursement system database21. The relevant mean costs per day were € 254 and € 1,489 for normal ward and ICU care, respectively.

Statistical analysis

Since populations of patients reported in the literature were not homogeneous, comparisons of absolute event rates were inappropriate. Therefore, risk ratios (RR) were used to calculate event rates in the PBM-arm compared to the control-arm. The RR of each complication was pooled using the binary fixed effect model (Mantel-Haenszel) and examined in forest plots. The presence of heterogeneity was detected by I2 statistic. These event rates were used to calculate the number of events for our hypothetical cohort. Specific event probabilities were combined with relevant cost data to determine the expected cost per patient. Based on outcome and costs in the control-arm, additional costs and number of avoided complications and deaths in the PBM-arm were calculated.

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PBM reflects additional costs when choosing the PBM-arm to avoid one adverse event. It was calculated with and without hospitalisation costs as these may have a much higher variance and uncertainty in the assessed data. Data are provided as mean ± standard deviation when indicated and p values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Treatment costs11 as well as the results of the meta-analysis were used for the simulated model calculation. The simulation enabled a calculation of the cost-effectiveness ratio taking into account both therapy costs and post-operative outcome in terms of complications.

Meta-analysis and effect estimates

A total of 478 citations were retrieved from the systematic literature search on complications: of these, 453 did not meet our inclusion criteria, leaving 22 relevant studies for the meta-analysis (Online Supplementary Content, Figure S2)1,6,7,2240. Six out of the 22 studies were performed before 2007, when the first article referring to PBM was published41 (Table I; Online Supplementary Content, Table SII). Patients in the restrictive transfusion group were predominantly not transfused with the exception of three studies reporting transfusion of 1 and 2 units of allogeneic23,29 or autologous38 RBC.

Table I.

Eligible articles included in the meta-analysis.

Reference Type of surgery Time of transfusion Liberal group (Units) Restrictive group (Units) Liberal group (%) Restrictive group (%) Liberal group (n) Restrictive group (n) Outcome Time
Sepsis complications
Bernard et al. 2009 General Intra-operative 1 0 19.6 3.2 1,343 120,389 Sepsis/septic shock 30 days
Bernard et al. 2009 General Intra-operative 2 0 24.5 3.2 1,903 120,389 Sepsis/septic shock 30 days
Ferraris et al. 2011 Thoracic Intra-operative 1–2 0 17.8 6.5 579 7,875 Sepsis with septic shock 30 days
Glance et al. 2011 Non-cardiac Intra-operative 1–2 0 16.4 9.81 2,160 7,940 Sepsis/septic shock 30 days
O’Keeffe et al. 2010 Vascular Intra-operative 1–3 0 12.9 5.0 1,971 6,827 Sepsis/septic shock 30 days
Pulmonary complications
Bernard et al. 2009 General Intra-operative 1 0 9.7 1.4 1,343 120,389 Pneumonia 30 days
Bernard et al. 2009 General Intra-operative 2 0 10.7 1.4 1,903 120,389 Pneumonia 30 days
Croce et al. 2005 ICU/Trauma After first 48 hours from admission 1–2 0 14 2.2 778 4,482 Ventilator-associated pneumonia In-hospital
Carson et al. 1998 Orthopaedic Post-operative 2 0 4.8 0 42 42 Pneumonia In-hospital
Foss et al. 2009 Orthopaedic Peri-operative 2 1 3 2 60 60 Pneumonia n.a.
Chelemer et al. 2002 Cardiac Peri-operative 1–2 0 3.75 1.7 178 262 Respiratory infections 30 days
Horvath et al. 2013 Cardiac Intra-/post-operative 3 0 3.59 1.23 2,481 2,677 Pneumonia 65 days
Ali et al. 2004 Cardiac Peri-operative 3 0 19.8 14.7 116 116 Chest infection In-hospital
Oz et al. 2013a Cardiac Intra-/post-operative 3.2 2 3.8 0.6 160 163 Pneumonia n.a.
Renal complications
Ferraris et al. 2011 Thoracic Intra-operative 1–2 0 6.9 3.1 579 7,875 Kidney injury or dialysis 30 days
Glance et al. 2011 Non-cardiac Intra-operative 1–2 0 2.69 1.85 2,160 7,940 Progressive renal insufficiency or renal failure 30 days
O’Keeffe et al. 2010 Vascular Intra-operative 1–3 0 3.0 1.0 1,971 6,827 Renal failure or insufficiency (no dialysis) 30 days
Khan et al. 2014 Cardiac Intra-operative 1–2 0 4.0 3.0 206 894 Doubling of serum creatinine Acute
Paone et al. 2014 Cardiac n.a. 1–2 0 2.5 1.0 5,951 10,884 Renal failure 30 days
Karkouti et al. 2011 Cardiac Day of surgery 1 0 2.2 1.9 464 462 Kidney injury (>50% decrease in GFR) Acute
Karkouti et al. 2011 Cardiac Day of surgery 1 0 2.8 1.4 455 984 Kidney injury Acute
Karkouti et al. 2011 Cardiac Day of surgery 2 0 4.6 1.9 691 462 Kidney injury Acute
Karkouti et al. 2011 Cardiac Day of surgery 2 0 2.2 1.4 459 984 Kidney injury Acute
Koch et al. 2006 Cardiac Intra-/post-operative 2 0 1.81 0 5,812 6,151 Renal failure requiring dialysis New
Hajjar et al. 2010 Cardiac Peri-operative 2 0 5 4 253 249 Renal failure requiring dialysis or hemofiltration Acute
Bracey et al. 1999 Cardiac Post-operative 1.4 0.9 2 4 216 212 Renal failure or creatinine level >2.5 mg per dL n.a.
Cardiac complications
Carson et al. 1998 Orthopaedic Post-operative 2 0 0 0 42 42 Myocardial infarction In-hospital
Carson et al. 2011 Orthopaedic Post-operative 2 0 2.3 3.8 1,007 1,009 Myocardial infarction 30 days
Bursi et al. 2009 Vascular Intra-/post-operative 3 0 21.1 6.8 95 264 Myocardial infarction 30 days
Foss et al. 2009 Orthopaedic Peri-operative 2 1 0 2 60 60 Myocardial infarction Acute
Ferraris et al. 2011 Thoracic Intra-operative 1–2 0 2.1 1.3 579 7,875 Myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest 30 days
Glance et al. 2011 Non-cardiac Intra-operative 1–2 0 2.08 1.4 2,160 7,940 Myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest 30 days
Bracey et al. 1999 Cardiac Post-operative 1.4 0.9 0 0.5 216 212 Myocardial infarction n.a.
Koch et al. 2006 Cardiac Intra-/post-operative 2 0 3.03 0.05 5,812 6,151 Low cardiac index or myocardial infarction In-hospital
Neurological complications
Ferraris et al. 2011 Thoracic Intra-operative 1–2 0 0.9 0.6 579 7,875 Stroke or coma 30 days
Glance et al. 2011 Non-cardiac Intra-operative 1–2 0 0.69 0.58 2,160 7,940 Cerebrovascular accident or coma lasting > 24 hours 30 days
Rubinstein et al. 2013 Vascular Intra-operative 1–2 0 6.3 1.3 80 160 Stroke with neurologic deficit 30 days
Carson et al. 1998 Orthopaedic Post-operative 2 0 2.4 0 42 42 Stroke In-hospital
Carson et al. 2011 Orthopaedic Post-operative 2 0 0.5 0.1 1,007 1,009 Stroke or TIA In-hospital
Foss et al. 2009 Orthopaedic Peri-operative 2 1 2 2 60 60 Cerebrovascular event n.a.
Mariscalco et al. 2015 Cardiac Peri-operative 1 0 0.7 0.5 1,194 8,504 Stroke (persistent neurological deficit) New
Mariscalco et al. 2015 Cardiac Peri-operative 2 0 1.1 0.5 2,814 8,504 Stroke New
Mikkola et al. 2012 Cardiac Peri-operative 1–2 0 2.1 1.5 401 983 Stroke (neurological deficit lasting >24 hours) Immediate
Paone et al. 2014 Cardiac n.a. 1–2 0 1.5 0.6 5,951 10,884 Permanent stroke 30 days
Koch et al. 2006 Cardiac Intra-/post-operative 2 0 2.41 0.37 5,812 6,151 Focal/global deficits or death without awakening In-hospital
Bracey et al. 1999 Cardiac Post-operative 1.4 0.9 4 n.a.
a

Transfusion of autologous RBC in the restrictive group; n.a.: not available; RBC: red blood cell; GFR: glomerular filtration rate; ICU: intensive care unit; TIA: transient ischaemic attack.

The pooled RR of complications in the restrictive group was 0.43 in non-cardiac and 0.34 in cardiac surgery patients (Table II, Online Supplementary Content, Figure S3). For non-cardiac and cardiac surgery patients the greatest differences between the restrictive and liberal groups were observed in the event rate of sepsis without pneumonia (11.08 vs 1.56%; p<0.01) and acute myocardial infarction (3.03 vs 0.07%; p<0.01).

Table II.

Meta-analysis-based effect estimates as input for the cost-effectiveness model.

Event probabilities are shown for patients in the liberal and restrictive groups. The probabilities of complications in the restrictive group were calculated with a pooled relative risk (RR) compared to the liberal group. The lower and upper bounds of the 95% confidence interval (CI) are given.

Probabilities Pooled effect liberal group Pooled relative risk Effect estimate restrictive group in % (95% CI) p-value
Non-cardiac surgery

Sepsis (total) 19.32% 0.30 5.72% (5.41–6.05) <0.01

 a) Sepsis with pneumonia 11.08% 0.14 1.56% (1.41–1.74) <0.01

 b) Sepsis without pneumonia 8.24% 0.50 4.16% (4.00–4.31) <0.01

Acute renal failure 4.02% 0.49 1.98% (1.65–2.38) 0.01

Acute myocardial infarction 5.96% 0.76 4.50% (3.58–5.66) 0.02

Acute stroke 1.58% 0.63 1.00% (0.64–1.55) <0.01

Total (any complication) 30.88% 0.43 13.20% (11.28–15.64)

Cardiac surgery

Sepsis (total) 11.31% 0.41 4.61% (3.39–6.29) 0.04

 a) Sepsis with pneumonia 6.48% 0.41 2.65% (1.94–3.60) <0.01

 b) Sepsis without pneumonia 4.82% 0.41 1.97% (1.45–2.68) <0.01

Acute renal failure 2.50% 0.38 0.94% (0.78–1.13) <0.01

Acute myocardial infarction 3.03% 0.02 0.07% (0.02–0.18) <0.01

Acute Stroke 1.90% 0.35 0.66% (0.54–0.81) <0.01

Total (any complication) 18.73% 0.34 6.28% (4.73–8.4)

Thirty-one studies retrieved by the non-systematic literature search provided data on mortality and LOS related to each complication4272. The mortality rate was highest in patients with septic complications, especially in the case of sepsis with pneumonia, which was associated with a mortality rate of 51.95% (p<0.01) (Table III, Online Supplementary Content, Figure S4). The average LOS resulting from complications ranged from 13.9 days for acute myocardial infarction to 23.8 days for acute stroke (Table IV).

Table III.

Literature data on complication-related mortality as the input for the cost-effectiveness model.

Rates of mortality considered to be caused by complications, regardless of assignment to the liberal or restrictive transfusion group. The lower and upper bounds of the 95% confidence interval (CI) are given.

Mortality (in-hospital/30 days) from complications (non-cardiac and cardiac surgery) Pooled effect estimate equal for both groups in % (95% CI) p-value
Sepsis (total) 28.70% (28.50–28.90) <0.01

 a) Sepsis with pneumonia 11.40% (11.20–11.60) <0.01

 b) Sepsis without pneumonia 51.95% (51.75–52.15) <0.01

Acute renal failure 28.40% (28.00–28.90) <0.01

Acute myocardial infarction 13.20% (12.90–13.40) <0.01

Acute stroke 23.20% (20.10–26.40) <0.01

No complication 0.78% (0.62–0.94)

Table IV.

Length of stay in hospital and hospitalisation costs.

The table shows hospitalisation costs per patient in the case of complications and in the absence of complications. Calculations are based on literature data regarding average costs and LOS in hospital and in the ICU. LOS on normal wards was calculated as the difference between LOS in hospital and LOS in the ICU.

Complications LOS not in ICU (days) LOS in ICU (days) LOS in hospital (total days) Hospitalisation costsa,b (€)
Without complication 6.2 1.0 7.2 3,065.51

Sepsis (total) 4.0 15.4 19.4 24,000.50

 a) Sepsis with pneumonia 3.5 13.6 17.1 21,170.47

 b) Sepsis without pneumonia 4.6 17.9 22.5 27,804.40

Acute renal failure 11.2 3.1 14.3 7,464.21

Acute myocardial infarction 6.8 7.1 13.9 12,302.93

Acute stroke 15.3 8.5 23.8 16,489.93
a

Cost per day for non-ICU patient: € 254.22;

b

Cost per day for ICU patient: € 1,489.33.

LOS: length of stay; ICU: Intensive Care Unit.

Health economic model

In the simulated cohort of 10,000 patients, 1,768 complications and 411 deaths were avoided in the non-cardiac surgery PBM-arm, while 1,245 complications and 304 deaths were avoided in the cardiac surgery PBM-arm (Table V). Among the non-cardiac surgery patients, the number-needed-to-treat (NNT) with PBM to prevent one complication compared to standard therapy was only six, while that for complication-related death was 25. The corresponding figures for cardiac surgery patients were 9 and 33, respectively.

Table V.

Number of events in simulated cohorts of 10,000 surgical patients

The table shows the calculated number of events (complications and related deaths) in hypothetical cohorts of 10,000 patients for non-cardiac and cardiac surgery.

Non-cardiac surgery Complications (number of events) Deaths related to complications (number of events)


Control-arm PBM-arm Difference Control-arm PBM-arm Difference
Sepsis (total) 1,932 572 1,360 554 234 320

 a) with pneumonia 1,108 156 952 126 18 108

 b) without pneumonia 824 416 408 428 216 212

Acute renal failure 402 198 204 114 56 58

Acute myocardial infarction 596 450 146 79 59 19

Acute stroke 158 100 58 37 23 13

Total 3,088 1,320 1,768 784 373 411

Cardiac surgery Complications (number of events) Deaths related to complications (number of events)


Control-arm PBM-arm Difference Control-arm PBM-arm Difference

Sepsis (total) 1,313 461 669 324 132 192

 a) with pneumonia 648 265 384 74 30 44

 b) without pneumonia 482 197 286 251 102 148

Acute renal failure 250 94 156 71 27 44

Acute myocardial infarction 303 7 296 40 1 39

Acute stroke 190 66 124 44 15 29

Total 1,873 628 1,245 479 175 304

PBM: Patient Blood Management.

Cost estimates

Costs of the PBM-arm could be subdivided into three modules: costs for anaemia management (PBM I = € 176.68), costs for rational use of RBC (PBM II = € 28.62) and material expenses and process costs for measures to reduce allogeneic blood transfusion (PBM III = € 214.19) with total expenses of € 419.49. Costs of the control-arm comprised administration of two units of allogeneic RBC and were € 269.21 (Online Supplementary Content, Table SIII). Thus, total therapy costs of the PBM-arm exceeded costs of the control-arm by € 150.28.

On the outcome side, the effects were quantified in terms of postoperative complications and related LOS. The average hospitalisation cost without complications was € 3,066 per patient. In the case of complications, the cost of hospitalisation was € 24,001 for sepsis (€ 27,804 without pneumonia; € 21,170 with pneumonia), € 7,464 for acute renal failure, € 12,303 for acute myocardial infarction and € 16,490 for acute stroke (Table IV). Considering therapy and hospitalisation costs, the control-arm (Table V) showed significantly higher expected costs per patient for both non-cardiac and cardiac surgery patients due to a higher risk of complications compared to the PBM-arm. The incremental cost in the control-arm was € 2,885 in non-cardiac surgery patients and € 1,761 in cardiac surgery patients (Online Supplementary Content, Table SIV).

Cost-effectiveness

Considering therapy costs to avoid one complication, the ICER of PBM was € 850.02 in non-cardiac and € 1,206.81 in cardiac surgery patients. The ICER of PBM per avoided death was € 3,653.50 in non-cardiac and € 4,940.45 in cardiac surgery patients. However, when costs of hospitalisation were also taken into account, the ICER of PBM turned negative, showing that PBM could yield savings of € 16,319 (non-cardiac surgery) and € 14,139 (cardiac surgery) while preventing one complication. The ICER regarding the prevention of one complication-related death was € −70,140 (non-cardiac surgery patient) and € −57,883 (cardiac surgery patient) (Table VI).

Table VI.

Incremental cost-effectiveness of PBM compared to standard therapy.

Incremental cost effectiveness of PBM Per avoided complication (€) Per avoided death (€)
Without hospitalisation costs
Non-cardiac patients 850.02 3,653.50
Cardiac patients 1,206.81 4,940.45
Including hospitalisation costs
Non-cardiac patients −16,318.79 −70,140.58
Cardiac patients −14,139.04 −57,882.56

PBM: Patient Blood Management.

Sensitivity analysis

To verify the validity of the results, probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted for the model input variables. The probabilities of complications and mortality rates were adjusted according to the upper and lower bounds of the pooled effect estimates (Tables II and III). Additionally, variations in hospitalisation costs with a range of ±25%, were tested. In probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations with 10,000 trials, the analyses showed a robust effect of the model results regarding PBM, being the dominant therapy strategy in more than 95% with a positive ICER.

Discussion

In times of increasing health-care costs, it is of great interest to assess cost-effectiveness of new interventions carefully. Given the worldwide interest in PBM4,73, critical evaluation of its appropriateness and assessment of its cost-effectiveness are crucial for continued implementation of this tested but still new concept. Our meta-analysis suggests that a restrictive transfusion strategy is associated with fewer complications compared to a liberal transfusion strategy. Taking into account that a reduced complication rate is not consequently associated with a reduction in costs, we conducted an economic evaluation to elucidate costs and consequences of PBM74.

In this simulation model, treatment according to the principles of PBM, including a restrictive transfusion strategy, was related to a reduced total complication rate in both non-cardiac and cardiac surgery patients. Moreover, our health economic model revealed that 17.68% of complications and 4.11% of deaths in non-cardiac surgery patients would have been avoided by PBM, while 12.45% of complications and 3.04% of deaths would have been avoided in the patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The observed prevalence of post-operative complications in our study is similar to the findings in other studies, for example that by Lasocki and Colleagues, who assigned 1,543 patients to either non-PBM or PBM treatment. Patients who were anaemic pre-operatively experienced a significantly higher rate of post-operative complications (36.9 vs 22.2%) and longer hospitalisation (11.7±9.6 vs 8.8±5.9 days) compared to non-anaemic patients. Furthermore, prolonged LOS was independently observed with RBC transfusion and non-PBM treatment75. Implementation of PBM measures73 was reported to be associated with 1.5 times higher expenses due to additional material costs for anaemia management, including iron therapy, blood-sparing techniques, cell salvage, administration of antifibrinolytics and management of coagulopathy. PBM does, however, have the potential to reduce complications and shorten LOS, which lowers hospitalisation costs. In our simulation, the savings per avoided complication were € 16,318.79 for non-cardiac and € 14,139.04 for cardiac surgery patients. Muñoz and Colleagues analysed economic aspects of intravenous iron therapy in 182 orthopaedic surgery patients. Administration of iron was associated with a reduced rate of allogeneic transfusions (11.5 vs 26.4%) without causing incremental costs76. Vigna-Taglianti and Colleagues conducted a cost analysis of administration of an antifibrinolytic drug in patients who underwent orthopaedic surgery among whom the transfusion rate of autologous or allogeneic blood could be reduced by 45%: this was associated with savings of € 138 per patient77. Recently, the impact of a jurisdiction-wide PBM programme was assessed in a large retrospective study including more than 600,000 patients in West-Australia. Implementation of PBM was associated with significant reductions of in-hospital mortality (28%), LOS in hospital (15%), hospital-acquired infection (21%), stroke (31%) and utilisation of RBC units (41%). Additionally, PBM and reduced blood product utilisation were associated with product-acquisition cost savings of $ 18.1 million78. Goodnough and Colleagues improved blood use by implementing a real-time clinical decision support and best practice alert into physicians’ order entry for blood transfusion. The transfusion rate for patients whose haemoglobin level exceeded 8 g/dL decreased from 57–66% (2008) to 35% (2010) and remained below 30% (2012): estimated net savings in purchase costs for RBC units were $ 1,616,75079.

Taken together, our simulation model-based analysis demonstrates that additional costs arising from PBM compared to control treatment were economically worthwhile because of the potential of decreased post-operative complications, which are responsible for the major part of hospitalisation costs.

A few limitations of our study need to be taken into account. Our model calculated therapy costs in the control-arm for patients receiving two RBC units and therefore costs are likely to be underestimated for patients transfused with three or more RBC units. Additionally, our results may not be transferable to cases of excessive blood loss that require substitution with more than three units of RBC, irrespectively of the treatment approach. Clinical outcome was determined by differences in the number of units transfused and the analysis was based on relevant literature data. An effort was made to deal with the problem of heterogeneous cohorts of patients by calculating effect estimates based on a systematic meta-analysis with pooled RR and performing sensitivity analyses with adjusted values. Several studies did not indicate exact time points of transfusion and therefore transfusion of additional units of RBC in the control- and PBM-arms could not be ruled out. Furthermore, we cannot exclude that outcome investigated or post-operative complications were exclusively due to transfusion and not on other conditions such as underlying diseases. Complications with very low incidence, transfusion-related infections and adverse events (e.g. transfusion-related lung injury) were not included in our analysis. We assessed the outcome 30 days after surgery and therefore long-term complications were not included in our calculation. Therapy costs were determined from an institutional perspective at one German hospital which depends on local conditions and may not be transferable to other institutions. For example, the average LOS in the United States of America is 4.5 days80 compared to 7.2 days in Germany and therefore total therapy costs might differ between countries. Finally, mortality rates were assessed using a non-systematic review approach and therefore might not reflect actual numbers. However, it is worth noting that our initial approach included mortality as outcome but resulted in no eligible studies for our analysis since mortality was always considered as outcome related to blood transfusion and not associated with complications.

Conclusions

There is an expanding body of evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of PBM in improving patients’ outcome. Our results from a meta-analysis and simulation model-based analysis highlight potential cost-effectiveness associated with a decreased rate of complications in surgical patients. Thus, PBM is an economically desirable therapeutic concept that can improve patients’ outcome.

Supplementary Information

Footnotes

Authorship contributions

AK, PM, NS designed and conducted the analysis with input from SC and KZ. AK, PM, NS, KZ and SC wrote the manuscript.

Conflicts of interest disclosure

PM and KZ received grants from B. Braun Melsungen, CSL Behring, Fresenius Kabi and Vifor Pharma for the implementation of Frankfurt’s Patient Blood Management programme and honoraria for scientific lectures from B. Braun Melsungen, Vifor Pharma, Ferring, CSL Behring, and Pharmacosmos. None of the other Authors have any potential conflicts of interest.

References

  • 1.Bernard AC, Davenport DL, Chang PK, et al. Intraoperative transfusion of 1 U to 2 U packed red blood cells is associated with increased 30-day mortality, surgical-site infection, pneumonia, and sepsis in general surgery patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:931–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.11.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Chatterjee S, Wetterslev J, Sharma A, et al. Association of blood transfusion with increased mortality in myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis and diversity-adjusted study sequential analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:132–9. doi: 10.1001/2013.jamainternmed.1001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Jakobsen CJ, Ryhammer PK, Tang M, et al. Transfusion of blood during cardiac surgery is associated with higher long-term mortality in low-risk patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;42:114–20. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezr242. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Meybohm P, Herrmann E, Steinbicker AU, et al. Patient blood management is associated with a substantial reduction of red blood cell utilization and safe for patient’s outcome: a prospective, multicenter cohort study with a noninferiority design. Ann Surg. 2016;264:203–11. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001747. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Musallam KM, Tamim HM, Richards T, et al. Preoperative anaemia and postoperative outcomes in non-cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2011;378:1396–407. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61381-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Carson JL, Terrin ML, Noveck H, et al. Liberal or restrictive transfusion in high-risk patients after hip surgery. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:2453–62. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1012452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Hajjar LA, Vincent JL, Galas FR, et al. Transfusion requirements after cardiac surgery: the TRACS randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2010;304:1559–67. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1446. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kotze A, Carter LA, Scally AJ. Effect of a patient blood management programme on preoperative anaemia, transfusion rate, and outcome after primary hip or knee arthroplasty: a quality improvement cycle. Br J Anaesth. 2012;108:943–52. doi: 10.1093/bja/aes135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ejaz A, Frank SM, Spolverato G, et al. Potential economic impact of using a restrictive transfusion trigger among patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. JAMA Surg. 2015;150:625–30. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2015.81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Freedman J, Luke K, Escobar M, et al. Experience of a network of transfusion coordinators for blood conservation (Ontario Transfusion Coordinators [ONTraC]) Transfusion. 2008;48:237–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01515.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kleineruschkamp AG, Zacharowski K, Ettwein C, et al. [Cost analysis of patient blood management]. Anaesthesist. 2016;65:438–48. doi: 10.1007/s00101-016-0152-9. [In German.] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Straub N, Bauer E, Agarwal S, et al. Cost-effectiveness of POC coagulation testing using multiple electrode aggregometry. Clin Lab. 2016;62:1167–78. doi: 10.7754/clin.lab.2015.151132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Davies L, Brown TJ, Haynes S, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cell salvage and alternative methods of minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10:iii–iv. ix–x, 1–210. doi: 10.3310/hta10440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Alberti C, Brun-Buisson C, Burchardi H, et al. Epidemiology of sepsis and infection in ICU patients from an international multicentre cohort study. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28:108–21. doi: 10.1007/s00134-001-1143-z. Erratum in: Intensive Care Med 2002; 28: 525–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Bateman BT, Schmidt U, Berman MF, et al. Temporal trends in the epidemiology of severe postoperative sepsis after elective surgery: a large, nationwide sample. Anesthesiology. 2010;112:917–25. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181cea3d0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Martin GS. Sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock: changes in incidence, pathogens and outcomes. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2012;10:701–6. doi: 10.1586/eri.12.50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Thomas ME, Blaine C, Dawnay A, et al. The definition of acute kidney injury and its use in practice. Kidney Int. 2015;87:62–73. doi: 10.1038/ki.2014.328. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Statistisches-Bundesamt. [Accessed on 5/07/2016]. Available at: www.gbe-bund.de. [In German.]
  • 19.Schwermann T, Grotz M, Blanke M, et al. [Evaluation of costs incurred for patients with multiple trauma particularly from the perspective of the hospital]. Unfallchirurg. 2004;107:563–74. doi: 10.1007/s00113-004-0778-y. [In German.] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Martin J, Neurohr C, Bauer M, et al. [Cost of intensive care in a German hospital: cost-unit accounting based on the InEK matrix]. Anaesthesist. 2008;57:505–12. doi: 10.1007/s00101-008-1353-7. [In German.] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.InEK-GmbH. DRG-Report-Browsers. [Accessed on 5/07/2016]. Available at: http://www.g-drg.de/Datenbrowser_und_Begleitforschung/Datenveroeffentlichung_gem._21_KHEntgG. [In German.]
  • 22.Ali ZA, Lim E, Motalleb-Zadeh R, et al. Allogenic blood transfusion does not predispose to infection after cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78:1542–6. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.05.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Bracey AW, Radovancevic R, Riggs SA, et al. Lowering the hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in coronary artery bypass procedures: effect on patient outcome. Transfusion. 1999;39:1070–7. doi: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1999.39101070.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Bursi F, Barbieri A, Politi L, et al. Perioperative red blood cell transfusion and outcome in stable patients after elective major vascular surgery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2009;37:311–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2008.12.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Carson JL, Terrin ML, Barton FB, et al. A pilot randomized trial comparing symptomatic vs. hemoglobin-level-driven red blood cell transfusions following hip fracture. Transfusion. 1998;38:522–9. doi: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1998.38698326331.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Chelemer SB, Prato BS, Cox PM, Jr, et al. Association of bacterial infection and red blood cell transfusion after coronary artery bypass surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;73:138–42. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(01)03308-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Croce MA, Tolley EA, Claridge JA, et al. Transfusions result in pulmonary morbidity and death after a moderate degree of injury. J Trauma. 2005;59:19–24. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000171459.21450.dc. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Ferraris VA, Davenport DL, Saha SP, et al. Intraoperative transfusion of small amounts of blood heralds worse postoperative outcome in patients having noncardiac thoracic operations. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91:1674–80. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.01.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Foss NB, Kristensen MT, Jensen PS, et al. The effects of liberal versus restrictive transfusion thresholds on ambulation after hip fracture surgery. Transfusion. 2009;49:227–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2008.01967.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Glance LG, Dick AW, Mukamel DB, et al. Association between intraoperative blood transfusion and mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Anesthesiology. 2011;114:283–92. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182054d06. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Horvath KA, Acker MA, Chang H, et al. Blood transfusion and infection after cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;95:2194–201. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.11.078. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Karkouti K, Wijeysundera DN, Yau TM, et al. Influence of erythrocyte transfusion on the risk of acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery differs in anemic and nonanemic patients. Anesthesiology. 2011;115:523–30. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318229a7e8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Khan UA, Coca SG, Hong K, et al. Blood transfusions are associated with urinary biomarkers of kidney injury in cardiac surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148:726–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.09.080. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Koch CG, Li L, Duncan AI, et al. Morbidity and mortality risk associated with red blood cell and blood-component transfusion in isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:1608–16. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000217920.48559.D8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Mariscalco G, Biancari F, Juvonen T, et al. Red blood cell transfusion is a determinant of neurological complications after cardiac surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2015;20:166–71. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivu360. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Mikkola R, Gunn J, Heikkinen J, et al. Use of blood products and risk of stroke after coronary artery bypass surgery. Blood Transfus. 2012;10:490–501. doi: 10.2450/2012.0119-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.O’Keeffe SD, Davenport DL, Minion DJ, et al. Blood transfusion is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after lower extremity revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 2010;51:616–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.10.045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Oz BS, Arslan G, Kaya E, et al. Comparison of results of autologous versus homologous blood transfusion in open-heart surgery. Cardiovasc J Afr. 2013;24:121–3. doi: 10.5830/CVJA-2013-020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Paone G, Likosky DS, Brewer R, et al. Transfusion of 1 and 2 units of red blood cells is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;97:87–93. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.07.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Rubinstein C, Davenport DL, Dunnagan R, et al. Intraoperative blood transfusion of one or two units of packed red blood cells is associated with a fivefold risk of stroke in patients undergoing elective carotid endarterectomy. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57:53s–7s. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.07.059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Isbister JP. Clinicians as gatekeepers: what is the best route to optimal blood use? Dev Biol (Basel) 2007;127:9–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Adrie C, Alberti C, Chaix-Couturier C, et al. Epidemiology and economic evaluation of severe sepsis in France: age, severity, infection site, and place of acquisition (community, hospital, or intensive care unit) as determinants of workload and cost. J Crit Care. 2005;20:46–58. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2004.10.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, et al. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:1303–10. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200107000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Anyanwu AC, Filsoufi F, Salzberg SP, et al. Epidemiology of stroke after cardiac surgery in the current era. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;134:1121–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.06.031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Bagshaw SM, George C, Bellomo R. A comparison of the RIFLE and AKIN criteria for acute kidney injury in critically ill patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008;23:1569–74. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfn009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Biteker M, Kayatas K, Turkmen FM, et al. Impact of perioperative acute ischemic stroke on the outcomes of noncardiac and nonvascular surgery: a single centre prospective study. Can J Surg. 2014;57:E55–61. doi: 10.1503/cjs.003913. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Botto F, Alonso-Coello P, Chan MT, et al. Myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery: a large, international, prospective cohort study establishing diagnostic criteria, characteristics, predictors, and 30-day outcomes. Anesthesiology. 2014;120:564–78. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Chen JC, Kaul P, Levy JH, et al. Myocardial infarction following coronary artery bypass graft surgery increases healthcare resource utilization. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:1296–301. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000262403.08546.A2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Devereaux PJ, Chan MT, Alonso-Coello P, et al. Association between postoperative troponin levels and 30-day mortality among patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. JAMA. 2012;307:2295–304. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.5502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Dovzhanskiy DI, Hackert T, Krumm J, et al. Clinical impact of perioperative myocardial infarction after pancreatic surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:929–34. doi: 10.1007/s11605-014-2453-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Engel C, Brunkhorst FM, Bone HG, et al. Epidemiology of sepsis in Germany: results from a national prospective multicenter study. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33:606–18. doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0517-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Ferrer R, Martin-Loeches I, Phillips G, et al. Empiric antibiotic treatment reduces mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock from the first hour: results from a guideline-based performance improvement program. Crit Care Med. 2014;42:1749–55. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Filsoufi F, Rahmanian PB, Castillo JG, et al. Incidence, topography, predictors and long-term survival after stroke in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:862–70. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.10.060. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Gupta N, Murugiah K, Gupta A, et al. Incidence, management patterns and outcomes of perioperative acute myocardial infarction following elective noncardiac surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:E201. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Haase M, Bellomo R, Matalanis G, et al. A comparison of the RIFLE and Acute Kidney Injury Network classifications for cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury: a prospective cohort study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;138:1370–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.07.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Hobson CE, Yavas S, Segal MS, et al. Acute kidney injury is associated with increased long-term mortality after cardiothoracic surgery. Circulation. 2009;119:2444–53. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.800011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Hortal J, Muñoz P, Cuerpo G, et al. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients undergoing major heart surgery: an incidence study in Europe. Crit Care. 2009;13:R80. doi: 10.1186/cc7896. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Hoste EA, Clermont G, Kersten A, et al. RIFLE criteria for acute kidney injury are associated with hospital mortality in critically ill patients: a cohort analysis. Crit Care. 2006;10:R73. doi: 10.1186/cc4915. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Joannidis M, Metnitz B, Bauer P, et al. Acute kidney injury in critically ill patients classified by AKIN versus RIFLE using the SAPS 3 database. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:1692–702. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1530-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Leal-Noval SR, Marquez-Vácaro JA, García-Curiel A, et al. Nosocomial pneumonia in patients undergoing heart surgery. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:935–40. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200004000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Li SL, Wang DX, Wu XM, et al. Perioperative acute myocardial infarction increases mortality following noncardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2013;27:1277–81. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2013.03.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Lisle TC, Barrett KM, Gazoni LM, et al. Timing of stroke after cardiopulmonary bypass determines mortality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:1556–62. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.02.035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Lopes JA, Fernandes P, Jorge S, et al. Acute kidney injury in intensive care unit patients: a comparison between the RIFLE and the Acute Kidney Injury Network classifications. Crit Care. 2008;12:R110. doi: 10.1186/cc6997. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Melsen WG, Rovers MM, Groenwold RH, et al. Attributable mortality of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised prevention studies. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013;13:665–71. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70081-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Nguile-Makao M, Zahar JR, Francais A, et al. Attributable mortality of ventilator-associated pneumonia: respective impact of main characteristics at ICU admission and VAP onset using conditional logistic regression and multi-state models. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36:781–9. doi: 10.1007/s00134-010-1824-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Ostermann M, Chang RW. Acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit according to RIFLE. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:1837–43. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000277041.13090.0A. quiz 1852. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Rothberg MB, Zilberberg MD, Pekow PS, et al. Association of guideline-based antimicrobial therapy and outcomes in healthcare-associated pneumonia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:1573–9. doi: 10.1093/jac/dku533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Safdar N, Dezfulian C, Collard HR, et al. Clinical and economic consequences of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review. Crit Care Med. 2005;33:2184–93. doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000181731.53912.d9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Salazar JD, Wityk RJ, Grega MA, et al. Stroke after cardiac surgery: short- and long-term outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:1195–201. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(01)02929-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Schmid A, Burchardi H, Clouth J, et al. Burden of illness imposed by severe sepsis in Germany. Eur J Health Econ. 2002;3:77–82. doi: 10.1007/s10198-002-0095-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Stevenson EK, Rubenstein AR, Radin GT, et al. Two decades of mortality trends among patients with severe sepsis: a comparative meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2014;42:625–31. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000026. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Thompson DA, Makary MA, Dorman T, et al. Clinical and economic outcomes of hospital acquired pneumonia in intra-abdominal surgery patients. Ann Surg. 2006;243:547–52. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000207097.38963.3b. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Meybohm P, Richards T, Isbister J, et al. Patient blood management bundles to facilitate implementation. Transfus Med Rev. 2017;31:62–71. doi: 10.1016/j.tmrv.2016.05.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ. 2011;342:d1548. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d1548. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Lasocki S, Krauspe R, von Heymann C, et al. PREPARE: the prevalence of perioperative anaemia and need for patient blood management in elective orthopaedic surgery: a multicentre, observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015;32:160–7. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Munoz M, Gomez-Ramirez S, Martin-Montanez E, et al. Cost of post-operative intravenous iron therapy in total lower limb arthroplasty: a retrospective, matched cohort study. Blood Transfus. 2014;12:40–9. doi: 10.2450/2013.0088-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Vigna-Taglianti F, Basso L, Rolfo P, et al. Tranexamic acid for reducing blood transfusions in arthroplasty interventions: a cost-effective practice. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014;24:545–51. doi: 10.1007/s00590-013-1225-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Leahy MF, Hofmann A, Towler S, et al. Improved outcomes and reduced costs associated with a health-system-wide patient blood management program: a retrospective observational study in four major adult tertiary-care hospitals. Transfusion. 2017;57:1347–58. doi: 10.1111/trf.14006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Goodnough LT, Shieh L, Hadhazy E, et al. Improved blood utilization using real-time clinical decision support. Transfusion. 2014;54:1358–65. doi: 10.1111/trf.12445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Weiss AJ, Elixhauser A. Overview of Hospital Stays in the United States. 2012. [Accessed on 07.11.2017]. Available at: https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb180-Hospitalizations-United-States-2012.pdf. [PubMed]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials


Articles from Blood Transfusion are provided here courtesy of SIMTI Servizi

RESOURCES