Citations

Introduction: There are discrepant definitions of both iron deficiency and anemia in pregnancy. It is recognized that iron requirements increase during pregnancy, particularly in the third trimester, and that deficiencies should be corrected to avoid adverse maternal-fetal outcomes. While low dose iron supplementation is recommended for all pregnant persons (ACOG Bulletin 233), dosing through prenatal vitamins varies widely. Additionally, despite the epidemic of iron deficiency in reproductive-age females globally and availability of high-value biomarkers (e.g., ferritin), current guidelines only recommend screening for iron deficiency during pregnancy in the presence of anemia. As anemia is the terminal manifestation of iron deficiency and reference ranges vary by organization, these guidelines and practices warrant further investigation and discussion. Methods: Retrospective review and analysis of the electronic health record at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) was performed for obstetric deliveries between June 2022 and May 2023. Iron deficiency was defined as a ferritin <50 mcg/L and anemia was defined as a hemoglobin <11 g/dL. Results: A total of 2,141 unique deliveries were identified. The median age at delivery was 31 years old (range: 15 - 45) with 82% identifying as white. Anemia was documented in 42% (n=904) of pregnancies at least once throughout gestation, with an increasing frequency of 2% (n=43) in the first trimester, 11% (n=230) in the second trimester, 17% (n=361) in the third trimester, and 38% (n=803) from admission for delivery through the peri-partum period. There were five documented pRBC transfusions prior to admission for delivery; however, from admission for delivery through the peri-partum period, there were a total of 102 documented pRBC transfusions. In total, 15% (n=318) of pregnancies were screened for iron deficiency through ferritin testing. Ferritin levels were measured 415 times with 23% (n=96) occurring between the last menstrual period and 12 weeks gestational age (WGA), 24% (n=100) occurring between 13-27 WGA, 40% (n=164) occurring between 28-40 WGA, and 13% (n=55) occurring post-partum. Iron deficiency was found in 70% (n=67), 79% (n=79), 80% (n=164), and 78% (n=43) of measured ferritin levels, respectively. Despite the paucity of screening, prescriptions for oral iron increased throughout gestation with supplementation in pregnancy for 8% (n=170) prior to 12 WGA, 14% (n=290) for those 13-27 WGA, and 23% (n=489) for those 28-40 WGA. Similarly, intravenous iron infusions increased throughout gestation with supplementation in pregnancy for 0.3% (n=7) prior to 12 WGA, 0.7% (n=16) for those 13-27 WGA, and 4% (n=95) for those 28-40 WGA. Prenatal vitamins were documented in over 90% of pregnancies throughout gestation, although the majority were non-prescription and contained variable amounts of elemental iron. Conclusions: Iron deficiency in pregnancy is underrecognized and undertreated. It follows that the accuracy of current reference ranges for anemia in pregnancy are suspect without rigorous verification of replete iron stores in the reference population. Given potential implications for blood product utilization and prenatal care, additional studies are warranted to better characterize iron deficiency in pregnancy as well as clinical sequelae for both mothers and infants. Simultaneously, discussions are needed around current guidelines and recommendations for both screening and treating iron deficiency in pregnancy. Providers, institutions, and professional societies should pursue pragmatic quality improvement initiatives and equitable healthcare delivery efforts to optimize care for this vulnerable patient population at high risk of iron deficiency.

Preoperative anemia is common and associated with worse outcomes in cardiac surgery including acute kidney injury, red blood cell transfusion, cardiovascular complications, stroke, infection, and death. Patient blood management programs, which include dedicated clinical programs to diagnose and treat anemia in advance of surgery (ie, preoperative anemia programs), have been highlighted as a means to optimize the blood health of each patient, thereby decreasing risk for allogeneic transfusion and improving clinical outcomes. However, there remain implementation challenges for preoperative anemia programs, including difficulties with education of patients and staff, short lead times to address anemia, infrastructure and staffing limitations, lack of clear leadership or ownership of preoperative anemia, the need to develop treatment algorithms and ensure appropriate infusion therapy support, lack of capital support, and insurance/reimbursement concerns, amongst others. The purpose of this advisory from the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists (SCA) Clinical Practice Improvement Committee and the Subcommittee on Patient Blood Management with endorsement from the Society for the Advancement of Patient Blood Management (SABM) is to provide guidance on the development and implementation of a preoperative anemia clinic or service line, including identification and navigation through potential logistical barriers. A detailed analysis of financial incentives is highlighted in our companion article in this edition focuses on the return on investment of anemia management. Although originating with a focus on anemia before cardiac surgery, this advisory is broadly applicable to all perioperative patients.

Despite multiple recent guidelines recommending the diagnosis and treatment of anemia before elective cardiac surgery, few institutions have formal programs or methods in place to accomplish this. A major limitation is the perceived financial shortfall and the leadership buy-in required to undertake such an initiative. The purpose of this advisory from the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists (SCA) Clinical Practice Improvement Committee with endorsement by the Society for the Advancement of Patient Blood Management (SABM) is to provide an overview of preoperative anemia management programs with an emphasis on the associated financial implications. This advisory reviews the evidence for preoperative anemia management programs in both cardiac and noncardiac surgery, discusses options for managing preoperative anemia, provides novel financial modeling regarding the implementation of preoperative anemia management programs, and describes implementation challenges, potential solutions, and opportunities for improvement.

BACKGROUND: Packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusions in patients undergoing surgery for cancer are given to treat anemia or acute hemorrhage. Evidence indicates that pRBC transfusions are associated with poor perioperative and oncological outcomes. The ARCA-1 (Perioperative Care in the Cancer Patient-1) study was designed to test the association between perioperative pRBC transfusions and postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing cancer surgery. The primary hypothesis of our study was that perioperative pRBC transfusions have a negative impact on postoperative morbidity and 1-year mortality. METHODS: ARCA-1 was an international multicenter prospective observational cohort study. Participating centers enrolled a minimum of 30 consecutive adult patients with cancer who underwent surgery with curative intent. The primary end point was all-cause mortality 1 year after major cancer surgery. Secondary end points were rates of perioperative blood product use, 1-year cancer-specific mortality, overall survival, and 30-day morbidity and mortality. We performed a propensity score matching analysis to adjust for selection bias. A multivariable logistic regression model was fitted to estimate the effects of significant covariates on 1-year mortality, cancer-related mortality, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 1079 patients were included in the study. The rate of perioperative pRBC transfusions was 21.1%. Preoperative comorbidities, including anemia, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of III to IV, a history of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), myocardial infarction, stroke, need for dialysis, history of blood transfusions, and metastatic disease were statistically significantly more frequent in transfused patients compared to nontransfused patients. The 1-year mortality rate was higher in transfused patients before (19.7% vs 6.5%; P < .0001) and after (17.4% vs 13.2%; P = .29) propensity score matching. 1-year mortality was 1.97 times higher in transfused than in no-transfused patients (odd ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13–3.41). The odds of 1-year cancer mortality for patients who had perioperative pRBCs was 1.82 times higher (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 0.97–3.43) compared to those who did not receive perioperative pRBC transfusion. The effect of perioperative pRBC transfusion on overall survival was also significant (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.15–2.99). Transfused patients also had a higher rate of 30-day postoperative mortality before (3.5% vs 0.7%; P = .0009) and after propensity score matching (4.2% vs 1.8%; P = .34). CONCLUSIONS: This international, multicenter observational study showed that perioperative pRBC transfusion was associated with an increased mortality risk.

AbstractBackgroundSome patients express concerns regarding receipt of allogeneic blood transfusions from donors potentially vaccinated against SARS‐CoV‐2 (COVID‐19). However, limited information exists about patients' expression of these concerns or how to address them during the blood transfusion consent process. In this study, we describe our experience of working collaboratively with patients with vaccine‐related transfusion concerns prior to elective surgery, summarizing treatment decisions and clinical outcomes.Study Design and MethodsThis observational descriptive study includes patients seen in our Bloodless Medicine and Surgery clinic between June 2022 and June 2024 for vaccine‐related transfusion concerns prior to elective surgery. A shared decision‐making framework was employed to foster conversation, share information, provide reassurance, reconcile conflict, and match preferences with available care options. Patient characteristics, treatment decisions, and surgical outcomes were reviewed and summarized.ResultsThirty‐five patients were included, with median (1st, 3rd quartile) age of 61 (53, 69) years. Cardiac surgery was the most common type of surgery (29%). Twelve patients (34%) were anemic preoperatively, and all received preoperative treatment. After discussion with a Bloodless Medicine specialist, 24 (68.6%) decided to consent to the use of all blood products, 5 (14.3%) accepted only red blood cells, and 6 (17.1%) declined all blood products. Among 28 patients undergoing surgery, only 4 (14%) received allogeneic transfusion perioperatively.ConclusionMany patients concerned about the vaccination status of blood donors may ultimately consent to allogeneic blood products after shared decision‐making with a Bloodless Medicine specialist, highlighting the importance of patient empowerment and collaborative care.

AbstractBackgroundEvaluations of critical bleeding and massive transfusion have focused on traumatic hemorrhage. However, most critical bleeding in hospitalized patients occurs outside trauma. The purpose of this study was to provide an in‐depth description examining the critical administration threshold (CAT; ≥3 units red blood cells (RBCs) in a 1‐h period) occurrences in nontraumatic hemorrhage. This will assist in establishing the framework for future investigations in nontraumatic hemorrhage.MethodsThis is an observational cohort study of adults experiencing critical bleeding defined as being CAT+ during hospitalization from 2016 to 2021 at a single academic institution. A CAT episode started with administration of the first qualifying RBC unit and ended at the time of completion of the last allogeneic unit prior to a ≥4‐h gap without subsequent transfusion. The primary goal was to describe demographic, clinical and transfusion characteristics of participants with nontraumatic critical bleeding.Results2433 patients suffered critical bleeding, most often occurring in the operating room (71.1%) followed by the intensive care unit (20.8%). 57% occurred on the initial day of hospitalization, with a median duration of 138 (36, 303) minutes. The median number of RBCs transfused during the episode was 5 (4, 8), with median total allogeneic units of 9 (4, 9). Hospital mortality was 19.2%. The most common cause of death was multi‐organ failure (50.3%), however death within 24 h was due to exsanguination (72.7%).DiscussionThe critical administration threshold may be employed to identify critical bleeding in non‐trauma settings of life‐threatening hemorrhage, with a mortality rate of approximately 20%.

Background: Hospitalization represents a major access point for prescription opioids, yet little is known regarding patterns and outcomes of opioid exposures before and after hospitalization for critical illness. Methods: This is an observational, population-based cohort study of adults (≥18 years) hospitalized for critical illness from 2010 to 2019. Multivariable models assess associations between opioid exposures prior to hospitalization, classified according to the Consortium to Study Opioid Risks and Trends, and posthospitalization opioid exposures and clinical outcomes through 1-year posthospitalization. Results: Of 11 496 patients, 6318 (55%) were men with a median age of 66 (51, 79) years and 40% (n = 4623) surgical admissions. Prehospitalization opioid availability included 8449 (73%) none, 2117 (18%) short-term, 471 (4%) episodic, and 459 (4%) long-term. Thirty-nine percent (4144/10 708) of hospital survivors were discharged with opioids, with higher prescribing rates for surgical admissions (55%). Greater preadmission opioid exposures were associated with higher prevalent opioid availability at 1 year (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 24.1 [18.3-31.8], 9.42 [7.18-12.3], and 2.55 [2.08-3.12] for long-term, episodic, and short-term exposures, respectively, vs none, P < .001). Greater preadmission opioid exposures were associated with longer hospitalizations (1.13 [1.04-1.23], 1.15 [1.06-1.25], and 1.08 [1.04-1.13] multiplicative increase in geometric mean, P < .001), more readmissions (hazard ratio [HR] 2.08 [1.74-2.49], 1.88 [1.56-2.26], and 1.48 [1.33-1.64], P < .001), and higher 1-year mortality (HR 1.59 [1.28-1.98], 1.75 [1.41-2.18], and 1.49 [1.32-1.69], P < .001). Similar associations were observed across surgical and nonsurgical admissions. Conclusions: Prehospitalization opioid exposures in survivors of critical illness are associated with clinical outcomes through 1 year and may serve as important prognostic markers.

Patients with cirrhosis have abnormal coagulation indices such as a high international normalized ratio and low platelet count, but these do not correlate well with periprocedural bleeding risk. We sought to develop a consensus among the multiple stakeholders in cirrhosis care to inform process measures that can help improve the quality of the periprocedural management of coagulopathy in cirrhosis. We identified candidate process measures for periprocedural coagulopathy management in multiple contexts relating to the performance of paracentesis and upper endoscopy. An 11-member panel with content expertise was convened. It included nominees from professional societies for interventional radiology, transfusion medicine, and anesthesia as well as representatives from hematology, emergency medicine, transplant surgery, and community practice. Each measure was evaluated for agreement using a modified Delphi approach (3 rounds of rating) to define the final set of measures. Out of 286 possible measures, 33 measures made the final set. International normalized ratio testing was not required for diagnostic or therapeutic paracentesis as well as diagnostic endoscopy. Plasma transfusion should be avoided for all paracenteses and diagnostic endoscopy. No consensus was achieved for these items in therapeutic intent or emergent endoscopy. The risks of prophylactic platelet transfusions exceed their benefits for outpatient diagnostic paracentesis and diagnostic endosopies. For the other procedures examined, the risks outweigh benefits when platelet count is >20,000/mm 3 . It is uncertain whether risks outweigh benefits below 20,000/mm 3 in other contexts. No consensus was achieved on whether it was permissible to continue or stop systemic anticoagulation. Continuous aspirin was permissible for each procedure. Clopidogrel was permissible for diagnostic and therapeutic paracentesis and diagnostic endoscopy. We found many areas of consensus that may serve as a foundation for a common set of practice metrics for the periprocedural management of coagulopathy in cirrhosis.