MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417014835 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-4921

Perioperative anemia and transfusion thresholds in vascular surgery procedures – a systematic review

2025· article· en· W4417014835 sur OpenAlexaff
Alexander Xiang, Allen Li, Ali Eshaghpour, Riley Dow, Yasmin Meghdadi, David Gou, Jeremy Steen, Mark Crowther

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBlood transfusion and management
Établissements canadiensHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPerioperativeVascular surgeryAnemiaBlood managementPopulationAdverse effectBlood transfusionRandomized controlled trialCohort

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Anemia is a common condition, with an estimated 1.92 billion cases, or 24.3% of the worldwide population as of 2021, and has been shown to be a predictor of adverse surgical outcomes in a range of patient populations and procedures. Anemia is often treated with blood transfusions perioperatively, but potential benefits must be balanced against risks associated with transfusion including but not limited to cost, lack of availability, infectious complications and transfusion reactions. High quality studies in many populations have demonstrated noninferior outcomes in patients transfused with a restrictive threshold (hemoglobin (Hb) level < 7-8g/dL), but these results many not be applicable to vascular surgery patients. These patients tend to have a high rate of severe underlying cardiovascular disease and oftentimes present with critical limb ischemia which may be particularly sensitive to the tissue hypoxia potentially associated with lower hemoglobin thresholds. Objective We performed a systematic review and qualitative analysis to determine the relative risks and benefits of a restrictive (target Hb < 7-8g/dL) versus liberal (target Hb 9-10g/dL or higher) transfusion threshold in patients undergoing major vascular surgical procedures. Methods We searched Ovid Medline, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and the reference lists of eligible publications for relevant studies published from inception until July 25th, 2025. Studies were screened at abstract and full-text level independently and in duplicate. Any cohort study or randomized controlled trial (RCT) examining either restrictive or liberal transfusion strategies in patients undergoing major vascular procedures were included. Baseline characteristics, surgical procedure details, and transfusion strategies were extracted. Efficacy outcomes included major cardiovascular adverse events (MACEs), surgical complications, mortality, and major ischemic events. Secondary outcomes included documented transfusion reactions as defined by primary authors. Results A total of 4343 studies were identified in our initial search strategy, of which 50 had their full texts reviewed for eligibility. 12 eligible studies were included with a total of 29,707 patients. The most common study type was retrospective cohort (n = 7), followed by RCTs (n = 3) and prospective cohort studies (n = 2). The most common procedures included endovascular or open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (n = 8), infrainguinal bypass (n = 6), and lower limb amputations (n = 5). Included studies had variable definitions for restrictive transfusion threshold ranging from 7-9 g/dL. Efficacy and safety outcomes were largely dependent on procedure type. Studies which included major, high-risk vascular procedures such as open AAA repair and lower limb amputation trended towards higher rates of mortality, procedural complications, and MACE in the restrictive transfusion groups, though these findings were of variable statistical significance. Studies examining lower-risk procedures including infrainguinal bypass, carotid endarterectomy, and endovascular aneurysm repair had variable results. Multiple studies, including one RCT and two cohort studies noted lower rates of MACE and 30-day mortality in patients transfused with a restrictive strategy, albeit with similarly variable levels of statistical significance. Two other cohort studies in this group noted no differences in patient outcomes with a restrictive strategy. Lastly, pRBCs were noted to be transfused at a higher rate in the liberal group across the included studies, though there was insufficient data on the rates of transfusion reactions between the two strategies. Meta-analysis of the data could not be performed due to significant heterogeneity in the design of the included studies. Conclusions Overall, studies examining higher-risk procedure such as open AAA repairs and lower limb amputations noted trend towards lower MACE, surgical complications, and mortality in patients receiving a liberal transfusion threshold (Hb > 9g/dL). In lower-risk vascular surgical procedures, MACE, surgical complications, and mortality appeared non inferior or superior with a restrictive transfusion threshold. Large randomized trials examining a variety of vascular surgery procedures with standardized hemoglobin thresholds are necessary to establish more conclusive benefits or harms of a restrictive or liberal transfusion strategy in patients undergoing vascular surgery.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,030

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,034
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0070,007
Bibliométrie0,0080,008
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,250
Écart entre enseignants0,241 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetBlood transfusion and management→Travaux en français237 207→