Is autologous blood transfusion drainage necessary after total knee arthroplasty：a meta-analysis
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2016.09.018
- VernacularTitle:全膝关节置换后应用自体血回输器是否必要：一项Meta分析
- Author:
Minghui LUO
;
Kunhao HONG
;
Jianke PAN
;
Jun LIU
;
Weiyi YANG
;
Da GUO
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2016;20(9):1336-1344
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty is a procedure for treatment of knee osteoarthritisa with standardized, mature technology and affirmative efficacy. Total knee arthroplasty can result in overt excessive bleeding, decreased hemoglobin levels, patient mouth infection and other complications. As a new technology, autologous blood transfusion device can effectively reduce the rate of blood transfusion through reinfusing the unwashed and filterable drainage blood after operation. Up to now, no systematic reviews incorporating meta-analyses have found directly sufficient evidence to compare autologous blood transfusion drainage and no drainage after primary total knee arthroplasty. OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical efficacy, safety and potential advantages of the application of autologous blood transfusion device/no drainage based on the meta-analysis. METHODS:PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CBMdisc, China HowNet, VIP, Wanfang database were searched comprehensively by computer. The search strategies were developed by the way of MeSH terms combining with free words: “total knee replacement” OR “total knee arthroplasty” OR “total knee prosthesis” OR “unicompartmental” OR “unicondylar” OR “unicompartmenta” OR “arthroplasty, replacement, knee” [MeSH terms] AND “autologous blood transfusion” OR “Autotransfusion” OR “blood transfusion, autologous” [MeSH Terms] OR “Intraoperative Blood Salvage” OR “Intraoperative Blood” OR “Postoperative Blood Salvage” OR “Intraoperative Blood Cel Salvage” OR “Operative Blood Salvage” [MeSH Terms]. Data included in the final literature were analyzed using RevMan 5.3.5 software recommended by Cochrane. The main outcome measure was the rate of transfusion. The secondary outcome measures were the average change in hemoglobin, hemoglobin levels at the 3rd day, hospitalization time and intraoperative mouth infection rate. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:Five randomized controlled trials, a total of 667 patients were enroled. Meta-analysis results showed that there were no significant differences in the transfusion rate (OR=0.73, 95%CI: 0.47-1.13;Z=1.41,P=0.16), average change in hemoglobin (WMD=0.20, 95%CI:-0.28-0.68;Z=0.82,P=0.41), the hemoglobin levels at the 3rdday (WMD=0.41, 95%CI:-0.26-1.09;Z=1.20,P=0.23), hospitalization time (OR=1.01, 95%CI: 0.06-16.27;Z= 0.01,P=1.00), intraoperative mouth infection rate (OR=1.01, 95%CI: 0.06-16.27;Z=0.01,P=1.00) between the postoperative use of autologous blood transfusion and no drainage. These results suggest that the meta-analysis of outcome measures has not provided the evidence-based medical support for the clinical efficacy of autologous blood transfusion device (including blood transfusion rate, the average change in hemoglobin, average hemoglobin change at the 3rd day, hospitalization time). Given the inherent limitations of the quality of the included studies and the publication bias, future high-quality, large-volume, multi-center randomized controled trials are awaited to confirm and update the findings of this analysis.
