Cost-effectiveness of cell salvage and alternative methods of minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion: a systematic review and economic model

Davies L, Brown T J, Haynes S, Payne K, Elliott R A, McCollum C
Record ID 32006001106
English
Authors' objectives:

The aim of this review is to compare patient outcomes, resource use and costs to the NHS and NHS Blood Transfusion Authority (BTA) associated with cell salvage and alternative methods of minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion.

Authors' results and conclusions: Overall, 668 studies were identified electronically for the update of the two systematic reviews. This included five RCTs, of which two were cell salvage and three preoperative autologous donation (PAD). Five published systematic reviews were identified for antifibrinolytics, fibrin sealants and restrictive transfusion triggers, PAD plus erythropoietin, erythropoietin alone and acute normovolaemichaemodilution (ANH). Twelve published studies reported full economic evaluations. All but two of the transfusion strategies significantly reduced exposure to allogeneic blood. The relative risk of exposure to allogeneic blood was 0.59 for the pooled trials of cell salvage (95% confidence interval: 0.48 to 0.73). This varied by the type and timing of cell salvage and type of surgical procedure. For cell salvage, the relative risk of allogeneic blood transfusion was higher in cardiac surgery than in orthopaedic surgery. Cell salvage had lower costs and slightly higher quality-adjusted life years compared with all of the alternative transfusion strategies except ANH. The likelihood that cell salvage is cost-effective compared with strategies other than ANH is over 50%. Most of the secondary analyses indicated similar results to the primary analysis. However, the primary and secondary analyses indicated that ANH may be more cost-effective than cell salvage.
Authors' recommendations: The available evidence indicates that cell salvage may be a cost-effective method to reduce exposure to allogeneic blood transfusion. However, ANH may be more cost-effective than cell salvage. The results of this analysis are subject to the low quality and reliability of the data used and the use of indirect comparisons. This may affect the reliability and robustness of the clinical and economic results. There is a need for further research that includes adequately powered high-quality RCTs to compare directly various blood transfusion strategies. These should include measures of health status, health-related quality of life and patient preferences for alternative transfusion strategies. Observational and tracking studies are needed to estimate reliably the incidence of adverse events and infections transmitted during blood transfusion and to identify the lifetime consequences of the serious hazards of transfusion on mortality, health status and health-related quality of life.
Authors' methods: Systematic review
Details
Project Status: Completed
URL for project: http://www.hta.ac.uk/1369
Year Published: 2006
English language abstract: An English language summary is available
Publication Type: Not Assigned
Country: England, United Kingdom
MeSH Terms
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Costs and Cost Analysis
  • Intraoperative Period
  • Salvage Therapy
  • Blood Loss, Surgical
  • Blood Transfusion, Autologous
  • Hemostatics
  • Perioperative Care
  • Transplantation, Autologous
Contact
Organisation Name: NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
Contact Address: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK
Contact Name: journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
Contact Email: journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
Copyright: 2009 Queen's Printer and Controller of HMSO
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.