|
The Cochrane Collaboration
Cochrane Reviews |
| Explore | New + Updated | Other languages |
|
|
|
Platelet-rich-plasmapheresis for minimising peri-operative allogeneic blood transfusionCarless PA, Rubens FD, Anthony DM, O'Connell D, Henry DA SummaryPlatelet-rich plasmapheresis (PRP) has less proven benefits than some other technologies designed to reduce the need for donor bloodPlatelet-rich plasmapheresis is a technique that involves a patient’s own blood (autologous whole blood) being withdrawn via an intravenous catheter into a device that separates the blood by centrifugation into red blood cells (RBC), plasma, and a highly concentrated platelet solution. This concentrated autologous platelet solution is returned to the patient at the end of the operation to optimise blood clotting and minimise bleeding. The review of trials found that while PRP can reduce post-operative blood loss and the need for blood transfusion, other techniques may be more effective.
This is a Cochrane review abstract and plain language summary, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration, currently published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010 Issue 1, Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X).
This version first published online:
April 22. 2003 AbstractBackgroundConcerns regarding the safety of transfused blood have generated considerable enthusiasm for the use of technologies intended to reduce the use of allogeneic blood (blood from an unrelated donor). Platelet-rich plasmapheresis (PRP) offers an alternative approach to blood conservation. ObjectivesTo examine the evidence for the efficacy of PRP in reducing peri-operative allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and the evidence for any effect on clinical outcomes such as mortality and re-operation rates. Search strategyWe identified studies by searching MEDLINE (1950 to 2009), EMBASE (1980 to 2009), The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2009), the Internet (to March 2009) and the reference lists of published articles, reports, and reviews. Selection criteriaControlled parallel group trials in which adult patients, scheduled for non-urgent surgery, were randomised to PRP, or to a control group which did not receive the intervention. Data collection and analysisPrimary outcomes measured were: the number of patients exposed to allogeneic RBC transfusion, and the amount of RBC transfused. Other outcomes measured were: the number of patients exposed to allogeneic platelet transfusions, fresh frozen plasma, and cryoprecipitate, blood loss, re-operation for bleeding, post-operative complications (thrombosis), mortality, and length of hospital stay. Treatment effects were pooled using a random-effects model. Trial quality was assessed using criteria proposed by Schulz et al (Schulz 1995). Main resultsTwenty-two trials of PRP were identified that reported data for the number of patients exposed to allogeneic RBC transfusion. These trials evaluated a total of 1589 patients. The relative risk (RR) of exposure to allogeneic blood transfusion in those patients randomised to PRP was 0.73 (95%CI 0.59 to 0.90), equating to a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 27% and a risk difference (RD) of 19% (95%CI 10% to 29%). However, significant heterogeneity of treatment effect was observed (p < 0.00001; I² = 79%). On average, PRP did not significantly reduce the total volume of RBC transfused (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.69, 95%CI -1.93 to 0.56 units). Trials provided inadequate data regarding the impact of PRP on morbidity, mortality, and hospital length of stay. Trials were generally small and of poor methodological quality. Authors' conclusionsAlthough the results suggest that PRP is effective in reducing allogeneic RBC transfusion in adult patients undergoing elective surgery, there was considerable heterogeneity of treatment effects and the trials were of poor methodological quality. The available studies provided inadequate data for firm conclusions to be drawn regarding the impact of PRP on clinically important endpoints. |