Do we really need to routinely crossmatch blood before primary total knee or hip arthroplasty?

Abstract

Background A maximum surgical blood ordering schedule may lead to wastage of valuable resources due to over-ordering of blood and/or under-utilisation. We audited the results of a group-and-save (GS) policy for primary hip (THR) and knee (TKR) arthroplasty to evaluate its safety and practicality.Patients and methods We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive patients attending for THR (177) or TKR (137) over a period of 8 months (phase 1). Following introduction of a limited GS policy, 205 THR and 147 TKR were reviewed prospectively over a correspondingperiod of 8 months (phase 2). Corresponding THR and TKR groups in each phase were comparable with respect to age, gender, length of stay, operating surgeon, pre- and lowest postoperative hemoglobin, reason for and timing of transfusion. Quantities (units) of blood requested pre- and postoperatively, transfused and returned to the blood bank, were recorded.Results 77 and 62% of all blood requested for THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 1 was not used. 58 and 21% of patients undergoing THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 2 underwent preoperative GS, with 92% and 100% of all blood requested being used for transfusion. Overall, the quantity of blood returned was reduced by 25% for the THR group. Transfusion rates fell by 9% and 5% for the TKR and THR groups, respectively. We found no adverse events associated with blood from a GS sample. Cost savings of 37 800 euros were calculated estimated for the study period (phase 2).Interpretation For routine primary THR/TKR, GS policy is a safe procedure. Reduction in non-utilisation of blood has economic and cost-saving implications for limited healthcare resources. Having subsequently introduced a group-and-save policy for all patients undergoing routine THR/TKR, considerable savings have been identified after only 2 months.