Efficacy and Safety of Erythropoietin and Intravenous Iron in Perioperative Blood Management: A Systematic Review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmrv.2013.09.001Get rights and content

Abstract

The use of erythropoietin (EPO) and intravenous (IV) iron as bloodless therapeutic modalities is being explored in the current era of restrictive transfusion strategies and perioperative blood management. It is unclear, however, whether the evidence in the literature supports their safety and efficacy in reducing perioperative red cell transfusions. Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate their use in a variety of perioperative settings. We performed a literature search of English articles published between July 1997 and July 2012 in MEDLINE via PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Only studies with a comparator group were eligible for inclusion. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 15 nonrandomized studies were included in the final review. Using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, 8 RCTs were assessed to be at low risk for methodological bias. Of these, however, only 4 RCTs were adequately powered to detect a reduction in transfusion rates. Patients with preoperative iron deficiency anemia may have an earlier and more robust hemoglobin recovery with preoperative IV iron therapy than with oral iron supplementation. A short preoperative regimen of EPO, or a single dose of EPO plus IV iron in the preoperative or intraoperative period, may significantly reduce transfusion rates (number needed to treat to avoid any transfusion ranged from 3 to 6). With regard to the safety of erythropoietin-stimulating agent therapy, IV iron appears to be as well tolerated as oral iron; however, the incidence of severe anaphylactic-type reactions attributable to IV iron is difficult to estimate in prospective trials because of its relatively infrequent occurrence. Furthermore, EPO may increase the risk of thromboembolism in spinal surgery patients who receive mechanical antithrombotic prophylaxis in the perioperative period so pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is advised. Future low risk of bias, adequately powered prospective efficacy, and safety trials in various surgical settings that traditionally require red cell transfusions would be required to make evidenced-based conclusions about the clinical significance of erythropoietin-stimulating agent as a transfusion avoidance strategy in perioperative blood management.

Section snippets

Protocol Registration and Eligibility Criteria

We carefully adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines throughout the entire process of writing this systematic review and registered a protocol online in advance (PROSPERO 2012:CRD42012002599). The PICOS approach was used to define the criteria for inclusion (Table 1). Any disagreements between review authors (DL and MT) in the process of study selection and appraisal were resolved by discussion.

Search Strategy and Information Sources

We conducted a systematic literature search of

Study Selection and Characteristics

The study selection process is depicted in Fig. Most identified records were easily excluded by the title or abstract alone. After this initial screening, records that potentially fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected for full-text review. Thirty-nine articles were eligible for inclusion, of which 8 studies were identified through manual search of references. In the end, 24 RCTs and 15 nonrandomized studies with a comparator group were included in the final review. In Table 3A, Table 3B

Discussion

The strength of this systematic review lies in our careful adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis, including a rigorous appraisal process using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. This systematic review is limited by a search strategy restricted to English publications and exclusion criteria for autologous blood donation, children, and pregnant women. Most included studies were assessed to be at least at moderate risk of bias; therefore, the following

Conclusion

In recent years, an effort to reduce perioperative RBC transfusions has led to a growing number of trials studying EPO and IV iron as a bloodless therapeutic modality [3]. Perioperative blood management strategies might benefit from targeting the underlying pathophysiology of functional iron deficiency by choosing pharmacological therapies that would enhance the marrow's erythropoietic drive, particularly in cases of preoperative iron deficiency anemia. Taken together, the 8 low risk of bias

References (24)

  • L.T. Goodnough

    Iron deficiency syndromes and iron-restricted erythropoiesis

    Transfusion

    (2012)
  • Cited by (86)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Conflict of interest statement: This study was performed without external funding.

    View full text