Table 28Post-operative cell salvage versus standard treatment

OutcomesNo. of Participants
(studies)
Follow up
Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)
Relative effect
(95% CI)
Anticipated absolute effects
Risk with standard treatmentRisk difference with post-operative cell salvage
(95% CI)
No. exposed to allogeneic blood262
(4 studies)
VERY LOWa,b
due to risk of bias, imprecision
RR 0.6
(0.45 to 0.81)
Study population
390 per 1000156 fewer per 1000
(from 74 fewer to 214 fewer)
Units of allogeneic blood transfused60
(1 study)
VERY LOWa,b
due to risk of bias, imprecision
The mean units of allogeneic blood transfused in the intervention groups was 1.02 lower
(1.19 to 0.85 lower)
Mortality at up to 30 days50
(1 study)
VERY LOWa,c
due to risk of bias, imprecision
RR 3
(0.13 to 70.3)
Study population
0 per 1000-
Any infection90
(1 study)
VERY LOWa,b
due to risk of bias, imprecision
RR 0.15
(0.02 to 1.15)
Study population
163 per 1000139 fewer per 1000
(from 160 fewer to 24 more)
Hospital length of stay90
(1 study)
LOWa
due to risk of bias
The mean hospital length of stay in the intervention groups was 7.13 lower
(9.12 to 5.14 lower)
a

The majority of the evidence was at very high risk of bias.

b

The confidence interval crosses one MID.

c

The confidence interval crosses both MIDs.

From: 6, Alternatives to blood transfusion for patients having surgery: Cell salvage and tranexamic acid

Cover of Blood Transfusion
Blood Transfusion.
NICE Guideline, No. 24.
National Clinical Guideline Centre (UK).
Copyright © 2015 National Clinical Guideline Centre.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.