Main SCVS Site
Annual Meeting Home
Final Program
Past & Future Meetings
 

Back to Karmody Posters


“Type & Screen” for CEA is rarely needed: Development of a risk prediction model using the NSQIP database and demonstration of significant cost-saving potential
Lars Stangenberg, MD PhD, Thomas Curran, MD, Feroze Mahmood, MD, Dominique Buck, MD, Jack McCallum, MD, Jeremy Darling, Marc L. Schermerhorn, MD.
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

OBJECTIVES:
Preoperative testing for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) often includes blood typing and antibody screen (T&S). In our institutional experience, however, transfusion for CEA is rare. We assessed transfusion rate and risk factors in a national clinical database to identify a cohort of patients in whom T&S can be avoided with the potential for substantial cost savings.
METHODS:
Using the NSQIP database, transfusion events and timing were established for all elective CEAs in 2012. Comorbidities and other characteristics were compared for patients receiving intra- or postoperative transfusion and those that did not using two-tailed t-test or Fisher’s exact test. Using one half of the data set, a point-based risk prediction model that was then validated on the other half.
RESULTS:
Of 7601 patients undergoing CEA in 2012, 139 received at least one transfusion prior to discharge (1.8%). 80% of transfusions occurred on POD#0 or #1. Hematocrit 1.2 [OR: 3.0; 95%CI: 1.7-5.1], female sex [OR: 1.8; 95%CI: 1.1-3.1] and preoperative open wound [OR: 5.0; 95%CI: 1.6-16.3] among other risk factors predicted transfusion.
Score was calculated with 1 point for female gender, preoperative dyspnea, preoperative coagulopathy and BMI 1.2 and 8 points for hematocrit <30. A risk prediction model based on these data produced a C-statistic of 0.84. Application of this model to the validation set demonstrated a C-statistic of 0.76. 77% of patients in the validation set received a score of 2 or less corresponding to a transfusion risk of 1.1%. Omitting a T&S in these patients would generate a potential annual cost-saving to NSQIP hospitals of over ,000,000 based on our institutional charge.
CONCLUSIONS:
While T&S is commonly performed for patients undergoing CEA, transfusion following CEA is rare and well predicted by a transfusion risk score. Avoidance of T&S in this low-risk population provides a substantial cost-saving opportunity without compromise of patient care.


Back to Karmody Posters
 
© 2024 Society for Clinical Vascular Surgery . All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy.