nach oben

World Journal of Surgical Oncology

Erschienen in:

Open Access 01.12.2019 | Research

Perioperative transfusion and the prognosis of colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Qian-Yun Pang, Ran An, Hong-Liang Liu

Erschienen in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 1/2019

Abstract

Background

Perioperative transfusion can reduce the survival rate in colorectal cancer patients. The effects of transfusion on the short- and long-term prognoses are becoming intriguing.

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to define the effects of perioperative transfusion on the short- and long-term prognoses of colorectal cancer surgery.

Results

Thirty-six clinical observational studies, with a total of 174,036 patients, were included. Perioperative transfusion decreased overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio (HR), 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.24 to 0.41; P < 0.0001) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.47; P < 0.0001), but had no effect on disease-free survival (DFS) (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, − 0.12 to 0.47; P = 0.248). Transfusion could increase postoperative infectious complications (RR, 1.89, 95% CI, 1.56 to 2.28; P < 0.0001), pulmonary complications (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.54 to 2.63; P < 0.0001), cardiac complications (RR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.75 to 2.76; P < 0.0001), anastomotic complications (RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.79; P < 0.0001), reoperation(RR, 2.88; 95% CI, 2.05 to 4.05; P < 0.0001), and general complications (RR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.66 to 2.07; P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Perioperative transfusion causes a dramatically negative effect on long-term prognosis and increases short-term complications after colorectal cancer surgery.

CSS

Cancer-specific survival

DFS

Disease-free survival

Overall survival

Introduction

Patients with colorectal cancer often have accompanying anaemia or perioperative bleeding. Allogeneic transfusion becomes necessary in these cases. Some studies have found that perioperative transfusion could suppress the immune function and increase the recurrence and metastasis [1, 2], but others have not [3, 4]. One recent meta-analysis showed that perioperative transfusion could decrease the survival rate and increase the incidence rates of cancer recurrence and metastasis in colorectal cancer patients [5], but in that meta-analysis, low-quality studies were included, odds ratios (ORs) were used to extract the survival data, which was not appropriate, and the effects of censored data on the results were ignored. Until now, the effects of perioperative transfusion on the short- and long-term prognoses of the patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer are becoming increasingly intriguing. The effects of the volume and trigger of transfusion on the prognosis are unclear. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address these issues and attempted to define the relationships between perioperative transfusion and short- or long-term prognosis in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

Methods

We conducted our systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the methods recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. There was no registered protocol.

Literature search

The PubMed, Cochrane library, and Embase databases (from January 1990 to June 2018) were searched. The reference lists of the research studies and previous meta-analysis articles were also checked to find any further eligible trials.

The key words for the electronic search strategy included intestinal, intestine, bowel, colonic, colon, rectal, rectum, colorectal, cancer, tumour, carcinoma, neoplasm, transfusion, and blood transfusion. The citations to be searched were restricted to clinical studies and were published in English, the participants of our study were patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer, and the intervening measure was perioperative allogeneic transfusion. The exclusion criteria were comparison between allogeneic and autogenous transfusion or comparison between autogenous transfusion and no transfusion.

Outcome parameters and data collection

The primary outcome of interest was overall survival (OS), while the secondary outcomes included disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and postoperative complications. OS was defined as the time from surgery to death from any cause. DFS was defined as the time from surgery to a recurrence or death from any cause. CSS was defined as the time from surgery to death from cancer recurrence or metastasis. Data were extracted and collected by two authors independently, and disagreements were resolved by discussion and consensus among all authors.

Quality assessment

The quality of publications was judged by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS); a quality review of the data obtained from each study was performed on the basis of case selection, comparability, and outcome reporting. The highest score was 9 stars; a study with an NOS score greater than or equal to 7 stars was defined as a high-quality study, and if the NOS score was less than 7 stars, the study was excluded.

Statistical analysis

Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 12.0 software (StataCorp LP, US). The hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for OS, DFS, and CSS, and the risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated for postoperative complications. The HRs were extracted from the multivariable analysis when both univariable and multivariable analyses were available, and Engauge Digitizer 4.1 and Adobe Photoshop software were used for the extraction of HR [6]. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the chi-square test and I² statistics; I² ≥ 50% (P ≤ 0.1) indicated significant heterogeneity, and the random-effects model was used, and the fixed-effects model was used when I² < 50% (P > 0.1) [7]. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the source and size of heterogeneity among studies when necessary. Publication bias was evaluated by the Egger test, and P ≥ 0.05 represented no statistical significance in publication bias.

Results

Literature search and characteristics of eligible trials

We identified 5687 potential articles: 3749 articles from PubMed, 864 articles from Cochrane library, 1036 articles from Embase, and 38 articles from other sources. Sixty relevant articles were left after initial screening and reading the titles or abstracts, and 36 clinical observational studies with a total of 174,036 patients were ultimately included [1‐4, 8‐39]. The details of the screening process are presented in Fig. 1. These 36 studies were conducted in different countries and were published from 1990 to 2018. The characteristics and the qualities of these studies are presented in Table 1.

Table 1

Characteristics of the trials

ID	Country	Tumour type	Sample size			Transfusion trigger	Type of blood products	Outcomes	NOS (stars)
ID	Country	Tumour type	BT+	BT−	Total	Transfusion trigger	Type of blood products	Outcomes	NOS (stars)
1 Tarantino I 2013 [1]	Switzerland	Colonic	148	161	309	–	–	OS	7
2 Gunka I 2013 [2]	Czech	Colorectal	132	451	583	–	–	OS	7
3 Amri R 2017 [3]	USA	Colonic	305	1118	1423	–	–	OS, CSS	8
4 Morner MEM 2016 [4]	Sweden	Colorectal	199	297	496	–	–	OS	8
5 Qiu L 2015 [8]	China	Colorectal	803	601	1404	Hb < 6 g/dL, Hb 6–10 g/dL according to cardiopulmonary function	–	OS, postoperative complications	7
6 Miki C 2006 [9]	Japan	Colorectal	35	82	117	–	–	OS, postoperative complications	8
7 Meng J 2013 [10]	China	Colonic	259	211	470	Hb < 8 g/dL	–	OS, postoperative complications	7
8 Talukder Y 2014 [11]	Australia	Colorectal	423	947	1370	–	–	OS, DFS, CSS, postoperative complications	8
9 Due SL 2012 [12]	Australia	Colorectal	151	654	805	–	–	CSS, postoperative complications	7
10 Jagoditsch M 2006 [13]	Australia	Rectal	471	126	597	Preoperative Hb < 8 g/dL, intraoperative bleeding > 500 mL or Hb < 10 g/dL	–	OS, DFS, postoperative complications	7
11 Lobaziewicz W 2008 [14]	Poland	Colorectal	122	135	257	Intraoperative bleeding > 1000 mL or Hct < 30%	RBC	OS, CSS, DFS	8
12 Kaneko M 2015 [15]	Japan	Colorectal	23	85	108	–	Allogeneic red blood cell	OS	8
13 Nursal TZ 2006 [16]	Turkey	Colorectal	61	272	333	–	Whole blood or RBC	OS	7
14 Li XX 2015 [17]	China	Colonic	614	461	1075	Hb < 6 g/dL, Hb 6–10 g/dL according to cardiopulmonary function	–	OS, postoperative complications	7
15 Halabi WJ 2013 [18]	USA	Colorectal	3815	23,305	27,120	–	RBC	OS, postoperative complications	8
16 Warschkow R 2014 [19]	Switzerland	Rectal	217	184	401	–	Prestored allogeneic blood	OS, DFS	7
17 Koch M 2011 [20]	Germany	Colorectal	135	396	531	Hb 8–10 g/dL according to cardiopulmonary function	–	Postoperative complications	7
18 Ghinea R 2013 [21]	Italy	Colorectal	68	133	201	–	–	OS, DFS, postoperative complications	7
19 Skanberg J 2007 [22]	Sweden	Colorectal	298	344	642	–	LDB or RBC	OS	8
20 Mynster T 2000 [23]	Denmark	Colorectal	288	452	770	–	SAGM and/or FFP	Postoperative complications	8
21 Patel SV 2017 [24]	Canada	Colonic	2009	5189	7198	–	–	OS, CSS	9
22 van de Watering LMG2001 [25]	Netherlands	Colorectal	446	251	697	–	LDB or RBC	OS	7
23 Papageorge CM 2016 [26]	England	Colorectal	2073	58,712	72,011	–	Whole blood or RBC	Postoperative complications	7
24 Benoist S 2001 [27]	France	Rectal	72	140	212	Hb < 8 g/dL	–	Postoperative complications	7
25 Jensen LS 2005 [28]	Denmark	Colorectal	249	320	569	–	LDB or RBC	OS, postoperative complications	9
26 Mynster T 2001 [29]	Denmark	Colorectal	452	288	740	–	SAGM and/or FFP	OS	7
27 Aquina CT 2016 [30]	USA	Colorectal	6927	17,303	24,230	–	–	OS, CSS, postoperative complications	8
28 Mazzeffi M 2017 [31]	USA	Colonic	1845	23,388	24,733	–	RBC	Postoperative complications	8
29 Van Osdol AD 2015 [32]	USA	Colorectal	110	365	475	Postoperative Hb < 7 g/dL, preoperative Hb < 8.4 g/dL	–	OS, DFS, postoperative complications	7
30 Sánchez-Velázquez P 2018 [33]	Spain	Colonic			363	–	–	DFS, CSS	8
31 Molland G 1995 [34]	Australia	Colorectal	223	210	433	–	All kinds of blood products	OS	8
32 Cheslyn-Curtis S 1990 [35]	UK	Colorectal	591	370	961	–	–	OS	7
33 Donohue JH 1995 [36]	USA	Colorectal	446	605	1051	–	Whole blood or RBC or plasma	OS	8
34 Tartter PI 1992 [37]	USA	Colorectal	110	229	329	–	RBC	DFS	7
35 Garau I 1994 [38]	Spain	Colorectal	348	338	686	–	Whole blood or RBC or plasma	OS	7
36 Edna TH 1994 [39]	Norway	Colorectal	236	100	336	Hb < 9 g/dL or bleeding > 20% blood volume	SAGM	OS	8

LDB leucocyte-depleted blood products, RBC packed red blood cells, SAGM buffy coat-depleted red cells suspended in saline, adenine, glucose, and mannitol, FFP fresh-frozen plasma

Results of meta-analysis

Overall survival (OS)

Data on OS were from 24 articles [1‐4, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 24, 28‐30, 32‐36, 38]. The random-effects model showed that transfusion could decrease OS significantly (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.41; I² = 61.9%; P < 0.0001; Fig. 2). There was no significant publication bias from the Egger test (P = 0.297).

Seven articles [2, 8, 10, 13, 17, 38, 39] reported the influence of transfusion volume (> 3 u and ≤ 3 u) on OS. The fixed-effects model showed that OS was lower in the large transfusion volume group (> 3 u) compared with those in the small transfusion volume group (≤ 3 u) (I² = 46.4%, HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.48–0.77, P < 0.0001) (Fig. 3). There was no significant publication bias from the Egger test (P = 0.072).

Nine articles reported the trigger of transfusion. The comparison between transfusion and non-transfusion on OS was from five of these articles [8, 13, 14, 17, 32]; in the five articles, one [14] used intraoperative bleeding > 1000 ml as a trigger of transfusion, and the other four articles were included in the following meta-analysis. The triggers were Hb ≤ 6 g/dl and Hb ≤ 7–10 g/dl, and the results showed that transfusion could reduce OS compared with non-transfusion if the trigger level was either Hb ≤ 6 g/dl (I² = 0%, HR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.14–0.43, P < 0.0001) or Hb ≤ 7–10 g/dl (I² = 0%, HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.35–0.90, P < 0.0001) (Fig. 4). There was no significant publication bias from the Egger test (P = 0.667).

Disease-free survival (DFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS)

Data on DFS and CSS were from 7 [13, 14, 19, 21, 32, 33, 37] and 7 articles [3, 11, 12, 14, 24, 30, 33], respectively. The random-effects model showed that transfusion could decrease CSS significantly (HR, 0.34, 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.47, I² = 62.9%; P < 0.0001) but did not affect DFS (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, − 0.12 to 0.47; I² = 54.6%; P = 0.248) (Fig. 5). There was no significant publication bias from the Egger test (P = 0.912).

Postoperative complications

Data on 30- or 60-day postoperative infectious complications (wound and urinary infections), pulmonary complications (pneumonia, respiratory failure, and pulmonary embolism), cardiac complications (myocardial infarction, angina, cardiac arrest, and arrhythmia), anastomotic complications (anastomotic fistula and bleeding), reoperation, and general complications were from 9 [9, 13, 14, 16, 18, 23, 27, 28, 31], 6 [14, 16, 18, 23, 27, 28], 4 [14, 16, 18, 27], 6 [13, 14, 16, 23, 26, 27], 2 [11, 27], and 10 [8, 10, 12, 13, 16‐18, 20, 26, 27] articles respectively. The meta-analysis showed that transfusion could increase infectious complications (RR, 1.89, 95% CI, 1.56 to 2.28; I² = 56.2%; P < 0.0001), pulmonary complications (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.54 to 2.63; I² = 42.4%; P < 0.0001), cardiac complications (RR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.75 to 2.76; I² = 0%; P < 0.0001), anastomotic complications (RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.79; I² = 51.4%; P < 0.0001), reoperation (RR, 2.88; 95% CI, 2.05 to 4.05; I² = 0%; P < 0.0001), and general complications (RR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.66 to 2.07; I² = 70.4%; P < 0.0001) (Fig. 6), and there was no significant publication bias from the Egger test (P = 0.541).

Subgroup and sensitivity analyses for OS

Table 2 shows the subgroup analysis for OS. Publication dates, sample size, and study region did not influence the effects. However, data on OS in rectal cancer patients were only from two articles, and the subgroup analysis showed that transfusion had no significant effect on OS in rectal cancer patients, which was different from the finding for colorectal cancer or colon cancer patients. The sensitivity analysis showed that the results of the effect of transfusion on OS were not changed when any suspicious study was omitted.

Table 2

Subgroup analyses for overall survival

Stratified	No. of studies	I² (%)	HR (95% CI)	P value
Publication date (year)
1990–2000	4	0	0.17 (0, 0.34)	0.049
2001–2010	7	4.5	0.32 (0.19, 0.45)	< 0.0001
2011–2018	14	74.7	0.37 (0.25, 0.48)	< 0.0001
Study size (no. of patients)
< 500	9	63.1	0.42 (0.12, 0.71)	0.005
≥ 500	5	63.1	0.32 (0.23, 0.40)	< 0.0001
Region
Asia	4	0	0.31 (0.17, 0.45)	< 0.0001
Europe	12	56.9	0.29 (0.12, 0.46)	0.0001
America	5	88.7	0.40 (0.22, 0.57)	< 0.0001
Australia	3	0	0.29 (0.14, 0.44)	< 0.0001
Surgical type
Colorectal	18	48.6	0.31 (0.21, 0.41)	< 0.0001
Colonic	4	59.8	0.37 (0.23, 0.52)	< 0.0001
Rectal	2	63.8	0.28(− 0.21, − 0.77)	0.258

No. number, HR hazard ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval

Discussion

Colorectal cancer is the most common human cancer. In the past few decades, many retrospective studies have focused on the effects of perioperative transfusion on short- and long-term prognoses in colorectal cancer patients, and a larger transfusion volume seems to have a poorer prognosis. It is very important to evaluate the trigger of transfusion and the influence of the volume of transfusion on prognosis to optimise perioperative transfusion and improve the outcome in colorectal cancer patients. Our meta-analysis reviewed the current available literature on perioperative transfusion and the prognosis of colorectal cancer surgery and extracted the survival data by HR method, which is more precise than the OR or RR methods.

Our results showed that perioperative transfusion could reduce OS and CSS and could increase the incidence of postoperative complications. Inflammatory and immunosuppressive mediators were proved to be associated with the development of recurrence and metastasis [40, 41], and transfusion could accelerate tumour progression by inducing an inflammatory response and immunosuppression [42]. In our meta-analysis, transfusion could reduce OS and CSS but had no effect on DFS. The possible reasons for this effect are that surgery, anaesthesia-related factors, and cancer staging can affect DFS, in addition to transfusion.

Allogeneic blood products release inflammatory factors during storage and can cause immunosuppression, including inhibiting NK cell activity and decreasing the Th1/Th2 ratio; eventually, infectious complications are increased after transfusion [42‐46]. It has been reported that postoperative intra-abdominal infection is an independent prognostic factor of DFS and disease-specific survival in patients with colon cancer [33]. In our meta-analysis, transfusion also increased the incidence of cardiopulmonary complications, anastomotic complications, and reoperation, which suggested that postoperative complications might have a negative impact on oncologic outcome. There are only two articles (1582 patients) included that addressed the incidence of reoperation; thus, more studies are needed to confirm the result.

Our meta-analysis showed that the poor overall survival was closely related with the transfusion volume. Large amounts of blood products can generate more active biochemical substances, including vascular endothelial growth factors and plasminogen activator inhibitors, and are more likely to promote the tumour angiogenesis and tumour cell proliferation and migration [47]; together with surgical stress, large-volume transfusions may cause more immunosuppression [18]. One study showed that restrictive transfusion (transfusion trigger: Hb < 8 g/dl) could not improve the survival rate, especially in a high-risk group of elderly patients with cardiovascular disease [48], and our meta-analysis showed that restrictive (transfusion trigger: Hb ≤ 6 g/dl) or liberal transfusion (transfusion trigger: Hb ≤ 7–10 g/dl) could decrease the OS significantly compared with non-transfusion. However, until now, there have been no direct comparisons between different transfusion triggers on prognosis, and very few articles report the trigger of transfusion. Since it is relatively rare in clinical circumstances that bleeding over 1000 ml as a transfusion trigger, we performed a sensitivity analysis, and the results showed that the effect of transfusion on OS was not changed when the article was omitted. Anaemia itself could negatively affect the prognosis of malignancy and could increase the risk for overall mortality, and the presence of anaemia was an independent risk factor for postoperative complications and a longer hospital stay after colon surgery [49]; therefore, preoperative therapy for anaemia was recommend to reduce the need for blood transfusions, and iron supplements have no influence on tumour progression [50].

It is known that allogeneic transfusion can aggravate perioperative immunosuppression in cancer patients, and autogenous transfusion seems to be superior to allogeneic transfusion [51, 52], but Harlaar et al. did not find any benefit from autologous transfusion compared with allogeneic transfusion after long-term follow-up in colorectal cancer patients [53]. The clinical data for autogenous transfusion in cancer patients are sparse, and the safety of autogenous transfusion is still a big concern in the clinic, as autogenous transfusion has the potential risk to induce iatrogenic metastasis.

There are some limitations of our meta-analysis. All of the included articles were observational studies, published from 1990 to 2018. The methods and drugs for anaesthesia and analgesia were not mentioned in these trials and may be different to some extent. Some other risk factors such as preoperative Hb level, different kinds and storage durations of blood products, operation duration, and the staging of cancer might affect the prognosis of colorectal cancer surgery. According to the subgroup analysis, different types of surgical procedure had different outcomes. However, most of the included articles did not describe colonic and rectal cancers surgery separately, so that the articles including colon cancer or rectal cancer are taken together in our meta-analysis. Therefore, prospective controlled clinical trials with large sample sizes need to be conducted to verify the results of our meta-analysis.

Conclusion

The results of our meta-analysis suggest that perioperative transfusion causes a dramatically negative effect on long-term prognosis and increases the short-term complications after colorectal cancer surgery.

Acknowledgements

The authors declare that no acknowledgements have to be made.

Funding

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets supporting the conclusion are included in the article.

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Tarantino I, Ukegjini K, Warschkow R, Schmied BM, Steffen T, Ulrich A, et al. Blood transfusion does not adversely affect survival after elective colon cancer resection: a propensity score analysis. Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2013;398(6):841–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-013-1098-x PubMed PMID: 23838797.CrossRef

Gunka I, Dostalik J, Martinek L, Gunkova P, Mazur M. Impact of blood transfusions on survival and recurrence in colorectal cancer surgery. Indian J Surg. 2013;75(2):94–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-012-0427-6 PubMed PMID: 24426401; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3644148.CrossRefPubMed

Amri R, Dinaux AM, Leijssen LGJ, Kunitake H, Bordeianou LG, Berger DL. Do packed red blood cell transfusions really worsen oncologic outcomes in colon cancer? Surgery. 2017;162(3):586–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2017.03.024 PubMed PMID: 28606725.CrossRefPubMed

Morner ME, Edgren G, Martling A, Gunnarsson U, Egenvall M. Preoperative anaemia and perioperative red blood cell transfusion as prognostic factors for recurrence and mortality in colorectal cancer-a Swedish cohort study. Int J Color Dis. 2017;32(2):223–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2678-3 PubMed PMID: 27770250; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5285411.CrossRef

Acheson AG, Brookes MJ, Spahn DR. Effects of allogeneic red blood cell transfusions on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2012;256(2):235–44. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31825b35d5 PubMed PMID: 22791100.CrossRef

Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, Burdett S, Sydes MR. Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials. 2007;8:1.CrossRef

Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1539–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186 PubMed PMID: 12111919.CrossRef

Qiu L, Wang DR, Zhang XY, Gao S, Li XX, Sun GP, et al. Impact of perioperative blood transfusion on immune function and prognosis in colorectal cancer patients. Transfus Apher Sci. 2016;54(2):235–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transci.2015.07.004 PubMed PMID: 26780991.CrossRefPubMed

Miki C, Hiro J, Ojima E, Inoue Y, Mohri Y, Kusunoki M. Perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion, the related cytokine response and long-term survival after potentially curative resection of colorectal cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2006;18(1):60–6 PubMed PMID: 16477921; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC16477921.CrossRef

10.

Meng J, Lu XB, Tang YX, Sun GP, Li X, Yan YF, et al. Effects of allogeneic blood transfusion in patients with stage II colon cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(1):347–50 PubMed PMID: 23534751; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC23534751.CrossRef

11.

Talukder Y, Stillwell AP, Siu SK, Ho YH. Comparing survival and recurrence in curative stage I to III colorectal cancer in transfused and nontransfused patients. Int Surg. 2014;99(1):8–16. https://doi.org/10.9738/INTSURG-D-13-00141.1 PubMed PMID: 24444262; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3897348.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Due SL, Wattchow DA, Sweeney JL, Milliken L, Luke CG. Colorectal cancer surgery 2000-2008: evaluation of a prospective database. ANZ J Surg. 2012;82(6):412–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2012.06078.x PubMed PMID: 22537147.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Jagoditsch M, Pozgainer P, Klingler A, Tschmelitsch J. Impact of blood transfusions on recurrence and survival after rectal cancer surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49(8):1116–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-006-0573-7 PubMed PMID: 16779711.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Lobaziewicz W, Kolodziejski L. The impact of homologous packed red blood cell transfusion on patients’ survival after radical surgical treatment of colorectal cancer. Acta Chir Belg. 2008;108(5):524–31 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC19051460.CrossRef

15.

Kaneko M, Sasaki S, Ishimaru K, Terai E, Nakayama H, Watanabe T. The impact of perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion on survival in elderly patients with colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res. 2015;35(6):3553–8 PubMed PMID: 26026124; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC 26026124.PubMed

16.

Nursal TZ, Hamaloglu E. The effect of preoperative blood transfusion on morbidity and survival in colorectal malignancy. The Turkish journal of gastroenterology. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2006;17(4):283–7 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC 17205407.PubMed

17.

Li XX, Meng J, Sun GP, Tang YX, Liang GF, Wang MF, et al. Effects of perioperative blood transfusion on the prognosis in hereditary and sporadic colon cancer. Biomarkers. 2015;20(6–7):481–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/1354750X.2015.1096306 PubMed PMID: 26616149.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Halabi WJ, Jafari MD, Nguyen VQ, Carmichael JC, Mills S, Pigazzi A, et al. Blood transfusions in colorectal cancer surgery: incidence, outcomes, and predictive factors: an American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis. Am J Surg. 2013;206(6):1024–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.10.001 discussion 32-3. PubMed PMID: 24296103.CrossRef

19.

Warschkow R, Guller U, Koberle D, Muller SA, Steffen T, Thurnheer M, et al. Perioperative blood transfusions do not impact overall and disease-free survival after curative rectal cancer resection: a propensity score analysis. Ann Surg. 2014;259(1):131–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318287ab4d PubMed PMID: 23470578.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Koch M, Antolovic D, Reissfelder C, Rahbari NN, Holoch J, Michalski I, et al. Leucocyte-depleted blood transfusion is an independent predictor of surgical morbidity in patients undergoing elective colon cancer surgery-a single-center analysis of 531 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(5):1404–11. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1453-x PubMed PMID: 21153884.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Ghinea R, Greenberg R, White I, Sacham-Shmueli E, Mahagna H, Avital S. Perioperative blood transfusion in cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection: risk factors and impact on survival. Tech Coloproctol. 2013;17(5):549–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-013-1014-y PubMed PMID: 23605190.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Skanberg J, Lundholm K, Haglind E. Effects of blood transfusion with leucocyte depletion on length of hospital stay, respiratory assistance and survival after curative surgery for colorectal cancer. Acta Oncol. 2007;46(8):1123–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02841860701441830 PubMed PMID: 17851860.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Mynster T, Christensen IJ, Moesgaard F, Nielsen HJ. Effects of the combination of blood transfusion and postoperative infectious complications on prognosis after surgery for colorectal cancer. Danish RANX05 Colorectal Cancer Study Group. Br J Surg. 2000;87(11):1553–62. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2168.2000.01570.x PubMed PMID: 11091245.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Patel SV, Brennan KE, Nanji S, Karim S, Merchant S, Booth CM. Peri-operative blood transfusion for resected colon cancer: practice patterns and outcomes in a population-based study. Cancer Epidemiol. 2017;51:35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2017.10.006 PubMed PMID: 29032319.CrossRefPubMed

25.

van de Watering LM, Brand A, Houbiers JG, Klein Kranenbarg WM, Hermans J, van de Velde C, et al. Perioperative blood transfusions, with or without allogeneic leucocytes, relate to survival, not to cancer recurrence. Br J Surg. 2001;88(2):267–72. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2168.2001.01674.x PubMed PMID: 11167879.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Papageorge CM, Kennedy GD, Carchman EH. Preoperative blood transfusion is a predictor of worse short-term postoperative outcomes after colectomy. Surgery. 2017;161(4):1067–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.08.042 PubMed PMID: 27838105; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5933528.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Benoist S, Panis Y, Pannegeon V, Alves A, Valleur P. Predictive factors for perioperative blood transfusions in rectal resection for cancer: a multivariate analysis of a group of 212 patients. Surgery. 2001;129(4):433–9. https://doi.org/10.1067/msy.2001.112068 PubMed PMID: 11283534.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Jensen LS, Puho E, Pedersen L, Mortensen FV, Sorensen HT. Long-term survival after colorectal surgery associated with buffy-coat-poor and leucocyte-depleted blood transfusion: a follow-up study. Lancet. 2005;365(9460):681–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17949-5 PubMed PMID: 15721474.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Mynster T, Nielsen HJ. Danish RANX05 Colorectal Cancer Study Group. Storage time of transfused blood and disease recurrence after colorectal cancer surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44(7):955–64 PubMed PMID: 11496075; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC11496075.CrossRef

30.

Aquina CT, Blumberg N, Becerra AZ, Boscoe FP, Schymura MJ, Noyes K, et al. Association among blood transfusion, sepsis, and decreased long-term survival after colon cancer resection. Ann Surg. 2017;266(2):311–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001990 PubMed PMID: 27631770.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Mazzeffi M, Tanaka K, Galvagno S. Red blood cell transfusion and surgical site infection after colon resection surgery: a cohort study. Anesth Analg. 2017;125(4):1316–21. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002099 PubMed PMID: 28504993.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Van Osdol AD, Borgert AJ, Kallies KJ, Froman JP, Bottner WA, Shapiro SB. Long-term outcomes of an integrated transfusion reduction initiative in patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer. Am J Surg. 2015;210(6):990–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.06.026 discussion 5.PubMed PMID: 26455522.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Sanchez-Velazquez P, Pera M, Jimenez-Toscano M, Mayol X, Roges X, Lorente L, et al. Postoperative intra-abdominal infection is an independent prognostic factor of disease-free survival and disease-specific survival in patients with stage II colon cancer. Clin Transl Oncol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-018-1866-8 PubMed PMID: 29623587.

34.

Molland G, Dent OF, Chapuis PH, Bokey EL, Nicholls M, Newland RC. Transfusion does not influence patient survival after resection of colorectal cancer. Aust N Z J Surg. 1995;65:592–5 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7661803.CrossRef

35.

Cheslyn-Curtis S, Fielding LP, Hittinger R, Fry JS, Phillips RK. Large bowel cancer: the effect of perioperative blood transfusion on outcome. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1990;72(1):53–9 PubMed PMID: 2405765; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2499079.PubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Donohue JH, Williams S, Cha S, Windschitl HE, Witzig TE, Nelson H, et al. Perioperative blood transfusions do not affect disease recurrence of patients undergoing curative resection of colorectal carcinoma: a Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group study. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13(7):1671–8. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1995.13.7.1671 PubMed PMID: 7602357.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Tratter PI. The association of perioperative blood transfusion with colorectal cancer recurrence. Ann Surg. 1992;216:633–8 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1466616.CrossRef

38.

Garau I, Benito E, Bosch FX, et al. Blood transfusion has no effect on colorectal cancer survival. A Population-based Study Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A:759–64 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7917533.PubMed

39.

Edna TH, Bjerkeset T. Perioperative blood transfusions reduce long-term survival following surgery for colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 1998;41(4):451–9 PubMed PMID: 9559629.CrossRef

40.

Pages F, Berger A, Camus M, Sanchez-Cabo F, Costes A, Molidor R, et al. Effector memory T cells, early metastasis, and survival in colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(25):2654–66. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa051424 PubMed PMID: 16371631.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Galon J, Costes A, Sanchez-Cabo F, Kirilovsky A, Mlecnik B, Lagorce-Pages C, et al. Type, density, and location of immune cells within human colorectal tumors predict clinical outcome. Science. 2006;313(5795):1960–4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1129139 PubMed PMID: 17008531.CrossRef

42.

Cata JP, Wang H, Gottumukkala V, Reuben J, Sessler DI. Inflammatory response, immunosuppression, and cancer recurrence after perioperative blood transfusions. Br J Anaesth. 2013;110(5):690–701. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aet068 PubMed PMID: 23599512; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3630286.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Atzil S, Arad M, Glasner A, Abiri N, Avraham R, Greenfeld K, et al. Blood transfusion promotes cancer progression: a critical role for aged erythrocytes. Anesthesiology. 2008;109(6):989–97. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0b013e31818ddb72 PubMed PMID: 19034095; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2694914.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Jensen LS, Andersen AJ, Christiansen PM, Hokland P, Juhl CO, Madsen G, et al. Postoperative infection and natural killer cell function following blood transfusion in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 1992;79(6):513–6 PubMed PMID: 1611441.CrossRef

45.

Patel HB, Nasir FA, Nash GF, Scully MF, Kakkar AK. Enhanced angiogenesis following allogeneic blood transfusion. Clin Lab Haematol. 2004;26(2):129–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2257.2004.00589.x PubMed PMID: 15053807.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Ben-Eliyahu S. The promotion of tumor metastasis by surgery and stress: immunological basis and implications for psychoneuroimmunology. Brain Behav Immun. 2003;17(Suppl 1):S27–36 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC12615183.CrossRef

47.

Horowitz M, Neeman E, Sharon E, Ben-Eliyahu S. Exploiting the critical perioperative period to improve long-term cancer outcomes. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015;12(4):213–26. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.224 PubMed PMID: 25601442; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5497123.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Carson JL, Sieber F, Cook DR, Hoover DR, Noveck H, Chaitman BR, et al. Liberal versus restrictive blood transfusion strategy: 3-year survival and cause of death results from the FOCUS randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9974):1183–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62286-8 PubMed PMID: 25499165; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4498804.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Leichtle SW, Mouawad NJ, Lampman R, Singal B, Cleary RK. Does preoperative anemia adversely affect colon and rectal surgery outcomes? J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212(2):187–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.09.013 PubMed PMID: 21276532.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Glechner A, Gartlehner G, Nussbaumer B, Kozek-Langenecker S. Perioperative anemia management: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Wien Med Wochenschr. 2014;164(15–16):330–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10354-014-0293-x PubMed PMID: 25168917.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Chen G, Zhang FJ, Gong M, Yan M. Effect of perioperative autologous versus allogeneic blood transfusion on the immune system in gastric cancer patients. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2007;8(8):560–5. https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.2007.B0560 PubMed PMID: 17657857; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1934950.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

52.

Xing YL, Wang YC. Influence of autologous and homologous blood transfusion on interleukins and tumor necrosis factor-alpha in peri-operative patients with esophageal cancer. Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(18):7831–4 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC25292072.CrossRef

53.

Harlaar JJ, Gosselink MP, Hop WC, Lange JF, Busch OR, Jeekel H. Blood transfusions and prognosis in colorectal cancer: long-term results of a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2012;256(5):681–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318271cedf discussion 6-7e. PubMed PMID: 23095610.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Perioperative transfusion and the prognosis of colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von: Qian-Yun Pang
Ran An
Hong-Liang Liu
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2019
Verlag: BioMed Central
Erschienen in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 1/2019
Elektronische ISSN: 1477-7819
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1551-y

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 Ablationstherapie Nachrichten

Nach der Katheterablation von Vorhofflimmern kommt es bei etwa einem Drittel der Patienten zu Rezidiven, meist binnen eines Jahres. Wie sich spätere Rückfälle auf die Erfolgschancen einer erneuten Ablation auswirken, haben Schweizer Kardiologen erforscht.

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 Appendizitis Nachrichten

Schmerzen im Unterbauch, aber sonst nicht viel, was auf eine Appendizitis hindeutete: Ein junger Mann hatte Glück, dass trotzdem eine Laparoskopie mit Appendektomie durchgeführt und der Wurmfortsatz histologisch untersucht wurde.

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

23.04.2024 Operationsvorbereitung Nachrichten

Derzeit wird empfohlen, eine Therapie mit GLP-1-Rezeptoragonisten präoperativ zu unterbrechen. Eine neue Studie nährt jedoch Zweifel an der Notwendigkeit der Maßnahme.

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich

19.04.2024 EAU 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Ureterstriktur ist eine relativ seltene Komplikation, trotzdem bedarf sie einer differenzierten Versorgung. In komplexen Fällen wird dies durch die roboterassistierte OP-Technik gewährleistet. Erste Resultate ermutigen.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Objective

Results

Conclusion

Introduction

Methods

Literature search

Outcome parameters and data collection

Quality assessment

Statistical analysis

Results

Literature search and characteristics of eligible trials

Results of meta-analysis

Discussion

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Funding

Availability of data and materials

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication

Competing interests

Publisher’s Note

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2019

Comparison of D2 and D2 plus radical surgery for advanced distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled study

Irreversible electroporation in a case of pancreatic leiomyosarcoma: a novel weapon versus a rare malignancy?

The application of polypropylene mesh for testicular prosthesis in surgical castration for patients with prostate cancer

Mutational spectrum of tobacco associated oral squamous carcinoma and its therapeutic significance

Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine carcinoma of gallbladder: case report

Traumatic ulcerative granuloma with stromal eosinophilia — clinical case report, literature review, and differential diagnosis

Update Chirurgie