4.6 Review

Perioperative Quality Initiative and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery-Cardiac Society Consensus Statement on the Management of Preoperative Anemia and Iron Deficiency in Adult Cardiac Surgery Patients

Journal

ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA
Volume 135, Issue 3, Pages 532-544

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006148

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. POQI society
  2. ERAS-C society

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Preoperative anemia and iron deficiency are common in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and are associated with increased risks of adverse outcomes. Current guidelines support diagnosing and treating before surgery, but details on screening and treatment methods remain unclear.
Preoperative anemia is common in patients presenting for cardiac surgery, with a prevalence of approximately 1 in 4, and has been associated with worse outcomes including increased risk of blood transfusion, kidney injury, stroke, infection, and death. Iron deficiency, a major cause of anemia, has also been shown to have an association with worse outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, even in the absence of anemia. Although recent guidelines have supported diagnosing and treating anemia and iron deficiency before elective surgery, details on when and how to screen and treat remain unclear. The Eighth Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI 8) consensus conference, in conjunction with the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery-Cardiac Surgery Society, brought together an international, multidisciplinary team of experts to review and evaluate the literature on screening, diagnosing, and managing preoperative anemia and iron deficiency in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, and to provide evidence-based recommendations in accordance with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria for evaluating biomedical literature.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available