Intraoperative autologous transfusion during elective infrarenal aortic reconstruction: a decision analysis model.

PURPOSE The use of intraoperative autologous transfusion devices expanded during the last decade as a result of the increased awareness of transfusion-associated complications. This study was designed to determine whether routine use of an intraoperative autologous transfusion device (Haemonetics Cell Saver [CS]) during elective infrarenal aortic reconstructions is cost-effective ($50,000/QALYs threshold). METHODS A decision analysis tree was constructed to model all of the complications that are associated with red blood cell replacement during aortic reconstructions for both abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). It was assumed that a unit of CS return (CSR; 250 ml/unit) equaled a unit of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) and that all CS transfusions were necessary. Transfusion requirements (AAA:PRBC = 2.8 +/- 3.2 units, CSB = 3.7 +/- 3.2 units; AIOD:PRBC = 3.1 +/- 3.0 units, CSR = 2.1 +/- 1.7 units) were determined from retrospective review of all elective aortic reconstructions (AAA, N = 63; AIOD, N = 75) from Jan. 1991 to June 1995 in which the CS was used (82.1% of all reconstructions). Risk of allogenic transfusion-related complications (transfusion reaction, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, human immunodeficiency virus, human T-cell lymphotropic virus types I and II) and their associated treatment costs (expressed in dollars and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were obtained from the medical literature, institutional audit, and a consensus of physicians. RESULTS Routine use of the CS during elective infrarenal aortic reconstructions was not cost-effective in our practice. Use during reconstructions for AAA repairs cost $263.75 but added only 0.00218 QALYs, for a rate of $120,794/QALY. Use during reconstructions for AIOD was even more costly at $356.68 and provided even less benefit at 0.00062 QALYs, for a rate of $578,275/QALY. The sensitivity analyses determined that the routine use of the CS would be cost-effective in our practice only for AAA repairs if the incidence of hepatitis C were tenfold greater than the baseline assumption. The model determined that CS was cost-effective if the CSR exceed 5 units during reconstructions for AAA and 6 units during reconstructions for AIOD. CONCLUSIONS The routine use of the CS during elective infrarenal aortic reconstructions is not cost-effective. The use of the device should be reserved for a select group of aortic reconstructions, including those in which cost-effective salvage volumes are anticipated. Alternatively, the CS should be used as a reservoir and activated as a salvage device if significant bleeding is encountered.