To the Editor:

We read with interest the recent article by Pinheiro de Almeida et al.1  regarding transfusion requirements in patients undergoing surgery for intraabdominal malignancies.

In contrast to the results from multiple other large-scale, randomized controlled trials, which did not show substantial differences in outcomes between restrictive and liberal blood transfusion strategies in a variety of different patient cohorts, the current study reports improved outcomes in patients that were transfused at a higher hemoglobin threshold (9 g/dl).2–4  It is unclear whether this improvement is unique to this particular patient population (patients undergoing surgical resection for solid intraabdominal tumors) or whether the results could be generalized to all patients undergoing surgery for resection of solid tumors.

The authors suggest that the improved outcomes could be related to utilization of leukodepleted blood as well as shorter duration of blood storage compared with other studies. However, there are no convincing data to date that transfusion of leukodepleted blood is associated with improved mortality or reduced incidence of cancer recurrence.5,6  Similarly, an association between the duration of erythrocyte storage and meaningful clinical outcomes such as increased mortality or long-term morbidities remains uncertain at this time.7–9  It is noteworthy that the mortality difference was driven by the incidence of septic shock (24 of 31 patients), suggesting the possibility that higher hemoglobin concentrations may protect against septic shock physiology. However, the larger prospective trial by Holst et al.,3  which was specifically focused on patients with septic shock, failed to demonstrate any advantage to liberal transfusion.

One concern is whether the study by Pinheiro de Almeida et al.1  had a sufficient number of patients upon which to set transfusion policies. Although the study was powered to assess a difference in primary outcome, it was not necessarily powered to achieve balance by randomization. For example, we note that the restrictive strategy group had twice the number of Whipple-type procedures, had a higher incidence of intraabdominal infections, twice the number of radical cystectomies, and a higher incidence of coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure. Imperfect randomization is a natural consequence of a smaller sample size. Furthermore, a large number of patients were excluded from this study, which further questions the generalizability of the study results.

Finally, there are potentially two distinct risk periods following major cancer surgery; the first is the intraoperative and immediate postoperative period when there is an increased risk of death due to blood loss and dilutional anemia. This risk may possibly be mitigated by blood transfusion as anemia in the early postoperative period is associated with increased risk of mortality in patients with cancer.1,10  The second risk period occurs after discharge from hospital when patients may be at increased risk of cancer recurrence. Although blood transfusion is the mainstay therapy for perioperative anemia, there is the hypothesis that transfusion leads to a nonspecific immunosuppression and increased the risk of cancer recurrence.10–12  However, this phenomenon has not been studied prospectively and remains controversial. Clearly, if a patient does not survive the immediate postoperative period, then cancer recurrence is not a relevant outcome. The critical unanswered question is where the “risk/benefit” threshold lies. Unfortunately, the authors do not provide data on long-term outcomes and cancer recurrence in their study population and only address early postoperative outcomes.

At this time, it remains unclear what criteria should be used to make the decision to transfuse or not, in order to balance the benefit of transfusion regarding perioperative mortality against the potential risk of transfusion regarding cancer recurrence. This balance likely varies based on a variety of factors including patient comorbidites, cancer type, and the extent of disease.11  We will need additional prospective trials to refine the indications for blood transfusion following cancer surgery. Although Pinheiro de Almeida et al.1  should be commended for their well-conducted study, which provides important new information in the perioperative transfusion literature, the practical question of whom and when to transfuse patients undergoing oncologic surgery to achieve “best outcomes” remains unanswered.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

1.
Pinheiro de Almeida
J
,
Vincent
JL
,
Barbosa Gomes Galas
FR
,
Pinto Marinho de Almeida
E
,
Fukushima
JT
,
Osawa
EA
,
Bergamin
F
,
Lee Park
C
,
Nakamura
RE
,
Fonseca
SM
,
Cutait
G
,
Inacio Alves
J
,
Bazan
M
,
Vieira
S
,
Vieira Sandrini
AC
,
Palomba
H
,
Ribeiro
U
Jr
,
Crippa
A
,
Dalloglio
M
,
Del Pilar Estevez Diz
M
,
Kalil Filho
R
,
Costa Auler
JO
Jr
,
Rhodes
A
,
Hajjar
LA
:
Transfusion requirements in surgical oncology patients: A prospective, randomized controlled trial.
Anesthesiology
2015
;
122
:
29
38
2.
Hébert
PC
,
Wells
G
,
Blajchman
MA
,
Marshall
J
,
Martin
C
,
Pagliarello
G
,
Tweeddale
M
,
Schweitzer
I
,
Yetisir
E
:
A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group.
N Engl J Med
1999
;
340
:
409
17
3.
Holst
LB
,
Haase
N
,
Wetterslev
J
,
Wernerman
J
,
Guttormsen
AB
,
Karlsson
S
,
Johansson
PI
,
Aneman
A
,
Vang
ML
,
Winding
R
,
Nebrich
L
,
Nibro
HL
,
Rasmussen
BS
,
Lauridsen
JR
,
Nielsen
JS
,
Oldner
A
,
Pettilä
V
,
Cronhjort
MB
,
Andersen
LH
,
Pedersen
UG
,
Reiter
N
,
Wiis
J
,
White
JO
,
Russell
L
,
Thornberg
KJ
,
Hjortrup
PB
,
Müller
RG
,
Møller
MH
,
Steensen
M
,
Tjäder
I
,
Kilsand
K
,
Odeberg-Wernerman
S
,
Sjøbø
B
,
Bundgaard
H
,
Thyø
MA
,
Lodahl
D
,
Mærkedahl
R
,
Albeck
C
,
Illum
D
,
Kruse
M
,
Winkel
P
,
Perner
A
;
TRISS Trial Group; Scandinavian Critical Care Trials Group
:
Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock.
N Engl J Med
2014
;
371
:
1381
91
4.
Carson
JL
,
Terrin
ML
,
Noveck
H
,
Sanders
DW
,
Chaitman
BR
,
Rhoads
GG
,
Nemo
G
,
Dragert
K
,
Beaupre
L
,
Hildebrand
K
,
Macaulay
W
,
Lewis
C
,
Cook
DR
,
Dobbin
G
,
Zakriya
KJ
,
Apple
FS
,
Horney
RA
,
Magaziner
J
;
FOCUS Investigators
:
Liberal or restrictive transfusion in high-risk patients after hip surgery.
N Engl J Med
2011
;
365
:
2453
62
5.
Dzik
WH
:
Leukoreduction of blood components.
Curr Opin Hematol
2002
;
9
:
521
6
6.
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
:
681
6; discussion 686–7
7.
Auborn
C
,
Baily
M
,
McQuilton
Z
,
Pilcher
D
,
Hegarty
C
,
Martinelli
A
,
Magrin
G
,
Irving
D
,
Cooper
DJ
,
Bellomo
R
:
Duration of red blood cell storage and outcome in critically ill patients.
J Crit Care
2014
;
476
:
e1–
8
8.
Wang
D
,
Sun
J
,
Solomon
SB
,
Klein
HG
,
Natanson
C
:
Transfusion of older stored blood and risk of death: A meta-analysis.
Transfusion
2012
;
52
:
1184
95
9.
Lelubre
C
,
Vincent
JL
:
Relationship between red cell storage duration and outcomes in adults receiving red cell transfusions: A systematic review.
Crit Care
2013
;
17
:
R66
10.
Knight
K
,
Wade
S
,
Balducci
L
:
Prevalence and outcomes of anemia in cancer: A systematic review of the literature.
Am J Med
2004
;
116
(
Suppl 7A
):
11S
26S
11.
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
:
690
701
12.
Wang
CC
,
Iyer
SG
,
Low
JK
,
Lin
CY
,
Wang
SH
,
Lu
SN
,
Chen
CL
:
Perioperative factors affecting long-term outcomes of 473 consecutive patients undergoing hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Ann Surg Oncol
2009
;
16
:
1832
42