Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 41491947

Risk prediction models for blood transfusion in patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and evaluate published risk prediction models for perioperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Embase from inception to May 31, 2025. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and applicability using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values were pooled via a meta-analysis using Stata 18.0. RESULTS: d Fourteen studies containing 36 prediction models were included. The incidence of blood transfusion among THA/TKA patients ranged from 3.2% to 30.8%. Preoperative hemoglobin (Hb) level, tranexamic acid (TXA) use, operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, and age were the most frequently incorporated predictors. Model sensitivity ranged from 58% to 94.5%, and specificity ranged from 71.3% to 94%. Meta-analysis showed that the pooled AUC value of the 13 validated models was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.85-0.90), suggesting good discriminatory performance. All models were rated as having a high risk of bias. The applicability of four studies was rated as unclear. CONCLUSION: Although the included studies demonstrated promising discriminative ability of prediction models for blood transfusion in THA/TKA, all were assessed as having a high risk of bias using the PROBAST tool. Therefore, future research should prioritize the development of models with larger sample sizes, rigorous study designs, and multicenter external validation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Xiaoya Liu, Mengyao Liu, Yuxia Yang, Chen Yue, Yanfeng Tang, Dongdong Xie, Qi Gao, Xiaolong Wu, Jiayi Guo. 2026-01-05. Risk prediction models for blood transfusion in patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2025.2610097

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative inflammation after arthroplasty contributes to pain, delayed mobilization and prolonged hospitalization. Recent randomized trials have evaluated pharmacological anti-inflammatory strategies within contemporary enhanced recovery pathways, but evidence after hip and shoulder arthroplasty remains scattered across different drug classes and perioperative regimens. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence on perioperative anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for English-language RCTs published from January 2020 to March 2026. The 2020-2026 window was selected to update evidence generated under modern arthroplasty, anesthesia, multimodal analgesia and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways. Eligible trials included adults undergoing hip or shoulder arthroplasty and compared corticosteroids, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-based/local anti-inflammatory regimens, or related anti-inflammatory interventions with placebo, saline, no treatment, or the same regimen without the target component. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 800 patients were included. Anti-inflammatory interventions significantly reduced postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) [WMD=-32.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-41.16, -23.21), P<0.001], interleukin-6 (IL-6) [WMD=-31.25, 95% CI (-41.79, -20.77), P<0.001], rest pain [WMD=-0.41, 95% CI (-0.58, -0.23), P<0.001], activity pain [WMD=-0.56, 95% CI (-0.83, -0.29), P<0.001] and hospital stay [WMD=-0.54, 95% CI (-0.92, -0.15), P=0.006]. CONCLUSION: Recent RCT evidence suggests that perioperative anti-inflammatory interventions can attenuate early inflammatory responses and improve short-term pain and recovery after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. Because data were limited and clinically heterogeneous, the findings should not be interpreted as evidence favoring a specific drug class, dose, route, or timing.

Humans

Impact on analgesia, diaphragmatic function, and recovery between erector spinae plane block versus superior trunk block in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective analgesia and preservation of diaphragmatic function are key considerations in analgesia for shoulder surgery. The superior trunk block provides analgesia with reduced phrenic nerve involvement, while the erector spinae plane block offers minimal impact on diaphragm motion. This randomized controlled trial compared the analgesic efficacy, impact on diaphragmatic motion, and postoperative recovery between the two blocks. METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive either erector spinae plane block or superior trunk block. Primary outcomes were postoperative VAS and changes in diaphragmatic excursion. Secondary outcomes included Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores, morphine-equivalent consumption, and the handgrip strength motor blockade. RESULTS: The superior trunk block resulted in significantly lower dynamic VAS at 1-h postoperatively (0.1 [0.0, 0.2] vs. 5.7 [4.0, 7.6]; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001) and reduced 24-h morphine consumption (7.8 [2.5, 15.0] mg vs. 12.7 [7.5, 17.3] mg; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.038) compared to the erector spinae plane block. However, diaphragmatic excursion was better preserved in the erector spinae plane block group (8.37% &#xb1; 20.7% vs. -20.09% &#xb1; 22.2%; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001), with a lower incidence of partial hemidiaphragm paresis (3.3% vs. 46.7%; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001). At 24&#x2009;h postoperatively, QoR-15 scores were higher in the superior trunk block group (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.047), and no patient in either group developed handgrip motor blockade. CONCLUSIONS: Superior trunk block offers superior early postoperative analgesia and better overall recovery, while erector spinae plane block minimizes diaphragmatic impairment. However, the erector spinae plane block may represent an option only in carefully selected patients at high respiratory risk, acknowledging its significantly poorer early analgesic profile.

Humans

Relationship between menopausal hormone therapy and incidence risk of breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) is widely prescribed for alleviating menopausal symptoms. Prior studies have mainly focused on individual hormone therapy formulations. This meta-analysis comprehensively synthesized evidence across various regimens to systematically evaluate the association between MHT and breast cancer risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception through August 2024. Eligible studies examining breast cancer risk following MHT were independently screened and assessed by two reviewers. The review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included. The random-effects model showed a significant but heterogeneous overall association (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.09-1.22; I&#xb2; = 92.4%). Subgroup analysis identified hormone type, use status, and region as key determinants (P for interaction < 0.001). Stratification by hormone type resolved much of the heterogeneity, revealing risk confined to estrogen-progestin therapy (EPT; OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.26-1.64), while estrogen-only therapy (ET) showed no overall association (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.91-1.10). Study type, region, and sample size were significant effect modifiers. For ET, randomized controlled trials demonstrated a protective effect (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.70-0.87), contrasting with neutral findings from observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: MHT is associated with a modest but significant increase in breast cancer risk, primarily driven by EPT. This risk was not observed with ET in observational studies, though trials suggested a protective effect. Crucially, the association shows marked geographical heterogeneity, indicating risk is modified by regimen and regional factors.

Humans