ArticleWorld journal of surgery2016
Are Routine Blood Group and Save Samples Needed for Laparoscopic Day Case Surgery?
Article in World journal of surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Substantial international variation in the cost of blood group and save and crossmatch: A systematic review.British journal of haematology · 2026Pooled it
- Requirement of preoperative blood typing for cholecystectomy and appendectomy: a systematic review.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Is Routine Group and Save Sampling Necessary for Emergency Laparoscopic Appendicectomy?Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Pre-Operative Group and Save in Elective and Emergency Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Necessity, Cost-Effectiveness, and Own Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Assessment of routine pre-operative group and save testing in patients undergoing cholecystectomy: a retrospective cohort study.NIHR open research · 2024Article
- Routine group and save screening prior to emergency laparoscopic surgery.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCommon day case laparoscopic procedures are usually safe, with low rates of bleeding complications. At our trust, most patients undergo pre-operative group and save (G&S) for these procedures, at a cost of £18.39 per sample excluding laboratory staffing costs. Our aim was to assess if routine G&S is indicated.
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIH) and diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) in our institution between April 2012 and March 2014. Patients were identified using hospital coding records. Transfusion department records were reviewed to see which patients had undergone pre-operative G&S or cross-match, and peri-operative transfusion.
resultsFive hundred and thirty-two procedures were performed in 2 years: 293 LC, 123 LIH and 116 DL. G&S was performed in 256 (87 %; LC), 67 (54 %; LIH) and 88 (76 %; DL), respectively. Zero patients were transfused for bleeding complications. One patient was transfused following diagnostic laparoscopy to optimise pre-existing anaemia. The total cost of G&S over the study period was £7558.
conclusionBlood transfusion rates for bleeding complications following laparoscopic day case surgery are 0 % in our unit. G&S samples for these procedures cost £7558 over 2 years. Abandoning pre-operative G&S for these patients appears to be clinically indicated and would lead to substantial financial savings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.