SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022
Requirement of preoperative blood typing for cholecystectomy and appendectomy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- The carbon footprint of group and save in elective and emergency surgery.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2026Article
- Routine Group-and-Save (G+S) Testing Prior to Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A 10-Year Single-Centre Review.Cureus · 2025Article
- Preoperative Group and Save Tests in Elective and Emergency Cholecystectomies: An Economic and Environmental Burden.Cureus · 2025Article
- Reassessing the Necessity of Group and Save Testing in Ambulatory Orthopedic Peripheral Limb Trauma Surgery.Cureus · 2025Article
- Cutting Costs and Carbon: Re-evaluating Routine Group and Save Testing for Appendicectomies.Cureus · 2025Article
- Reducing routine group and save testing in emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy surgery: a quality improvement project assessing the triple bottom line.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Is Routine Group and Save Sampling Necessary for Emergency Laparoscopic Appendicectomy?Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessment of routine pre-operative group and save testing in patients undergoing cholecystectomy: a retrospective cohort study.NIHR open research · 2024Article
- The Necessity of Routine Pre-operative Group and Save Testing for Emergency Appendectomies.Cureus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBlood typing, or group and save (G&S) testing, is commonly performed prior to cholecystectomy and appendectomy in many hospitals. In order to determine whether G&S testing is required prior to these procedures, we set out to evaluate the relevant literature and associated rates of perioperative blood transfusion.
methodsStudies from January 1990 to June 2021 assessing the requirement of preoperative G&S testing for elective or emergency cholecystectomy and appendectomy were retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases. The search was performed on 6th July 2021 (PROSPERO registration number CRD42021267967). Number of patients, co-morbidities, operation performed, number of patients that underwent preoperative G&S testing, perioperative transfusion rates and financial costs were extracted.
resultsWe initially screened 194 studies of which 15 retrospective studies, a total of 477,437 patients, specifically met the inclusion criteria. Ten studies reported on cholecystectomy, two studies on appendectomy and three studies included both procedures. Where reported, a total of 177,539/469,342 (37.8%) patients underwent preoperative G&S testing with a perioperative transfusion rate of 2.1% (range 0.0 to 2.1%). The main preoperative risk factors associated with perioperative blood transfusion identified include cardiovascular co-morbidity, coagulopathy, anaemia and haematological malignancy. All 15 studies concluded that routine G&S is not warranted.
conclusionThe current evidence suggests that G&S is not necessarily required for all patients undergoing cholecystectomy or appendectomy. Having a targeted G&S approach would reduce delays in elective and emergency lists, reduce the burden on the blood transfusion service and have financial implications.
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.