Cardiac Surgery in Jehovah's Witnesses Patients and Association With Peri-Operative Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Strategies for blood conservation, coupled with a careful preoperative assessment, may be applied to Jehovah's Witnesses (JW) patients who are candidates for cardiac surgery interventions. There is a need to assess clinical outcomes and safety of bloodless surgery in JW patients undergoing cardiac surgery.
Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing JW patients with controls undergoing cardiac surgery. The primary endpoint was short-term mortality (in-hospital or 30-day mortality). Peri-procedural myocardial infarction, re-exploration for bleeding, pre-and postoperative Hb levels and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time were also analyzed.
Results: A total of 10 studies including 2,302 patients were included. The pooled analysis showed no substantial differences in terms of short-term mortality among the two groups (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.74-1.73, I ² =0%). There were no differences in peri-operative outcomes among JW patients and controls (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.39-2.41, I ² =18% for myocardial infarction; OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.51-1.25, I ² =0% for re-exploration for bleeding). JW patients had a higher level of preoperative Hb (Standardized Mean Difference [SMD] 0.32, 95% CI 0.06-0.57) and a trend toward a higher level of postoperative Hb (SMD 0.44, 95% CI -0.01-0.90). A slightly lower CPB time emerged in JWs compared with controls (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.30-0.07).
Conclusions: JW patients undergoing cardiac surgery, with avoidance of blood transfusions, did not have substantially different peri-operative outcomes compared with controls, with specific reference to mortality, myocardial infarction, and re-exploration for bleeding. Our results support the safety and feasibility of bloodless cardiac surgery, applying patient blood management strategies.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)