Key result
Systematic searches found no evidence on the clinical or cost-effectiveness of routine pre-operative FBC, U&E, and PFTs in ASA grade 1 and 2 patients undergoing minor or intermediate surgery.
Why the study?
Does routine pre-operative testing of FBC, U&Es, and pulmonary function tests improve clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in ASA grade 1 and 2 adults undergoing elective minor or intermediate surgery?
Systematic Review
Does routine pre-operative testing of FBC, U&Es, and pulmonary function tests improve clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in ASA grade 1 and 2 adults undergoing elective minor or intermediate surgery?
There is no evidence to support routine pre-operative blood and pulmonary function testing in healthy adults undergoing minor or intermediate surgery, and current practice has appropriately shifted toward risk-guided testing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports selective pre-operative testing in low-risk patients; leaves open need for outcome studies on targeted strategies.
Czoski‐Murray et al. (2012) conducted a systematic review in Elective minor or intermediate surgery in ASA grade 1 and 2 patients. Routine pre-operative testing (full blood count, urea and electrolytes, pulmonary function tests) vs. No routine testing or risk-guided testing was evaluated on Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of routine pre-operative testing. Systematic searches found no evidence on the clinical or cost-effectiveness of routine pre-operative FBC, U&E, and PFTs in ASA grade 1 and 2 patients undergoing minor or intermediate surgery.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: