Key result
Formula-based estimation yields ~500 mL higher blood loss than visual assessment in robotic surgery.
Why the study?
Estimated blood loss is frequently inaccurate with under- and overestimations that can be dangerous for patients and confound scoring systems relying on EBL.
Population
23 patients undergoing major elective intra-abdominal operations
Comparison
Measured blood loss vs surgeon-estimated and anesthesiologist-estimated blood loss
Design
Prospective quality improvement observational study
Authors
Loading...
Formula estimates exceed visual by ~500 mL in robotic urologic surgery; supports visual inaccuracy but leaves open whether adoption affects outcomes.
Observational (n=111)
No
Mean Difference: 500.92
Absolute Event Rate: 721.64% vs 220.72%
p-value: p=<0.001
Ghee et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Robot-assisted urologic surgery (n=111). Formula-based blood loss estimation (López-Picado) vs. Visually estimated intraoperative blood loss was evaluated on Difference between López-Picado formula estimation and visually estimated intraoperative blood loss (Mean difference 500.92 mL, p=<0.001). Formula-based blood loss estimations yielded significantly higher values than visual estimation during robot-assisted urologic surgery, with a mean difference of 500.92 mL for the López-Picado formula (p < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: