Retrospective evaluation of plasma transfusions in dogs undergoing general anaesthesia: 85 cases (2017–2021)

Abstract

ObjectiveTo describe the use of plasma transfusion in anaesthetized dogs, specifically the triggers for use, the population administered plasma, reported adverse events and human errors associated with transfusion. Study designRetrospective observational study. AnimalsA total of 85 client-owned dogs. MethodsA search of electronic transfusion and anaesthetic records at a university teaching hospital was performed to identify dogs administered plasma during the study period (January 2017 to June 2021). Data collected included signalment, surgical procedure, intraoperative triggers for transfusion, the type of plasma, rate of transfusion and the presence of transfusion reactions, human errors or deviation from transfusion guidelines. ResultsDuring this period, 85 dogs were administered plasma. Sepsis was diagnosed in 49/85 (58%) dogs, with 42/85 (49%) animals undergoing surgery for septic peritonitis. Perianaesthetic hypotension contributed to the decision to administer plasma in 67/85 (79%) dogs. In 33/85 (39%) dogs, hypotension was the only reason for transfusion, while 31/85 (36%) had other influencing factors, most commonly hypoproteinaemia. Fresh frozen plasma was administered in 95% of cases. Only 31% of transfusions were started at a slower ‘test dose’ rate and 79% of dogs administered boluses of plasma. No definite, probable or possible transfusion reactions were identified using current veterinary guidelines. Conclusions and clinical relevancePlasma transfusions were commonly administered to dogs presenting with sepsis for haemodynamic optimization. Clinicians often chose to bolus plasma instead of initiating transfusions at the recommended initial slow starting rate. No transfusion reactions were identified; however, some reactions may have been masked by the effects of general anaesthesia and/or have been difficult to recognize in this critically ill canine population.