Receipt of RhD-positive whole blood for life-threatening bleeding in female children: A survey in alloimmunized mothers regarding minimum acceptable survival benefit relative to risk of maternal alloimmunization to anti-D.

BACKGROUND: Low-titer group O whole blood (LTOWB) for treatment of hemorrhagic shock sometimes necessitates transfusion of RhD-positive units due to short supply of RhD-negative LTOWB. Practitioners must choose between using RhD-positive LTOWB when RhD-negative is unavailable against the risk to a female of childbearing potential of becoming RhD-alloimmunized, risking hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) in future children, or using component therapy with RhD-negative red cells. This survey asked females with a history of red blood cell (RBC) alloimmunization about their risk tolerance of RhD alloimmunization compared to the potential for improved survival following transfusion of RhD-positive blood for an injured RhD negative female child. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A survey was administered to RBC alloimmunized mothers. Respondents were eligible if they were living in the United States with at least one red cell antibody known to cause HDFN and if they had at least one RBC alloimmunized pregnancy. RESULTS: Responses from 107 RBC alloimmmunized females were analyzed. There were 32/107 (30%) with a history of severe HDFN; 12/107 (11%) had a history of fetal or neonatal loss due to HDFN. The median (interquartile range) absolute improvement in survival at which the respondents would accept RhD-positive transfusions for a female child was 4% (1%-14%). This was not different between females with and without a history of severe or fatal HDFN (p = .08 and 0.38, respectively). CONCLUSION: Alloimmunized mothers would accept the risk of D-alloimmunization in a RhD-negative female child for improved survival in cases of life-threatening bleeding.

Survey of policies at US hospitals on the selection of RhD type of low-titer O whole blood for use in trauma resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: Low-titer group O whole blood (LTOWB) use is increasing due to data suggesting improved outcomes and safety. One barrier to use is low availability of RhD-negative LTOWB. This survey examined US hospital policies regarding the selection of RhD type of blood products in bleeding emergencies. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A web-based survey of blood bank directors was conducted to determine their hospital's RhD-type selection policies for blood issued for massive bleeding. RESULTS: There was a 61% response rate (101/157) and of those responses, 95 were complete. Respondents indicated that 40% (38/95) use only red blood cells (RBCs) and 60% (57/95) use LTOWB. For hospitals that issue LTOWB (N = 57), 67% are supplied only with RhD-positive, 2% only with RhD-negative, and 32% with both RhD-positive and RhD-negative LTOWB. At sites using LTOWB, RhD-negative LTOWB is used exclusively or preferentially more commonly in adult females of childbearing potential (FCP) (46%) and pediatric FCP (55%) than in men (4%) and boys (24%). RhD-positive LTOWB is used exclusively or preferentially more commonly in men (94%) and boys (54%) than in adult FCP (40%) or pediatric FCP (21%). At sites using LTOWB, it is not permitted for adult FCPs at 12%, pediatric FCP at 21.4%, and boys at 17.1%. CONCLUSION: Hospitals prefer issuing RhD-negative LTOWB for females although they are often ineligible to receive RhD-negative LTOWB due to supply constraints. The risk and benefits of LTOWB compared to the rare occurrence of hemolytic disease of the fetus/newborn (HDFN) need further examination in the context of withholding a therapy for females that has the potential for improved outcomes.

Comparison of platelet quality and function across apheresis collection platforms.

BACKGROUND: Platelet concentrates (PLT) can be manufactured using a combination of apheresis collection devices and suspension media (plasma or platelet additive solution (PAS)). It is unclear how platelet quality and hemostatic function differ across the current in-use manufacturing methods in the United States. The objective of this study was therefore to compare baseline function of PLT collected using different apheresis collection platforms and storage media. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: PLT were collected at two sites with identical protocols (N = 5 per site, N = 10 total per group) on the MCS® + 9000 (Haemonetics; "MCS"), the Trima Accel® 7 (Terumo; "Trima"), and the Amicus Cell Separator (Fresenius Kabi, "Amicus"). MCS PLT were collected into plasma while Trima and Amicus PLT were collected into plasma or PAS (Trima into Isoplate and Amicus into InterSol; yielding groups "TP", "TI" and "AP", "AI", respectively). PLT units were sampled 1 h after collection and assayed to compare cellular counts, biochemistry, and hemostatic function. RESULTS: Differences in biochemistry were most evident between plasma and PAS groups, as anticipated. MCS and TP had the highest clot strength as assessed by viscoelastometry. AI had the lowest thrombin generation capacity. Both TP and TI had the highest responses on platelet aggregometry. AI had the greatest number of microparticles. DISCUSSION: Platelet quality and function differ among collection platforms at baseline. MCS and Trima platelets overall appear to trend toward higher hemostatic function. Future investigations will assess how these differences change throughout storage, and if these in vitro measures are clinically relevant.