Storage of thawed plasma for a liquid plasma bank: impact of temperature and methylene blue pathogen inactivation.

BACKGROUND: Rapid transfusion of fresh-frozen plasma (FFP) is desired for treating coagulopathies, but thawing and issuing of FFP takes more than 40 minutes. Liquid storage of plasma is a potential solution but uncertainties exist regarding clotting factor stability. We assessed different storage conditions of thawed FFP and plasma treated by methylene blue plus light (MB/light) for pathogen inactivation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Fifty thawed apheresis plasma samples (approx. 750 mL) were divided into three subunits and either stored for 7 days at 4°C, at room temperature (RT), and at 4°C after MB/light treatment. Clotting factor activities (Factor [F] II, FV, FVII through FXIII, fibrinogen, antithrombin, von Willebrand factor antigen, Protein C and S) were assessed after thawing and on Days 3, 5, and 7. Changes were classified as "minor" (activities within the reference range) and "major" (activities outside the reference range). RESULTS: FFP storage at 4°C revealed major changes for FVIII (median [range], 56% [33%-114%]) and Protein S (51% [20%-88%]). Changes were more pronounced when plasma was stored at RT (FVIII, 59% [37%-123%]; FVII, 69% [42%-125%]; Protein S, 20% [10%-35%]). MB/light treatment of thawed FFP resulted in minor changes. However, further storage for 7 days at 4°C revealed major decreases for FVIII (47% [12%-91%]) and Protein S (49% [18%-95%]) and increases for FVII (150% [48%-285%]) and FX (126% [62%-206%]). CONCLUSION: Storage of liquid plasma at 4°C for 7 days is feasible for FFP as is MB/light treatment of thawed plasma. In contrast, storage of thawed plasma for 7 days at RT or after MB/light treatment at 4°C affects clotting factor stability substantially and is not recommended.

Transmission of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection by leukoreduced blood products not tested for CMV antibodies: a single-center prospective study in high-risk patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (CME).

BACKGROUND: Measures to prevent transfusion-transmitted cytomegalovirus (TT-CMV) infection after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) include transfusion of CMV antibody-negative blood units and/or transfusion of leukoreduced cellular blood products. We assessed the incidence of TT-CMV in CMV-seronegative patients receiving CMV-seronegative HSC transplants, who were transfused with leukoreduced cellular blood products not tested for anti-CMV. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In a prospective observational study between 1999 and 2009, all HSCT patients received leukoreduced cellular blood products not tested for anti-CMV. Patients were screened for CMV serostatus and CMV-negative recipients of CMV-negative transplants were systematically monitored for TT-CMV clinically and by CMV nucleic acid testing. Anti-CMV antibodies (immunoglobulin [Ig]G and IgM) were assessed after three time intervals (Interval 1, study inclusion to Day +30 after HSCT; Interval 2, Day +30-Day +100; Interval 3, after Day +100). RESULTS: Among 142 patients treated with allogeneic HSCT, 23 CMV-negative donor-patient pairs were identified. These 23 patients received 1847 blood products from 3180 donors. All patients remained negative for CMV DNA and none developed CMV-associated clinical complications. This results in a risk for TT-CMV per donor exposure of 0% (95% confidence interval, 0.0%-0.12%). However, 17 of 23 patients seroconverted for anti-CMV IgG, but none for anti-CMV IgM. CMV IgG seroconverters received significantly more transfusions per week than nonconverters. CONCLUSION: The risk of TT-CMV is low in high-risk CMV(neg/neg) HSCT patients transfused with leukoreduced blood products not tested for anti-CMV. The cause of anti-CMV IgG seroconversion is most likely passive antibody transmission by blood products.

Incidence and clinical relevance of anti-platelet factor 4/heparin antibodies before cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is caused by anti-platelet factor 4/heparin (PF4/H) immunoglobulin (Ig) G antibodies, which activate platelets. In some patients, anti-PF4/H antibodies are already detectable before cardiac surgery. Whether preoperative presence of antibodies confers adverse prognosis and which particular antibody classes (IgG, IgA, IgM) might be implicated are unknown. METHODS: We prospectively screened 591 patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass surgery for heparin-dependent antibodies by PF4/H immunoassay (separately for IgG, IgA, and IgM) and platelet activation test at preoperative baseline and at days 6 and 10. All patients received heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin postsurgery regardless of antibody status and were followed for postoperative complications, frequency of HIT, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Anti-PF4/H antibodies of any class were detected at preoperative baseline in 128 (21.7%) of 591 patients: IgG n = 44 (7.4%), IgA n = 36 (6.1%), and IgM n = 79 (13.4%); some patients had >1 antibody class. Neither IgG nor IgA was a risk factor for any adverse outcome parameter. However, preoperative presence of IgM antibodies was associated with an increased risk for nonthromboembolic complications (all complications combined: hazard ratio 1.73, 95% CI 1.15-2.61) and a longer in-hospital stay (P = .02), but without evidence for increased risk of thrombotic complications or subsequent HIT. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preoperative anti-PF4/H antibodies of IgG and IgA class are not at increased risk for thrombotic or nonthrombotic adverse events, whereas those with baseline anti-PF4/H IgM had an increased risk of nonthrombotic adverse outcomes but not of subsequent HIT or thrombosis. Because IgM antibodies do not cause HIT, they could represent a surrogate marker for other heparin-independent risk factors.

Results of a systematic evaluation of treatment outcomes for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients receiving danaparoid, ancrod, and/or coumarin explain the rapid shift in clinical practice during the 1990s.

INTRODUCTION: Randomized controlled trials evaluating treatment of acute, transient, but uncommon diseases are difficult to perform. The prothrombotic adverse drug reaction, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), is such an example. During the mid-1980s, the defibrinogenating snake venom, ancrod (+/-warfarin, Canada), or coumarin (warfarin, Canada; phenprocoumon, Germany) alone, were often used to treat HIT. During the 1990s, danaparoid+/-coumarin began to replace ancrod (+/-coumarin), or coumarin alone, for treating HIT, despite danaparoid not being approved for treatment of HIT. METHODS: We performed a retrospective evaluation of treatment outcomes from 1986 to 1999, comparing danaparoid+/-coumarin (n=62) versus ancrod+/-coumarin or coumarin alone (controls, n=56). RESULTS: The predefined composite endpoint of adjudicated new, progressive, or recurrent thrombosis (including thrombotic death), or limb amputation, at day 7 (maximum, one event per patient) was significantly lower in danaparoid-treated patients, compared with controls: 8/62=12.9% (95% CI, 4.3-21.5) vs. 22/56=39.3% (95% CI, 26.1-52.5); p=0.0014. We also found a lower frequency of the composite endpoint at end of study (day 35) in danaparoid-treated patients: 12/62=19.4% vs. 24/56=42.9% (p=0.0088). Major bleeding (by day 7) occurred in 7/62 (11.3%) and 16/56 (28.6%) of danaparoid-treated and control patients, respectively (p=0.0211). CONCLUSIONS: The replacement of ancrod+/-coumarin, or coumarin alone, by danaparoid (+/-coumarin) in the mid-1990s for the treatment of HIT was justified by improved efficacy and safety.

Incidence and clinical significance of anti-PF4/heparin antibodies of the IgG, IgM, and IgA class in 755 consecutive patient samples referred for diagnostic testing for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is usually caused by anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies, leading to intravascular platelet activation. These antibodies can be detected by PF4/polyanion antigen assays or platelet activation assays. While antigen assays are very sensitive and recognize immunoglobulin (Ig)G, IgA, and IgM antibodies, the role of IgM and IgA HIT-antibodies is debated. Platelet activation assays recognize IgG and are more specific for clinical HIT. METHODS: We analyzed sera from 755 consecutive patients referred for diagnostic testing for HIT using a PF4/heparin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for IgG, IgA, and IgM and by the heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) test. Clinical information was provided by the treating physicians. RESULTS: A total of 108 of 755 (14.3%) patients tested positive, 105 (13.9%) in the PF4/heparin IgG/A/M ELISA [28 (26.7%) only for IgM/A]; 53 (7.0%) sera were positive in the HIPA, of those 50 tested also positive in the ELISA. In 77 patients sufficient clinical information was provided. Available clinical information for 17 of the 28 patients who had only IgM and/or IgA detected showed plausible alternative (non-HIT) explanations in four of seven who had thromboembolic complications and in nine of 10 who had isolated HIT. CONCLUSION: Detection of IgG, IgM and IgA class antibodies by PF4/heparin ELISA yields a positive test result about twice as often as does a platelet activation assay, with only a minority of the additional patients detected likely having HIT. Thus, there is a potential for considerable over-diagnosis of HIT by laboratories that utilize only an ELISA for diagnostic testing.