Neutrophil antigen antibodies affect engraftment and secondary graft failure in hematopoietic progenitor cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Research is limited on the role of antibodies against human neutrophil antigen (HNA) in hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) transplantation outcomes. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on medical records of patients at the NIH Clinical Center enrolled in six research protocols. This case-control study included 21 patients tested for HNA antibodies from January 2010 to March 2022 who underwent HPC transplantation. In addition, 42 patients following the same research protocols were randomly selected as a control group. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of time to neutrophil engraftment was significantly impacted by the patients' anti-HNA status (p = .042), with the patients with anti-HNA experiencing delayed engraftment. Secondary graft failure occurred in 4 out of 42 patients (9.52%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.7-22.1) of the control group, while 5 out of 9 patients (55.5%; 95% CI: 26.7-81.1) with anti-HNA experienced secondary graft failure (p = .005). Furthermore, patients with anti-HNA had a lower proportion (p = .008 for full and p = .002 for partial chimerism) and cumulative incidence (p = .016 for full and p = .010 for partial chimerism) of achieving donor chimerism compared to the control group. DISCUSSION: The study reveals a potential link between anti-HNA and HPC transplantation outcomes not previously reported. Patients with anti-HNA had a lower proportion and cumulative incidence of achieving donor chimerism. Additionally, anti-HNA status affected the time for neutrophil engraftment, with a slower rate of neutrophil engraftment and increased risk of secondary failure in patients with anti-HNA.

Euvolemic automated transfusion to treat severe anemia in sickle cell disease patients at risk of circulatory overload.

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion remains a major treatment for sickle cell disease (SCD). Patients with SCD have a high prevalence of renal impairment and cardiorespiratory disease, conferring risk of transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We describe an approach, titled euvolemic automated transfusion (EAT), to transfuse SCD patients with severe anemia who are at risk of TACO. In EAT, plasmapheresis is performed using donor RBCs, rather than albumin or plasma, as replacement fluid. Euvolemia is maintained. A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients with SCD who underwent EAT at our institution over a 10-year period, to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EAT. RESULTS: Eleven SCD patients underwent 109 EAT procedures (1-59 procedures per patient). The median age was 42 years (IQR = [30-49]) and 82% (n = 9) were female. Most (82%; n = 9) patients had severe chronic kidney disease and 55% (n = 6) had heart failure. One (9%) patient had a history of life-threatening TACO. Mean pre- and post-procedure Hct values were 19.8% (SD ± 1.6%) and 29.1% (SD ± 1.4%), respectively. The average Hct increment was 3.2% per RBC unit. Only two EAT-related complications were recorded during the 109 procedures: central line-associated infection and citrate toxicity (muscle cramping). EAT used an average of two RBC units less than that projected for standard automated RBC exchange. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that EAT is safe and effective to treat patients with SCD and severe anemia, who are at risk for TACO. EAT requires fewer RBC units compared to automated RBC exchange.

Chronic automated red cell exchange therapy for sickle cell disease.

BACKGROUND: The data to support chronic automated red cell exchange (RCE) in sickle cell disease (SCD) outside of stroke prevention, is limited, especially in adults. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients with SCD who were referred for chronic RCE at our institution over a 10-year period. Data that were evaluated included patient demographics, referral indications, and procedural details (e.g., vascular access, adverse events, etc.). In a subanalysis, the number of annual acute care encounters during 3 years of chronic RCE was compared with that in the year preceding the first RCE. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were referred for chronic RCE: median age was 28 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 22-36) at referral and 60% were female. Seventy (42.6%) were naïve to chronic transfusion (simple or RCE) prior to referral. The leading indications for referral were refractory pain (73/164, 44.5%) and iron overload (57/164, 34.7%). A total of 5090 procedures occurred during the study period (median = 19, IQR = 5-45). Of the 138 patients who had central vascular access, 8 (6%) and 16 (12%) had ≥1 central-line-related thrombosis and/or infection, respectively. Of those who were not RBC alloimmunized at initiation of RCE, 12/105 (11.4%) developed new antibodies during chronic RCE. In those 30 patients who were adherent to therapy for 3 years, there was no significant difference in acute care encounters following initiation of RCE. CONCLUSION: Prospective clinical trials are needed to determine which patients are most likely to benefit from chronic RCE and refine selection accordingly.

Reevaluation of the medical necessity of washed red blood cell transfusion in chronically transfused adults.

BACKGROUND: Washing red blood cell (RBC) units mitigates severe allergic transfusion reactions. However, washing reduces the time to expiration and the effective dose. Automated washing is time- and labor-intensive. A shortage of cell processor tubing sets prompted review of medical necessity for washed RBC for patients previously thought to require washing. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A single-center, retrospective study investigated discontinuing wash RBC protocols in chronically transfused adults. In select patients with prior requirements for washing, due to a history of allergic transfusion reactions, trials of unwashed transfusions were performed. Patient demographic, clinical, laboratory, and transfusion data were compiled. The per-unit washing cost was the sum of the tubing set, saline, and technical labor costs. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (median age 34 years interquartile range [IQR] 23-53 years, 46.7% female) were evaluated. These patients had been transfused with a median of 531 washed RBC units (IQR 244-1066) per patient over 12 years (IQR 5-18 years), most commonly for recurrent, non-severe allergic reactions. There were no transfusion reactions with unwashed RBCs aside from one patient with one episode of pruritus and another with recurrent pruritus, which was typical even with washed RBC. We decreased the mean number of washed RBC units per month by 72.9% (104 ± 10 vs. 28.2 ± 25.2; p < .0001) and saved US $100.25 per RBC unit. CONCLUSION: Washing of RBCs may be safely reconsidered in chronically transfused patients without a history of anaphylaxis. Washing should be implemented judiciously due to potential lack of necessity and logistical/operational challenges.

Overcoming challenges in managing a high-risk pregnancy with placenta previa and newly diagnosed Bombay phenotype.

BACKGROUND: Bombay phenotype is rare and characterized by a lack of H antigen on the surface of red blood cells (RBCs) with naturally occurring anti-H antibodies. The presence of anti-H necessitates the exclusive use of Bombay phenotype RBCs for transfusion. We present a case of a pregnant woman with Bombay phenotype who required urgent cesarean section delivery due to high-risk placenta previa. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 36-year-old G1P0 woman of Indian origin presented at 36 weeks and 4 days gestation for management of a high-risk pregnancy with complete placenta previa. Bombay phenotype was unexpectedly identified on routine testing. Given the rarity of the blood, advanced gestation, and risk of post-partum hemorrhage associated with complete placenta previa and spontaneous labor, prompt strategic planning commenced for a successful delivery. Two frozen allogeneic Bombay phenotype RBCs were available as part of a concise transfusion plan. Intraoperative cell salvage was successfully employed and allogeneic transfusion was not required. CONCLUSION: Management of patients with rare blood types can be extremely challenging and guidance for those presenting later in pregnancy is scarce. Our patient's gestational age precluded the use of well-known effective strategies, including hemoglobin optimization, autologous and directed donation, and procurement of large quantities of rare blood. Rather, our approach utilized multidisciplinary expertise and strategic planning to yield a successful outcome.

The need for uniform and coordinated practices involving centrally manufactured cell therapies.

Cellular therapies have become an important part of clinical care. The treatment of patients with cell therapies often involves the collection of autologous cells at the medical center treating the patient, the shipment of these cells to a centralized manufacturing site, and the return of the cryopreserved clinical cell therapy to the medical center treating the patient for storage until infusion. As this activity grows, cell processing laboratories at many academic medical centers are involved with many different autologous products manufactured by several different centralized laboratories. The handling of these products by medical center-based cell therapy laboratories is complicated and resource-intensive since each centralized manufacturing laboratory has unique methods for labeling, storing, shipping, receiving, thawing, and infusing the cells. The field would benefit from the development of more uniform practices. The development of a coordinating center similar to those established to facilitate the collection, shipping, and transplantation of hematopoietic stem cells from unrelated donors would also be beneficial. In summary, the wide range of practices involved with labeling, shipping, freezing, thawing, and infusing centrally manufactured autologous cellular therapies lack efficiency and consistency and puts patients at risk. More uniform practices are needed.

A case report and systematic literature review: insulin-induced type III hypersensitivity reaction.

Insulin-induced type III hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) are exceedingly rare and pose complex diagnostic and management challenges. We describe a case of a 43-year-old woman with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM), severe insulin resistance, and subcutaneous nodules at injection sites, accompanied by elevated anti-insulin IgG autoantibodies. Treatment involved therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) as bridge therapy, followed by long-term immunosuppression, which reduced autoantibody levels and improved insulin tolerance. Given the limited treatment guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature review, identifying 16 similar cases. Most patients were females with a median age of 36.5 years; 63% had type 1 DM, and 44% had concurrent insulin resistance (56% with elevated autoantibodies). Treatment approaches varied, with glucocorticoids used in 67% of cases. Patients with type 1 DM were less responsive to steroids than those with type 2 DM, and had a more severe course. Of those patients with severe disease necessitating immunosuppression, 66% had poor responses or experienced relapses. The underlying mechanism of insulin-induced type III HSRs remains poorly understood. Immunosuppressive therapy reduces anti-insulin IgG autoantibodies, leading to short-term clinical improvement and improved insulin resistance, emphasizing their crucial role in the condition. However, the long-term efficacy of immunosuppression remains uncertain and necessitates continuous evaluation and further research.

Managing blood supplies during natural disasters, humanitarian emergencies, and pandemics: lessons learned from COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a historic public health crisis with widespread social and economic ramifications. The pandemic has also affected the blood supply, resulting in unprecedented and sustained blood shortages. AREAS COVERED: This review describes the challenges of maintaining a safe and sufficient blood supply in the wake of natural disasters, humanitarian emergencies, and pandemics. The challenges, which are accentuated in low- and high-income countries, span the impact on human capacity (affecting blood donors and blood collections personnel alike), disruption to supply chains, and economic sustainability. COVID-19 imparted lessons on how to offset these challenges, which may be applied to future pandemics and public health crises. EXPERT OPINION: Pandemic emergency preparedness plans should be implemented or revised by blood centers and hospitals to lessen the impact to the blood supply. Comprehensive planning should address the timely assessment of risk to the blood supply, rapid donor recruitment, and communication of need, measures to preserve safety for donors and operational staff, careful blood management, and resource sharing.

Transfusion Reactions and Adverse Events.

Blood transfusions are generally safe but can carry considerable risks. This review summarizes the different types of transfusion reactions and ways to diagnose and manage them. Symptoms are often overlapping and nonspecific. When a reaction is suspected, it is critical to stop the transfusion immediately and report the reaction to the blood bank, as this can affect the patient's outcome. New evidence-based algorithms of transfusion, newer blood screening methods and donor policies and deferrals, new laboratory testing, electronic verification systems, and improved hemovigilance lead to the avoidance of unnecessary transfusions and decrease the incidence of serious transfusion reactions.

Patients' capability, opportunity, motivation, and perception of inpatient hand hygiene.

BACKGROUND: Studies that examine the perceptions and behaviors of patients regarding patient hand hygiene rarely examine the viewpoint of patients about their hand hygiene behavior relative to current resources provided in the hospital. METHODS: Voluntary interviews that employed a 16-item survey tool were used among patients (N = 107) in outpatient clinics at post-admission visits. The survey was created using the Behavior Change Wheel, Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Behavior model. Patients were asked whether they brought hand sanitizer to the hospital, used hospital resources to clean their hands, and their perspective on patient hand hygiene importance compared with hospital staff, as well as their satisfaction or lack of satisfaction with hand hygiene independence. RESULTS: Most of the participants (65, 60.7%) reported that prior to being admitted to the hospital, they were able to maintain cleaning their hands with little or no difficulty. During their admission, only 21 (19.6%) of the participants reported needing little or no assistance. More than one-half of the participants, 34 (31.8%) and 23 (21.5%), respectively, reported, mostly or completely agreeing that the hand hygiene of the health care staff was more important than their own. Close to one-half of the participants (50, 46.7%) reported not being satisfied at all with their ability to maintain their hand hygiene in the hospital, whereas only 10 (9.3%) were very satisfied with their ability to maintain hand hygiene. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study will enhance our understanding of how to incorporate inpatient hand hygiene into existing infection control programs in inpatient settings.

A pilot study to assess the impact of an educational patient hand hygiene intervention on acquisition of colonization with health care-associated pathogens.

Patient hand hygiene is a commonsense measure that has been associated with reductions in colonization or infection with bacterial and viral pathogens in quasi-experimental studies. We conducted a nonblinded pilot randomized trial to assess the impact of an educational patient hand hygiene intervention on acquisition of colonization by selected health care-associated pathogens in hospitalized patients. For patients with negative admission cultures, the intervention did not reduce the new acquisition of colonization by pathogens compared with that of standard care.

Use of a verbal electronic audio reminder with a patient hand hygiene bundle to increase independent patient hand hygiene practices of older adults in an acute care setting.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the addition of a novel verbal electronic audio reminder to an educational patient hand hygiene bundle would increase performance of self-managed patient hand hygiene. METHODS: We conducted a 2-group comparative effectiveness study randomly assigning participants to patient hand hygiene bundle 1 (n = 41), which included a video, a handout, and a personalized verbal electronic audio reminder (EAR) that prompted hand cleansing at 3 meal times, or patient hand hygiene bundle 2 (n = 34), which included the identical video and handout, but not the EAR. The primary outcome was alcohol-based hand sanitizer use based on weighing bottles of hand sanitizer. RESULTS: Participants that received the EAR averaged significantly more use of hand sanitizer product over the 3 days of the study (mean ± SD, 29.97 ± 17.13 g) than participants with no EAR (mean ± SD, 10.88 ± 9.27 g; t73 = 5.822; P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a novel verbal EAR to a patient hand hygiene bundle resulted in a significant increase in patient hand hygiene performance. Our results suggest that simple audio technology can be used to improve patient self-management of hand hygiene. Future research is needed to determine if the technology can be used to promote other healthy behaviors, reduce infections, and improve patient-centered care without increasing the workload of health care workers.

Comparison of ethanol hand sanitizer versus moist towelette packets for mealtime patient hand hygiene.

To facilitate patient hand hygiene, there is a need for easy-to-use products. In a survey of 100 patients, a single-use ethanol hand sanitizer packet took less time to access than a single-use moist towelette packet (3 vs 23 seconds) and was preferred by 74% of patients for mealtime hand hygiene. Performance of patient hand hygiene increased when a reminder was provided at the time of meal tray delivery.

A randomized trial to determine the impact of a 5 moments for patient hand hygiene educational intervention on patient hand hygiene.

We conducted a randomized trial of a simple educational intervention encouraging patients to perform hand hygiene at 5 specific moments, including on entry of health care personnel into their room as a reminder of the importance of hand hygiene. The intervention resulted in a significant increase in patient hand hygiene.

Feasibility: An important but neglected issue in patient hand hygiene.

BACKGROUND: Patient hand hygiene may be a useful strategy to prevent acquisition of pathogens and to reduce the risk for transmission by colonized patients. Several studies demonstrate that patients and long-term-care facility (LTCF) residents may have difficulty using hand hygiene products that are provided; however, none of them measure feasibility for patients to use different hand hygiene products. METHODS: A convenience sample of 42 hospitalized patients and 46 LTCF residents was assessed for their ability to use 3 hand sanitizer products (8-oz pushdown pump bottle, 2-oz pocket-sized bottle with a reclosable lid, and alcohol-impregnated hand wipes). The time (seconds) required for accessing each product was compared among acute-care patients and LTCF residents. Participants provided feedback on which product they preferred and found easiest to use. RESULTS: Of 88 participants, 86 (97.7%) preferred the pushdown pump, 2 (2.3%) preferred the bottle with the reclosable lid, and none preferred the hand wipes. For both hospitalized patients and LTCF residents, the average time required to access the pushdown pump was significantly less than the time required to access the other products (pushdown pump, 0.45 seconds; bottle with reclosable lid, 3.86 seconds; and wipes, 5.66 seconds; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Feasibility and ease of use should be considered in the selection of hand hygiene products for patients and LTCF residents.

Evaluation of a Novel Alcohol-Based Surface Disinfectant for Disinfection of Hard and Soft Surfaces in Healthcare Facilities.

We examined the efficacy of a new 1-step cleaner and disinfectant containing 30% ethanol that is applied as a spray. The product rapidly reduced vegetative bacterial pathogens on carriers and on hard and soft surfaces in healthcare settings, but it did not stain clothing.