The safety of ABO minor incompatible platelets transfusions using a rapid infuser.

BACKGROUND: Administering platelets through a rapid infuser is proven to be safe. However, the clinical significance of infusing ABO-incompatible platelets with red blood cells (RBCs) in a rapid infuser remains unclear. There is a theoretical risk that isoagglutinin in the plasma of a platelet unit can interact with RBCs and induce hemolysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven in vitro studies were performed including five cases (type A RBCs and type O platelets) and two controls (type A RBCs and platelets). Anti-A titers were measured in platelet units. An RBC unit and a platelet unit were mixed in the rapid infuser reservoir and incubated for 30 min. The primary outcome was the presence of hemolysis based on the following parameters: free hemoglobin concentration, hemolysis check, direct antiglobulin test (DAT), and direct agglutination. RESULTS: The post-mix DAT was positive for IgG in all test samples (5/5), and weakly positive for complement in 3/5. The changes in free Hb in test cases between measured and calculated post-mix spanned -2.2 to +3.4 mg/dL. Post-mix hemolysis check was negative in 3/5 and slightly positive in 2/5 cases, with no significant differences compared to the control case. Anti-A titers ranged from 16 to 512 and were not associated with hemolysis. All samples were negative for direct agglutination. CONCLUSION: Our study suggested that mixing ABO-incompatible platelets with RBCs in a rapid infuser does not induce in vitro hemolysis. These findings support the use of rapid infusers regardless of platelet compatibility in support of hemostatic resuscitation.

Red Blood Cell Transfusion: 2023 AABB International Guidelines.

Importance: Red blood cell transfusion is a common medical intervention with benefits and harms. Objective: To provide recommendations for use of red blood cell transfusion in adults and children. Evidence Review: Standards for trustworthy guidelines were followed, including using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methods, managing conflicts of interest, and making values and preferences explicit. Evidence from systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials was reviewed. Findings: For adults, 45 randomized controlled trials with 20 599 participants compared restrictive hemoglobin-based transfusion thresholds, typically 7 to 8 g/dL, with liberal transfusion thresholds of 9 to 10 g/dL. For pediatric patients, 7 randomized controlled trials with 2730 participants compared a variety of restrictive and liberal transfusion thresholds. For most patient populations, results provided moderate quality evidence that restrictive transfusion thresholds did not adversely affect patient-important outcomes. Recommendation 1: for hospitalized adult patients who are hemodynamically stable, the international panel recommends a restrictive transfusion strategy considering transfusion when the hemoglobin concentration is less than 7 g/dL (strong recommendation, moderate certainty evidence). In accordance with the restrictive strategy threshold used in most trials, clinicians may choose a threshold of 7.5 g/dL for patients undergoing cardiac surgery and 8 g/dL for those undergoing orthopedic surgery or those with preexisting cardiovascular disease. Recommendation 2: for hospitalized adult patients with hematologic and oncologic disorders, the panel suggests a restrictive transfusion strategy considering transfusion when the hemoglobin concentration is less than 7 g/dL (conditional recommendations, low certainty evidence). Recommendation 3: for critically ill children and those at risk of critical illness who are hemodynamically stable and without a hemoglobinopathy, cyanotic cardiac condition, or severe hypoxemia, the international panel recommends a restrictive transfusion strategy considering transfusion when the hemoglobin concentration is less than 7 g/dL (strong recommendation, moderate certainty evidence). Recommendation 4: for hemodynamically stable children with congenital heart disease, the international panel suggests a transfusion threshold that is based on the cardiac abnormality and stage of surgical repair: 7 g/dL (biventricular repair), 9 g/dL (single-ventricle palliation), or 7 to 9 g/dL (uncorrected congenital heart disease) (conditional recommendation, low certainty evidence). Conclusions and Relevance: It is good practice to consider overall clinical context and alternative therapies to transfusion when making transfusion decisions about an individual patient.

An analysis of quality of life and functional outcomes as reported in randomized trials for red cell transfusions.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating thresholds for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion typically focus on mortality; however, other outcomes are highly relevant. The aim of this study is to summarize the effects of different transfusion thresholds on the outcomes of quality of life (QoL) and function. STUDY DESIGN: We extracted data from RCTs identified in a recently published Cochrane systematic review. Primary analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: A total of 23 RCTs with 13,743 adult participants were included. Fifteen RCTs included patients in the postoperative period, of which 9 RCTs were conducted in hip (n = 3024) and 6 (n = 8672) in cardiac surgeries; 5 RCTs (n = 489) were in patients with hematological malignancies; 2 in the setting of bleeding (gastrointestinal bleed [n = 936] and postpartum [n = 521]); and one RCT (n = 936) included critically ill patients. QoL and function were reported using a variety of questionnaires and tools. The timing of assessments varied between trials. No clear clinical differences in QoL outcomes were identified in comparisons between restrictive and liberal transfusion thresholds. DISCUSSION: There is no evidence that a liberal transfusion strategy improves QoL and functional outcomes. However, the substantial limitations of many included studies indicate the need for further well-designed and adequately powered trials.

Current advances in 2022: A critical review of selected topics by the Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies (AABB) Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee.

BACKGROUND: The Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee (CTMC) composes a summary of new and important advances in transfusion medicine (TM) on an annual basis. Since 2018, this has been assembled into a manuscript and published in Transfusion. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: CTMC members selected original manuscripts relevant to TM that were published electronically and/or in print during calendar year 2022. Papers were selected based on perceived importance and/or originality. References for selected papers were made available to CTMC members to provide feedback. Members were also encouraged to identify papers that may have been omitted initially. They then worked in groups of two to three to write a summary for each new publication within their broader topic. Each topic summary was then reviewed and edited by two separate committee members. The final manuscript was assembled by the first and senior authors. While this review is extensive, it is not a systematic review and some publications considered important by readers may have been excluded. RESULTS: For calendar year 2022, summaries of key publications were assembled for the following broader topics within TM: blood component therapy; infectious diseases, blood donor testing, and collections; patient blood management; immunohematology and genomics; hemostasis; hemoglobinopathies; apheresis and cell therapy; pediatrics; and health care disparities, diversity, equity, and inclusion. DISCUSSION: This Committee Report reviews and summarizes important publications and advances in TM published during calendar year 2022, and maybe a useful educational tool.

Antibody Titers in Transfusion Medicine: A Critical Reevaluation of Testing Accuracy, Reliability, and Clinical Use.

CONTEXT.­: Substantial variability between different antibody titration methods has been identified since the development and introduction of the uniform procedure in 2008. OBJECTIVE.­: To determine whether more recent methods or techniques decrease interlaboratory and intralaboratory variation measured using proficiency testing. DESIGN.­: Proficiency test data for antibody titration between 2014 and 2018 were obtained from the College of American Pathologists. Interlaboratory and intralaboratory variations were compared by analyzing the distribution of titer results by method and phase, comparing the results against the supplier's quality control titer, and by evaluating the distribution of paired titer results when each laboratory received a sample with the same titer twice. RESULTS.­: A total of 1337 laboratories participated in the antibody titer proficiency test during the study period. Only 54.1% (5874 of 10 852) of anti-D and 63.4% (3603 of 5680) of anti-A reported responses were within 1 titer of the supplier's intended result. Review of the agreement between laboratories of the same methodology found that 78.4% (3139 of 4004) for anti-A and 89.0% (9655 of 10 852) of laboratory responses for anti-D fell within 1 titer of the mode response. When provided with 2 consecutive samples of the same titer (anti-D titer: 16), 85% (367 of 434) of laboratories using the uniform procedure and 80% (458 of 576) using the other method reported a titer difference of 1 or less. CONCLUSIONS.­: Despite advances, interlaboratory and intralaboratory variance for this assay remains high in comparison with the strong reliance on titer results in clinical practice. There needs to be a reevaluation of the role of this test in clinical decision-making.

Serologic reactivity of unidentified specificity in antenatal testing and hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn: The BEST collaborative study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical significance of serologic reactivity of unidentified specificity (SRUS) in pregnancy is not clear based on available literature. The aim of this study is to determine if SRUS is associated with hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from eight institutions over an 11-year study period (2010-2020), when available (5/8 sites). The outcome of the pregnancies with SRUS-no, mild, moderate, or severe HDFN-was determined. RESULTS: SRUS was demonstrated in 589 pregnancies. After excluding those with incomplete data, a total of 284 pregnancies were included in the primary HDFN outcome analysis. SRUS was detected in 124 (44%) pregnancies in isolation, and none were affected by HDFN. Of 41 pregnancies with SRUS and ABO incompatibility, 37 (90%) were unaffected, and 4 (10%) were associated with mild HDFN. Of 98 pregnancies with SRUS and concurrent identifiable antibody reactivity(s), 80 (81%) were unaffected, and 19 (19%) were associated with mild to severe HDFN. There was 1 case of mild HDFN and 1 case of severe HDFN in the 21 pregnancies with SRUS, ABO incompatibility, and concurrent identifiable antibody reactivity(s), and 19 (90%) were unaffected by HDFN. Among all patients with repeat testing, newly identified alloantibodies or other antibodies were identified in 63 of 212 (30%) patients. Although most were not clinically significant, on occasion SRUS preceded clinically significant antibody(s) associated with HDFN (3%, 5/188). CONCLUSION: The antenatal serologic finding of SRUS in isolation is not associated with HDFN but may precede clinically significant antibodies.

Obstetric and Newborn Weak D-Phenotype RBC Testing and Rh Immune Globulin Management Recommendations: Lessons From a Blinded Specimen-Testing Survey of 81 Transfusion Services.

CONTEXT.­: Modern RHD genotyping can be used to determine when patients with serologic weak D phenotypes have RHD gene variants at risk for anti-D alloimmunization. However, serologic testing, RhD interpretations, and laboratory management of these patients are quite variable. OBJECTIVE.­: To obtain interlaboratory comparisons of serologic testing, RhD interpretations, Rh immune globulin (RhIG) management, fetomaternal hemorrhage testing, and RHD genotyping for weak D-reactive specimens. DESIGN.­: We devised an educational exercise in which 81 transfusion services supporting obstetrics performed tube-method RhD typing on 2 unknown red blood cell challenge specimens identified as (1) maternal and (2) newborn. Both specimens were from the same weak D-reactive donor. The exercise revealed how participants responded to these different clinical situations. RESULTS.­: Of reporting laboratories, 14% (11 of 80) obtained discrepant immediate-spin reactions on the 2 specimens. Nine different reporting terms were used to interpret weak D-reactive maternal RhD types to obstetricians. In laboratories obtaining negative maternal immediate-spin reactions, 28% (16 of 57) performed unwarranted antiglobulin testing, sometimes leading to recommendations against giving RhIG. To screen for excess fetomaternal hemorrhage after a weak D-reactive newborn, 47% (34 of 73) of reporting laboratories would have employed a contraindicated fetal rosette test, risking false-negative results and inadequate RhIG coverage. Sixty percent (44 of 73) of laboratories would obtain RHD genotyping in some or all cases. CONCLUSIONS.­: For obstetric and neonatal patients with serologic weak D phenotypes, we found several critical problems in transfusion service laboratory practices. We provide recommendations for appropriate testing, consistent immunohematologic terminology, and RHD genotype-guided management of Rh immune globulin therapy and RBC transfusions.

Platelet components and bacterial contamination: hospital perspective 2022.

Bacterial contamination of platelet units has been one of the most common transfusion-transmitted infections. Approximately 4 to 7 fatalities are being reported to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) annually, which cites bacterially contaminated platelet units as the cause. Over the past 3 decades, different mitigation strategies have been introduced to minimize the risk of morbidity and mortality related to contaminated platelet units. The process of platelet collection and manufacturing as well as storage at 20°C to 24°C contributes to higher prevalence of contaminated units. The risk of transfusing bacterially contaminated platelets can be lowered using different types of interventions. Prevention of bacterial contamination can be done by strict adherence to techniques that minimize contamination during unit collection. The detection of bacteria in platelet products can be improved with a combination of rapid testing and bacterial cultures that involve large volume and delayed sampling. Finally, pathogen reduction can inactivate bacteria or other pathogens present in the unit. This article describes different strategies that blood centers and transfusion services have undertaken since October 2021 to meet FDA guidance requirements. Market forces as well as feasibility of different FDA-proposed approaches have limited the number of practical solutions to just a few. In addition, the blood product availability required hospitals to adopt more progressive strategies to provide patients with needed platelet products.

Clinical Practice Guidelines From the Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies (AABB): COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma.

DESCRIPTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 convalescent plasma (CCP) has emerged as a potential treatment of COVID-19. However, meta-analysis data and recommendations are limited. The Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies (AABB) developed clinical practice guidelines for the appropriate use of CCP. METHODS: These guidelines are based on 2 living systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating CCP from 1 January 2019 to 26 January 2022. There were 33 RCTs assessing 21 916 participants. The results were summarized using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method. An expert panel reviewed the data using the GRADE framework to formulate recommendations. RECOMMENDATION 1 (OUTPATIENT): The AABB suggests CCP transfusion in addition to the usual standard of care for outpatients with COVID-19 who are at high risk for disease progression (weak recommendation, moderate-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2 (INPATIENT): The AABB recommends against CCP transfusion for unselected hospitalized persons with moderate or severe disease (strong recommendation, high-certainty evidence). This recommendation does not apply to immunosuppressed patients or those who lack antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. RECOMMENDATION 3 (INPATIENT): The AABB suggests CCP transfusion in addition to the usual standard of care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who do not have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies detected at admission (weak recommendation, low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 4 (INPATIENT): The AABB suggests CCP transfusion in addition to the usual standard of care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and preexisting immunosuppression (weak recommendation, low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 5 (PROPHYLAXIS): The AABB suggests against prophylactic CCP transfusion for uninfected persons with close contact exposure to a person with COVID-19 (weak recommendation, low-certainty evidence). GOOD CLINICAL PRACTICE STATEMENT: CCP is most effective when transfused with high neutralizing titers to infected patients early after symptom onset.

Hospital red blood cell and platelet supply and utilization from March to December of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: The BEST collaborative study.

BACKGROUND: At the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, widespread blood shortages were anticipated. We sought to determine how hospital blood supply and blood utilization were affected by the first wave of COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Weekly red blood cell (RBC) and platelet (PLT) inventory, transfusion, and outdate data were collected from 13 institutions in the United States, Brazil, Canada, and Denmark from March 1st to December 31st of 2020 and 2019. Data from the sites were aligned based on each site's local first peak of COVID-19 cases, and data from 2020 (pandemic year) were compared with data from the corresponding period in 2019 (pre-pandemic baseline). RESULTS: RBC inventories were 3% lower in 2020 than in 2019 (680 vs. 704, p < .001) and 5% fewer RBCs were transfused per week compared to 2019 (477 vs. 501, p < .001). However, during the first COVID-19 peak, RBC and PLT inventories were higher than normal, as reflected by deviation from par, days on hand, and percent outdated. At this time, 16% fewer inpatient beds were occupied, and 43% fewer surgeries were performed compared to 2019 (p < .001). In contrast to 2019 when there was no correlation, there was, in 2020, significant negative correlations between RBC and PLT days on hand and both percentage occupancy of inpatient beds and percentage of surgeries performed. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, RBC and PLT inventories remained adequate. During the first wave of cases, significant decreases in patient care activities were associated with excess RBC and PLT supplies and increased product outdating.

Vitamin K antagonist reversal strategies: Systematic review and network meta-analysis from the AABB.

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation requires urgent reversal in cases of life-threatening bleeding or invasive procedures. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Network meta-analysis for comparing the safety and efficacy of warfarin reversal strategies including plasma and prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs). RESULTS: Seven studies including 594 subjects using reversal agents plasma, 3-factor-PCC (Uman Complex and Konyne), and 4-factor-PCC (Beriplex/KCentra, Octaplex, and Cofact) met inclusion criteria. Compared with plasma, patients receiving Cofact probably have a higher rate of international normalized ratio (INR) correction (risk difference [RD] 499 more per 1000 patients, 95% confidence interval [CI], 176-761, low certainty[LC]); higher reversal of bleeding (323 more per 1000 patients, 11-344 more, LC); and fewer transfusion requirements (0.96 fewer units, 1.65-0.27 fewer, LC). Patients receiving Beriplex/KCentra probably have a higher rate of INR correction (476 more per 1000 patients, 332-609 more, LC); higher reversal of bleeding (127 more per 1000 patients, 43 fewer to 236 more); and similar transfusion requirements (0.01 fewer units, 0.31 fewer to 0.28 more, high/moderate certainty). Patients receiving Octaplex probably have a higher rate of INR correction (RD 579 more per 1000 patients, 189-825 more, LC). CONCLUSIONS: PCCs probably provide an advantage in INR reversal compared to plasma. There was no added risk of adverse events with PCCs.

Current advances in transfusion medicine 2021: A critical review of selected topics by the AABB Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee.

BACKGROUND: Each year the AABB Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee (CTMC) procures a synopsis highlighting new, important, and clinically relevant studies in the field of transfusion medicine (TM). This has been made available as a publication in Transfusion since 2018. METHODS: CTMC members reviewed and identified original manuscripts covering TM-related topics published electronically (ahead-of-print) or in print from December 2020 to December 2021. Selection of publications was discussed at committee meetings and chosen based on perceived relevance and originality. Next, committee members worked in pairs to create a synopsis of each topic, which was then reviewed by additional committee members. The first and senior authors assembled the final manuscript. Although this synopsis is extensive, it is not exhaustive, and some articles may have been excluded or missed. RESULTS: The following topics are included: blood products; convalescent plasma; donor collections and testing; hemoglobinopathies; immunohematology and genomics; hemostasis; patient blood management; pediatrics; therapeutic apheresis; and cell therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This synopsis highlights and summarizes recent key developments in TM and may be useful for educational purposes.

Prophylactic tranexamic acid in patients with hematologic malignancy: a placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

Evidence of the effectiveness of prophylactic use of tranexamic acid (TXA) in thrombocytopenia is lacking. To determine whether TXA safely reduces bleeding incidence in patients undergoing treatment for hematologic malignancies, a randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted from June 2016 through June 2020. Of 3120 screened adults, 356 patients were eligible and enrolled, and 337 patients (mean age, 53.9; 141 [41.8%] women), randomized to 1300 mg TXA orally or 1000 mg TXA through IV (n = 168) vs placebo (n = 169) thrice daily for maximum 30 days. Three hundred thirty patients were activated when their platelet counts fell below 30 000 per µL; 279 (83%) had complete outcome ascertainment. World Health Organization (WHO) grade ≥2 bleeding was observed in the 30 days following activation in 50.3% (73/145) and 54.2% (78/144) of patients in the TXA and placebo groups, with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-1.34; P = .44). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean number of platelet transfusions (mean difference, 0.1; 95% CI, -1.9 to 2.0), mean days alive without grade ≥2 bleeding (mean difference, 0.8; 95% CI, -0.4 to 2.0), thrombotic events (6/163 [3.7%] TXA, 9/163 [5.5%] placebo), or deaths due to serious bleeding. Most common adverse events were: diarrhea (116/164 [70.7%] TXA and 114/163 [69.9%] placebo); febrile neutropenia (111/164 [67.7%] TXA, 105/163 [64.4%] placebo); fatigue (106/164 [64.6%] TXA, 109/163 [66.9%] placebo); and nausea (104/164 [63.4%] TXA, 97/163 [59.5%] placebo). Among patients with hematologic malignancy undergoing chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, prophylactic treatment with TXA compared with placebo did not significantly reduce the risk of WHO grade ≥2 bleeding.

Status of hospital-based blood transfusion services in low-income and middle-income countries: a cross-sectional international survey.

OBJECTIVES: Blood transfusion is life-saving for patients experiencing acute blood loss and severe anaemia. In low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), low blood donation rates and unavailability of whole blood and blood components (blood products) impairs timely blood transfusion. To fulfil patient-specific blood orders, a hospital blood transfusion service (HBTS) receives orders from a prescriber for blood transfusion, tests and prepares blood products for the patient. This study sought to describe the current state of LMIC HBTS. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey explored LMIC HBTS access to blood products, testing methods, policies and structure. Surveys were administered in English, Spanish, French and Russian, followed by a mixed-methods analysis. SETTING: HBTS within LMICs. PARTICIPANTS: From among 124 public and private facilities invited to participate, we received 71 (57%) responses. Of these responses, 50 HBTS from 27 LMICs performed on-site blood transfusions. RESULTS: Most LMIC HBTS perform blood collection to generate blood products for their patients (36/47, 77%); few relied exclusively on an external supply of blood products (11/47, 23%). The primary reason for blood transfusion was adult anaemia for non-malignant conditions (17/112, 15%). Testing methods varied by gross national income per capita. Blood transfusion delays to patients were common (17/30, 57%) attributed to inadequate blood inventories (13/29, 45%). Other barriers included lack of regular clinician education about transfusion (8/29, 28%) and sustainable financial models for the HBTS (4/29, 14%). CONCLUSION: This survey describes the status of HBTS in diverse LMICs, illustrating that the availability of blood products remains a principal problem, requiring HBTS to generate its own facility's blood supply. Currently, blood shortages are not reported as a patient-specific adverse event making systematic tracking of delays in transfusion difficult. These findings highlight areas for further exploration related to the lack of available blood inventories for transfusions at HBTS in LMICs.

Hospital transfusion service operations during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Lessons learned from the AABB hospital survey in preparation for the next infectious disease outbreak.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic disrupted hospital operations, affected the blood supply, and challenged the health care system to develop new therapeutic options, including convalescent plasma (CCP). The aim of this study is to describe and analyze blood supply fluctuations and the use of convalescent plasma in 2020. METHODS: AABB distributed a weekly and biweekly questionnaire through email to hospital-based members (HBM). RESULTS: The survey was sent to 887 HBM with 479 unique respondents, most of the hospitals served pediatric and adult patients, and all states of the country participated, except Idaho and Vermont. Fifty four percent of HBM reported increased wastage in the early phase of the pandemic (May), which decreased to 4% by the end of June and throughout the rest of the year. The majority of HBM reported receiving alerts from their blood suppliers reporting blood shortages throughout the year. During March and April, only 12% of HBM were performing elective surgical procedures. The top reasons to delay procedures were: bed availability (28%); COVID-19 caseload (23%; and blood availability (19%). By mid-April, 42% HBM had transfused CCP and reported >24 h delay in getting the units; the vast majority obtained CCP using the Expanded Access Protocol, and later, the Emergency Use Authorization. HBM consistently prioritized the most severe patients to receive CCP, but the proportion of severely ill recipients fell from 52% to 37% between May and October, with an increase from 5% to 21% of HBM providing CCP transfusion early in the course of the disease. DISCUSSION: Blood utilization and availability fluctuated during the pandemic. The fluctuations appeared to be related to the number of COVID-19 in the community. The use and regulatory landscape of CCP rapidly evolved over the first 8 months of the pandemic.

Current advances in transfusion medicine 2020: A critical review of selected topics by the AABB Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee.

BACKGROUND: The AABB Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee (CTMC) compiles an annual synopsis of the published literature covering important developments in the field of transfusion medicine (TM), which has been made available as a manuscript published in Transfusion since 2018. METHODS: CTMC committee members reviewed original manuscripts including TM-related topics published electronically (ahead) or in print from December 2019 to December 2020. The selection of topics and manuscripts was discussed at committee meetings and chosen based on relevance and originality. Next, committee members worked in pairs to create a synopsis of each topic, which was then reviewed by two additional committee members. The first and senior authors of this manuscript assembled the final manuscript. Although this synopsis is extensive, it is not exhaustive, and some papers may have been excluded or missed. RESULTS: The following topics are included: COVID-19 effects on the blood supply and regulatory landscape, COVID convalescent plasma, adult transfusion practices, whole blood, molecular immunohematology, pediatric TM, cellular therapy, and apheresis medicine. CONCLUSIONS: This synopsis provides easy access to relevant topics and may be useful as an educational tool.