Immediate adverse reactions to platelet transfusions: whole blood derived versus apheresis platelets.

The transfusion of whole blood derived platelets (WBDPs) or apheresis platelets (APs) is standard support for cancer patients. However, disputes remain about which type of platelets are ideal in terms of efficacy, cost, and the risk of adverse reactions. This cross sectional study included 141 cancer patients who underwent chemotherapy or hematopoietic progenitor cell transplantation and received platelet transfusions at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center between 2002 and 2003 were retrospectively evaluated. A total of 141 patients who did not differ significantly in terms of age or sex had a reaction to transfusions (WBDPs, n=123; APs, n=18), for a frequency of 0.66% in patients who received WBDPs and 0.45% in patients who received APs, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.13). More WBDP-related reactions occurred in patients transfused with older platelets (>2 days old) than in patients transfused with fresh platelets, but the difference compared with AP-associated reactions was not statistically significant. However, the rate of reactions to WBDP may increase if WBDPs are stored for a prolonged time (>2 days). Until evidence becomes available that clearly refutes this; the more fresh platelets as possible may be used.

The role and impact of the transfusion medicine consultation service in the management of patients in the hematopoietic transplant service: A retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adverse reactions secondary to transfusion of incorrect blood components can be fatal. We have established numerous processes to prevent these reactions in patients with cancer who continuously need blood component support, especially hematopoietic transplant recipients. The development of an active transfusion medicine consultation service at our institution to serve patients undergoing hematopoietic transplantation has led to more organized and simpler management of providing blood components to such patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Safety tools were employed to attain our goal of providing safe blood components to hematopoietic transplant recipients. These tools were consultation request forms, blood component selection stickers on the patients' charts, and transfusion medicine physician consultation notes posted in the patients' medical records. One hundred randomly selected hematopoietic transplant recipients were reviewed over 16 months. Fifty patients received blood components from ABO-compatible donors, whereas the other 50 patients received components from ABO-incompatible donors. Deviation reports regarding the issuance of blood components in these patients over the study period were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: We identified eight reported deviations from the recommended blood components: red blood cells in one case, fresh frozen plasma in one case, single donor platelets in one case, and random donor platelets in five cases. Our transfusion service issued all eight components, but none of them were transfused. In all eight cases, the blood components were intended for transfusion to ABO-mismatched hematopoietic transplant recipients. Nurses identified the incorrect blood components by verifying the recommended blood groups on the patients' chart stickers, returned the components to the transfusion service, and transfused the correct blood components. CONCLUSION: Use of these safety tools has improved the safety culture regarding transfusion of blood components in hematopoietic transplant recipients at our institution.

Transfusion of leukoreduced cellular blood components from cytomegalovirus-unscreened donors in allogeneic hematopoietic transplant recipients: analysis of 72 recipients.

Leukoreduction of blood components has been considered a safe alternative to screening donors for CMV. The objective of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of bedside leukoreduction in preventing CMV transmission. We retrospectively studied 72 transplant recipients and donors who were CMV-seronegative pairs. All patients were transfused with CMV-unscreened cellular blood products leukoreduced at the bedside using leukoreduction filters. Quality control measures performed monthly in our leukoreduced blood components consistently demonstrated that at least 95% of the units sampled meet the leukoreduction criterion established by the American Association of Blood Banks standards. The CMV status of the recipients and donors was determined before transplantation by the latex agglutination assay. Recipients were observed for at least 100 days after transplantation. CMV cultures of urine, buffy coat, bone marrow, and bronchial washings were done weekly when indicated. CMV antigenemia testing was performed twice weekly: 11 transplant recipients seroconverted after transplantation. One patient was positive for CMV antigenemia 4 months after transplantation, but did not have CMV infection. Two of 61 patients who were not seroconverted were CMV antigenemia positive and did not have CMV infection: leukoreduction of cellular blood products is an efficient method of preventing CMV infection.

Bedside leukoreduction of cellular blood components in preventing cytomegalovirus transmission in allogeneic bone marrow transplant recipients: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection continues to be a major complication of bone marrow transplants (BMTs). Administration of leukoreduced unscreened cellular blood products at the bedside has been shown to be effective in preventing CMV transmission via transfusions in CMV-seronegative bone marrow transplant recipients who receive their transplants from CMV-seronegative donors. The aim of this study was to determine whether CMV infection occurred in CMV-seronegative BMT patients who received CMV-seronegative donor marrows and CMV untested blood products leukodepleted at the bedside. DESIGN AND METHODS: We collected data over a 2-year period from patients undergoing allogeneic transplantation who received leukoreduced cellular blood components that were not screened for CMV. All CMV-seropositive patients and donors were excluded from the study. The CMV status of both the donors and the patients was determined before the transplantations. CMV cultures of urine, blood buffy coat, bone marrow samples and bronchial washings were performed if necessary in patients. RESULTS: Thirty-six CMV-seronegative patient-donor pairs were included in the study. Five patients (13.89%) were serologically reactive, but their CMV cultures were negative and they did not show signs or symptoms of CMV infection. These patients received intravenous immunoglobulin and thus could have acquired anti-CMV passively. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: The confidence interval in this study is 0/36 incidence of CMV infection. Our present findings support those of prior studies showing the effectiveness of filtered unscreened blood components as an alternative transfusion support for CMV-seronegative marrow transplant recipients. Studies in larger number of patients are warranted.

Transfusion support using filtered unscreened blood products for cytomegalovirus-negative allogeneic marrow transplant recipients.

It has been suggested that leukoreduced unscreened blood products can be used as an alternative to components from cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seronegative donors in order to prevent transmission of CMV from transfusions for CMV-seronegative marrow transplant recipients with CMV-seronegative donors, but confirmatory data are lacking. A retrospective chart review was undertaken for patients undergoing allogeneic transplantation over a 4-year period during which blood products were filtered for CMV-seronegative patients with CMV-seronegative donors when CMV-seronegative components were not available. Forty-five CMV-seronegative patient-donor pairs were identified. Only one patient developed CMV disease (pneumonia) and no other patients developed an infection. In this group of patients, the rate of CMV infection was 2.7% (95% CI, 0-8%) by life-table analysis. We conclude that filtered unscreened blood products as partial transfusion support for CMV-seronegative marrow transplant recipients were associated with a low incidence of CMV infection, justifying further evaluation of filtered blood products as total transfusion support for this patient population. However, since CMV infections still occur, continued surveillance by periodic culture or other techniques is warranted.

Assessing the efficiency of leukoreduction of cellular blood components. Use of a simplified formalin-fixation and batch-counting method.

To simplify the quality control procedure used to determine the efficiency and consistency of bedside leukoreduction, a counting protocol using prefiltration and postfiltration aliquots fixed in 10% formaldehyde was designed. To assess the reliability of the values obtained by counting the formalin-fixed samples, a parallel study was performed using our standard protocol of counting fresh propidium iodide-stained samples in a Nageotte chamber under a fluorescent microscope. A total of 30 single-donor platelet concentrates and 30 units of packed red blood cells were analyzed in parallel using the standard and formalin-fixation methods. Furthermore, the aliquots fixed in formaldehyde were split and counted at 1, 3, and 30 days. The results showed no significant quantitative difference between the two methods. Of note is that the counts in formaldehyde-fixed samples at 1, 3, and 30 days were consistent among themselves. The formaldehyde fixation of samples obtained for quality control of leukoreduction allows blood collection and storage at 4 degrees C and batch counting when and where convenient.