Age of blood and adverse outcomes in a maternity population

BACKGROUND In recent times there has been debate around whether longer storage time of blood is associated with increased rates of adverse outcomes following transfusion. It is unclear whether results focused on cardiac or critically ill patients apply to a maternity population. This study investigates whether older blood is associated with increased morbidity and readmission in women undergoing obstetric transfusion. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS Women giving birth in hospitals in New South Wales, Australia between July 2006‐December 2010 were included in the study population if they had received between 1‐4 red cell units during the birth admission. Information on women’s characteristics, transfusions and outcomes were obtained from 5 routinely collected datasets including blood collection, birth and hospitalisation data. Generalised propensity score methods were used to determine the effect of age of blood on rates of severe morbidity and readmission, independent of confounding factors. RESULTS Transfusion data were available for 2990 women, with a median age of blood transfused of 20 days (interquartile range 14,27 days). There were no differences in the age of blood transfused between women with and without severe morbidity (21 (14,28) vs 22 (15,30) days), and in women readmitted or not (22 (14,28) vs 22 (16,30) days). After considering potential confounding factors, no relationship was found between the age of blood transfused and rates of severe morbidity and readmission. CONCLUSION Among women receiving low volume transfusions during a birth admission, there was no evidence of increased rates of adverse outcomes following transfusion with older blood.NHMRC, Australian Red Cross, NSW Clinical Excellence Commission, AR

A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of intraoperative cell salvage during caesarean section in women at risk of haemorrhage: the SALVO (cell SALVage in Obstetrics) trial

Background Caesarean section is associated with blood loss and maternal morbidity. Excessive blood loss requires transfusion of donor (allogeneic) blood, which is a finite resource. Cell salvage returns blood lost during surgery to the mother. It may avoid the need for donor blood transfusion, but reliable evidence of its effects is lacking. Objectives To determine if routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section in mothers at risk of haemorrhage reduces the rates of blood transfusion and postpartum maternal morbidity, and is cost-effective, in comparison with standard practice without routine salvage use. Design Individually randomised controlled, multicentre trial with cost-effectiveness analysis. Treatment was not blinded. Setting A total of 26 UK obstetric units. Participants Out of 3054 women recruited between June 2013 and April 2016, we randomly assigned 3028 women at risk of haemorrhage to cell salvage or routine care. Randomisation was stratified using random permuted blocks of variable sizes. Of these, 1672 had emergency and 1356 had elective caesareans. We excluded women for whom cell salvage or donor blood transfusion was contraindicated. Interventions Cell salvage (intervention) versus routine care without salvage (control). In the intervention group, salvage was set up in 95.6% of the women and, of these, 50.8% had salvaged blood returned. In the control group, 3.9% had salvage deployed. Main outcome measures Primary – donor blood transfusion. Secondary – units of donor blood transfused, time to mobilisation, length of hospitalisation, mean fall in haemoglobin, fetomaternal haemorrhage (FMH) measured by Kleihauer–Betke test, and maternal fatigue. Analyses were adjusted for stratification factors and other factors that were believed to be prognostic a priori. Cost-effectiveness outcomes – costs of resources and service provision taking the UK NHS perspective. Results We analysed 1498 and 1492 participants in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Overall, the transfusion rate was 2.5% in the intervention group and 3.5% in the control group [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 1.01; p = 0.056]. In a planned subgroup analysis, the transfusion rate was 3.0% in the intervention group and 4.6% in the control group among emergency caesareans (adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.99), whereas it was 1.8% in the intervention group and 2.2% in the control group among elective caesareans (adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.83) (interaction p = 0.46, suggesting that the difference in effect between subgroups was not statistically significant). Secondary outcomes did not differ between groups, except for FMH, which was higher under salvage in rhesus D (RhD)-negative women with RhD-positive babies (25.6% vs. 10.5%, adjusted OR 5.63, 95% CI 1.43 to 22.14; p = 0.013). No case of amniotic fluid embolism was observed. The additional cost of routine cell salvage during caesarean was estimated, on average, at £8110 per donor blood transfusion avoided. Conclusions The modest evidence for an effect of routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section on rates of donor blood transfusion was associated with increased FMH, which emphasises the need for adherence to guidance on anti-D prophylaxis. We are unable to comment on long-term antibody sensitisation effects. Based on the findings of this trial, cell salvage is unlikely to be considered cost-effective. Future work Research into risk of alloimmunisation among women exposed to cell salvage is needed. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN66118656. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

AAGBI guidelines:the use of blood components and their alternatives 2016

Blood transfusion can be life-saving. Anaesthetists regularly request and administer blood components to their patients. All anaesthetists must be familiar with indications and appropriate use of blood and blood components and their alternatives, but close liaison with haematology specialists and their local blood sciences laboratory is encouraged. Considerable changes in approaches to optimal use of blood components, together with the use of alternative products, have become apparent over the past decade, leading to a need to update previous guidelines and adapt them for the use of anaesthetists working throughout the hospital system

On the Dark Side of Therapies with Immunoglobulin Concentrates: The Adverse Events

Therapy by human immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentrates is a success story ongoing for decades with an ever increasing demand for this plasma product. The success of IgG concentrates on a clinical level is documented by the slowly increasing number of registered indication and the more rapid increase of the off-label uses, a topic dealt with in another contribution to this special issue of Frontiers in Immunology. A part of the success is the adverse event (AE) profile of IgG concentrates which is, even at life-long need for therapy, excellent. Transmission of pathogens in the last decade could be entirely controlled through the antecedent introduction by authorities of a regulatory network and installing quality standards by the plasma fractionation industry. The cornerstone of the regulatory network is current good manufacturing practice. Non-infectious AEs occur rarely and mainly are mild to moderate. However, in recent times, the increase in frequency of hemolytic and thrombotic AEs raised worrying questions on the possible background for these AEs. Below, we review elements of non-infectious AEs, and particularly focus on hemolysis and thrombosis. We discuss how the introduction of plasma fractionation by ion-exchange chromatography and polishing by immunoaffinity chromatographic steps might alter repertoire of specificities and influence AE profiles and efficacy of IgG concentrates