Search

BackgroundDue to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the transfusion medicine community has experienced unprecedented blood supply shortages since March 2020. As such, numerous changes to everyday practice have occurred with a specific emphasis on blood conservation. We sought to determine the strategies used to mitigate blood shortages and promote blood conservation during the pandemic.MethodsAn anonymous, 37-question survey was developed using Research Electronic Data Capture and distributed via e-mail to transfusion medicine specialists across the US obtained via publicly available databases.ResultsAmongst surveyed [41.1% response rate (51/124 institutions)], 98.0% experienced a product shortage, with the greatest number reporting red blood cell (RBC) shortages (92.0%). This led to 35.3% of institutions altering the composition and/or number of blood product suppliers, including a 100% increase in the number of institutions acquiring blood from organizations that connect hospital transfusion services with blood collection centers (e.g., Blood Buy) compared to before March 2020. Prospective triaging of blood products was the most common blood conservation strategy (68.1%), though 35.4% altered their RBC exchange or transfusion program for patients receiving chronic RBC transfusion/exchange. As a result of these changes, 78.6% of institutions reported that these changes resulted in a reduction in blood product usage, and 38.1% reported a decrease in product wastage.ConclusionsMost hospitals experienced the effects of the supply shortage, and many of them implemented blood conserving measures. Conservation strategies were associated with decreased blood utilization and waste, and future studies could evaluate whether these changes persist.

BackgroundThe 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.MethodsCTMC 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionsThis synopsis provides easy access to relevant topics and may be useful as an educational tool.

Background: Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) and normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) are organ procurement and transport techniques that can improve organ quality, facilitate longer transport, and reduce postoperative complications, increasing organ availability and improving outcomes. NRP and NMP often require allogeneic red blood cells (RBCs). Our academic transfusion service began providing RBCs to support NRP and NMP for adult heart transplant (HT), orthotopic liver transplant (OLT), and multiorgan transplant (MOT) in August 2020. Methods: This single‐center, retrospective study describes the implementation process and analyzes the characteristics of RBC support during the first 3 years of the perfusion programs. Timing and quantity of units issued and used, organ recipient demographics, and transplant outcomes were obtained from transfusion service and electronic medical records. Results: From 2020 to 2023, the transfusion service received 233 requests to support NRP and NMP perfusion cases. Of these, 105 cases resulted in RBC use, and units were returned or discarded in 112 cases. A total of 131 patients received perfusion‐facilitated transplants (92 HT, 27 OLT, and 12 MOT). The majority of perfusion‐facilitated HTs utilized NRP (81/92, 88%), whereas most perfusion‐facilitated OLTs utilized NMP (21/27, 78%). Across all 233 requests, a total of 381 RBC units were used to facilitate 131 transplants, averaging 2.91 units/transplant. Discussion: Provision of RBCs for NRP and NMP techniques represents a novel method for transfusion services to support and facilitate life‐saving organ transplants with only modest product use, about three RBC units per organ transplant in this single‐center study. See editorial on page 1811–1813, in this issue [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) transplantation options for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) are currently under investigation. Patients with SCD have a high rate of alloimmunization to red blood cell antigens, often complicating transfusion support. Transfusion reactions, including acute and delayed hemolytic reactions, have been observed despite immunosuppressive regimens. Allogeneic donor transplants have been shown to carry a risk of prolonged reticulocytopenia and acute hemolysis with severe anemia in nonmyeloablative regimens. We discuss our experience providing transfusion support to patients with SCD undergoing HPC transplantation, propose an outline for a complete pretransplantation evaluation, and discuss donor/recipient compatibility issues and their implications.

BackgroundThe first step in manufacturing chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells is to collect autologous CD3+ lymphocytes by apheresis. Patients, however, often have leukopenia or have other disease-related complications. We evaluated the feasibility of collecting adequate numbers of CD3+ cells, risk factors for inadequate collections, and the rate of adverse events.Study design and methodsApheresis lymphocyte collections from patients participating in three CAR T-cell clinical trials were reviewed. Collections were performed on the COBE Spectra by experienced nurses, with the goal of obtaining a minimum of 0.6 × 109 and a target of 2 × 109 CD3+ cells. Preapheresis peripheral blood counts, apheresis parameters, and product cell counts were analyzed.ResultsOf the 71 collections, 69 (97%) achieved the minimum and 55 (77%) achieved the target. Before apheresis, the 16 patients with yields below the target had significantly lower proportions and absolute numbers of circulating lymphocytes and CD3+ lymphocytes and higher proportions of circulating blasts and NK cells than those who achieved the target (470 × 106 lymphocytes/L vs. 1340 × 106 lymphocytes/L, p = 0.008; 349 × 106 CD3+ cells/L vs. 914 × 106 CD3+ cells/L, p = 0.001; 17.6% blasts vs. 4.55% blasts, p = 0.029). Enrichment of blasts in the product compared to the peripheral blood occurred in four patients, including the two patients whose collections did not yield the minimum number of CD3+ cells. Apheresis complications occurred in 11 patients (15%) and, with one exception, were easily managed in the apheresis clinic.ConclusionsIn most patients undergoing CAR T-cell therapy, leukapheresis is well tolerated, and adequate numbers of CD3+ lymphocytes are collected.

Background: Transfusion service laboratories (TSL) often need to renovate or design new laboratory space, and their leaders must be involved in the complex and multifaceted design process. Study Design and Methods: This manuscript outlines the design process and considerations for a dedicated TSL space. Results: Proactive engagement with key collaborators throughout the design process is essential. Major design considerations include physical features such as location, size, service/equipment needs, and zones within the laboratory; intangible issues such as efficiency, well‐being, and disaster planning; and adaptations for suboptimal space and changes over time. Conclusion: Investing in the design of the laboratory space facilitates high‐quality TSL operations, productivity, customer satisfaction, regulatory compliance, staff well‐being, and most importantly, patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]