How do we implement Day 6 and Day 7 platelets at a hospital-based transfusion service?

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.

A survey of US hospitals on platelet inventory management, transfusion practice, and platelet availability

BACKGROUND

A survey of US hospitals was conducted to increase our understanding of the current state of platelet (PLT) practice and supply. The survey captures information on transfusion practice and inventory management, including stock levels, outdate rates, ability to return or transfer PLTs, and low dose PLTs. Notably, the survey also elucidates PLT availability challenges and impact to patient care.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A 27 question online survey was distributed directly to over 995 US hospitals and indirectly through blood centers to many more between September 27 and October 25, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for respondent characteristics. Bivariate analysis was performed and correlation coefficients, chi square tests, and p values determined statistical significance of relationships between variables.

RESULTS

Four hundred and eighty-one hospitals completed the survey of which 21.6%, 53.2%, and 25.2% were characterized as small, medium, and large hospitals, respectively. Some key observations from this survey include: (1) there is an opportunity for greater adherence to evidence-based guidelines; (2) higher outdate rates occur in hospitals stocking less than five PLTs and the ability to return or transfer PLTs lowers outdates; (3) use of low dose apheresis PLTs varies; and (4) decreased PLT availability is commonly reported, especially in hospitals with high usage, and can lead to delays in transfusions or surgeries.

CONCLUSION

This survey represents a comprehensive national assessment of inventory management practices and PLT availability challenges in US hospitals. Findings from this survey can be used to guide further research, help shape future guidance for industry, and assist with policy decisions.

Platelet transfusion: Alloimmunization and refractoriness

The transfusion of platelets for both prophylaxis and treatment of bleeding is relevant to all areas of medicine and surgery. Historically, guidance regarding platelet transfusion has been limited by a lack of good quality clinical trials and so has been based largely on expert opinion. In recent years however there has been renewed interest in methods to prevent and treat hemorrhage, and the field has benefited from a number of large clinical trials. Some studies, such as platelet transfusion versus standard care after acute stroke due to spontaneous cerebral haemorrhage associated with antiplatelet therapy (PATCH) and platelets for neonatal transfusion Study 2 (PLANET-2), have reported an increased risk of harm with platelet transfusion in specific patient groups. These studies suggest a wider role of platelets beyond hemostasis, and highlight the need for further clinical trials to better understand the risks and benefits of platelet transfusions. This review evaluates the indications for platelet transfusion, both prophylactic and therapeutic, in the light of recent studies and clinical trials. It highlights new developments in the fields of platelet storage and platelet substitutes, and novel ways to avoid complications associated with platelet transfusions. Lastly, it reviews initiatives designed to reduce inappropriate use of platelet transfusions and to preserve this valuable resource for situations where there is evidence for their beneficial effect.

New Approaches and Trials in Pediatric Transfusion Medicine

Blood transfusions are frequently lifesaving, but there is growing awareness of their associated infectious and noninfectious adverse events. Patient blood management advocates for judicious use of transfusions and considerations of alternatives to correct anemia or achieve hemostasis. Several transfusion practices, either already implemented or under investigation, aim to further improve the safety of transfusions. An enduring challenge in pediatric and neonatal transfusion practice is that studies typically focus on adults, and findings are extrapolated to younger patients. This article aims to summarize some of the newer developments in transfusion medicine with a focus on the neonatal and pediatric population.

Economic Implications of Pathogen Reduced and Bacterially Tested Platelet Components: A US Hospital Budget Impact Model

BACKGROUND

US FDA draft guidance includes pathogen reduction (PR) or secondary rapid bacterial testing (RT) in its recommendations for mitigating risk of platelet component (PC) bacterial contamination. An interactive budget impact model was created for hospitals to use when considering these technologies.

METHODS

A Microsoft Excel model was built and populated with base-case costs and probabilities identified through literature search and a survey of US hospital transfusion service directors. Annual costs of PC acquisition, testing, wastage, dispensing/transfusion, sepsis, shelf life, and reimbursement for a mid-sized hospital that purchases all of its PCs were compared for four scenarios: 100% conventional PCs (C-PC), 100% RT-PC, 100% PR-PC, and 50% RT-PC/50% PR-PC.

RESULTS

Annual total costs were US$3.64, US$3.67, and US$3.96 million when all platelets were C-PC, RT-PC, or PR-PC, respectively, or US$3.81 million in the 50% RT-PC/50% PR-PC scenario. The annual net cost of PR-PC, obtained by subtracting annual reimbursements from annual total costs, is 6.18% above that of RT-PC. Maximum usable shelf lives for C-PC, RT-PC, and PR-PC are 3.0, 5.0, and 3.6 days, respectively; hospitals obtain PR-PC components earliest at 1.37 days.

CONCLUSION

The model predicts minimal cost increase for PR-PC versus RT-PC, including cost offsets such as elimination of bacterial detection and irradiation, and reimbursement. Additional safety provided by PR, including risk mitigation of transfusion-transmission of a broad spectrum of viruses, parasites, and emerging pathogens, may justify this increase. Effective PC shelf life may increase with RT, but platelets can be available sooner with PR due to elimination of bacterial detection, depending on blood center logistics.

Efforts Toward Elimination of Infectious Agents in Blood Products

The US blood supply has never been safer. This level of safety depends on a multifaceted approach including blood donor screening, sensitive infectious disease testing, and good manufacturing practice. However, risks remain for transfusion-transmitted infections due to bacterial contamination of platelets and emerging diseases. Thus, ongoing improvements in screening and testing are required. Newer pathogen reduction technologies have shown promise in further ameliorating the safety of the blood supply.

Platelet Transfusion for Patients With Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

Purpose

To provide evidence-based guidance on the use of platelet transfusion in people with cancer. This guideline updates and replaces the previous ASCO platelet transfusion guideline published initially in 2001.

Methods

ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the medical literature published from September 1, 2014, through October 26, 2016. This review builds on two 2015 systematic reviews that were conducted by the AABB and the International Collaboration for Transfusion Medicine Guidelines. For clinical questions that were not addressed by the AABB and the International Collaboration for Transfusion Medicine Guidelines (the use of leukoreduction and platelet transfusion in solid tumors or chronic, stable severe thrombocytopenia) or that were addressed partially (invasive procedures), the ASCO search extended back to January 2000.

Results

The updated ASCO review included 24 more recent publications: three clinical practice guidelines, eight systematic reviews, and 13 observational studies.

Recommendations

The most substantial change to a previous recommendation involved platelet transfusion in the setting of hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Based on data from randomized controlled trials, adult patients who undergo autologous stem-cell transplantation at experienced centers may receive a platelet transfusion at the first sign of bleeding, rather than prophylactically. Prophylactic platelet transfusion at defined platelet count thresholds is still recommended for pediatric patients undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation and for adult and pediatric patients undergoing allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. Other recommendations address platelet transfusion in patients with hematologic malignancies or solid tumors or in those who undergo invasive procedures. Guidance is also provided regarding the production of platelet products, prevention of Rh alloimmunization, and management of refractoriness to platelet transfusion ( www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki ).

Storage time of platelet concentrates and risk of a positive blood culture: a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Concern of transfusion-transmitted bacterial infections has been the major hurdle to extend shelf life of platelet (PLT) concentrates. We aimed to investigate the association between storage time and risk of positive blood cultures at different times after transfusion.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed a nationwide cohort study among PLT transfusion recipients in Denmark between 2010 and 2012, as recorded in the Scandinavian Donations and Transfusions (SCANDAT2) database. Linking with a nationwide database on blood cultures (MiBa), we compared the incidence of a positive blood culture among recipients of PLTs stored 6 to 7 days (old) to those receiving fresh PLTs (1-5 days), using Poisson regression models. We considered cumulative exposures in windows of 1, 3, 5, and 7 days.

RESULTS

A total of 9776 patients received 66,101 PLT transfusions. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) of a positive blood culture the day after transfusion of at least one old PLT concentrate was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.09) compared to transfusion of fresh PLT concentrates. The incidence rate of a positive blood culture was lower the day after receiving one old compared to one fresh PLT concentrate (IRR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.37-0.87). Three, 5, or 7 days after transfusion, storage time was not associated with the risk of a positive blood culture.

CONCLUSION

Storage of buffy coat-derived PLT concentrates in PAS-C up to 7 days seems safe regarding the risk of a positive blood culture. If anything, transfusion of a single old PLT concentrate may decrease this risk the following day.

The platelets' perspective to pathogen reduction technologies

A wide variety of clinical conditions, associated with low circulating platelet counts, require platelet transfusion in order to normalize hemostatic function. Although single-donor apheresis platelets bear the lowest risk of transfusion-transmitted infections, pathogen reduction technologies (PRT) are being implemented worldwide to reduce this risk further through inactivation of known, emergent and as yet to be discovered nucleic acid-based pathogens. Human blood platelets are now known to harbor a diverse transcriptome, important to their function and comprised of >5000 protein-coding messenger RNAs and different classes of non-coding RNAs, including microRNAs. Our appreciation of the nucleic acid-dependent functions of platelets is likely to increase. On the other hand, the side effects of PRT on platelet function are underappreciated. Recent evidences suggest that PRT may compromise platelets' responsiveness to agonists, and induce platelet activation. For instance, platelets have the propensity to release proinflammatory microparticles (MPs) upon activation, and the possibility that PRT may enhance the production of platelet MPs in platelet concentrates (PCs) appears likely. With this in mind, it would be timely and appropriate to investigate other means to inactivate pathogens more specifically, or to modify the currently available PRT so to better preserve the platelet function and improve the safety of PCs; platelets' perspective to PRT deserves to be considered.