Tanja Vollmer1, Volkmar Schottstedt2, Juergen Bux2, Gabriele Walther-Wenke3, Cornelius Knabbe1, Jens Dreier1. 1. Institute of Laboratory and Transfusion Medicine, Heart and Diabetes Centre, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Ruhr University Hospital - Bochum University, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany. 2. DRK-West Blood Donation Service, Zentrallabor Hagen, Germany. 3. DRK- West Blood Donation Service, Münster, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is growing concern on the residual risk of bacterial contamination of platelet concentrates in Germany, despite the reduction of the shelf-life of these concentrates and the introduction of bacterial screening. In this study, the applicability of the BactiFlow flow cytometric assay for bacterial screening of platelet concentrates on day 2 or 3 of their shelf-life was assessed in two German blood services. The results were used to evaluate currently implemented or newly discussed screening strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two thousand and ten apheresis platelet concentrates were tested on day 2 or day 3 after donation using BactiFlow flow cytometry. Reactive samples were confirmed by the BacT/Alert culture system. RESULTS: Twenty-four of the 2,100 platelet concentrates tested were reactive in the first test by BactiFlow. Of these 24 platelet concentrates, 12 were false-positive and the other 12 were initially reactive. None of the microbiological cultures of the initially reactive samples was positive. Parallel examination of 1,026 platelet concentrates by culture revealed three positive platelet concentrates with bacteria detected only in the anaerobic culture bottle and identified as Staphylococcus species. Two platelet concentrates were confirmed positive for Staphylcoccus epidermidis by culture. Retrospective analysis of the growth kinetics of the bacteria indicated that the bacterial titres were most likely below the diagnostic sensitivity of the BactiFlow assay (<300 CFU/mL) and probably had no transfusion relevance. CONCLUSIONS: The BactiFlow assay is very convenient for bacterial screening of platelet concentrates independently of the testing day and the screening strategy. Although the optimal screening strategy could not be defined, this study provides further data to help achieve this goal.
BACKGROUND: There is growing concern on the residual risk of bacterial contamination of platelet concentrates in Germany, despite the reduction of the shelf-life of these concentrates and the introduction of bacterial screening. In this study, the applicability of the BactiFlow flow cytometric assay for bacterial screening of platelet concentrates on day 2 or 3 of their shelf-life was assessed in two German blood services. The results were used to evaluate currently implemented or newly discussed screening strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two thousand and ten apheresis platelet concentrates were tested on day 2 or day 3 after donation using BactiFlow flow cytometry. Reactive samples were confirmed by the BacT/Alert culture system. RESULTS: Twenty-four of the 2,100 platelet concentrates tested were reactive in the first test by BactiFlow. Of these 24 platelet concentrates, 12 were false-positive and the other 12 were initially reactive. None of the microbiological cultures of the initially reactive samples was positive. Parallel examination of 1,026 platelet concentrates by culture revealed three positive platelet concentrates with bacteria detected only in the anaerobic culture bottle and identified as Staphylococcus species. Two platelet concentrates were confirmed positive for Staphylcoccus epidermidis by culture. Retrospective analysis of the growth kinetics of the bacteria indicated that the bacterial titres were most likely below the diagnostic sensitivity of the BactiFlow assay (<300 CFU/mL) and probably had no transfusion relevance. CONCLUSIONS: The BactiFlow assay is very convenient for bacterial screening of platelet concentrates independently of the testing day and the screening strategy. Although the optimal screening strategy could not be defined, this study provides further data to help achieve this goal.
Authors: T Vollmer; J Dreier; V Schottstedt; J Bux; K Tapernon; W Sibrowski; K Kleesiek; C Knabbe Journal: Transfus Med Date: 2012-06-25 Impact factor: 2.019
Authors: Chyang T Fang; Linda A Chambers; Jean Kennedy; Annie Strupp; Mei-Chien H Fucci; Jo Ann Janas; Yanlin Tang; Cheryl A Hapip; Teri B Lawrence; Roger Y Dodd Journal: Transfusion Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Sarah K Harm; Meghan Delaney; Michael Charapata; James P Aubuchon; Darrell J Triulzi; Mark H Yazer Journal: Transfusion Date: 2012-07-31 Impact factor: 3.157