Aurélien Daurat1, Claire Roger1, JeanChristophe Gris2, Gérald Daurat3, Michel Feissel4, Yannick Le Manach5, JeanYves Lefrant1, Laurent Muller1. 1. Division Anesthésie Réanimation, Urgences Douleur, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nîmes, Nîmes, France. 2. Laboratory of Hematology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nîmes, Nîmes, France. 3. Délégation Qualité Gestion des Risques, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nîmes, Nîmes, France. 4. Etablissement Français du Sang Pyrénées-Méditerranée, Nîmes, France. 5. Departments of Anesthesia & Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the safety of the different types of platelet (PLT) concentrates. This study was aimed at comparing the rate of adverse reactions associated with apheresis PLT concentrates (APCs) and pooled PLT concentrates (PPCs) both in donors and in recipients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: From the French national hemovigilance system, types and numbers of recipient adverse reactions were compared over a period from 2009 to 2011. Donor adverse reactions were available for 2010 and 2011. This study involved 23 of 26 French regions. Main outcomes were the rates of adverse reaction in recipients and serious adverse reaction in donors. RESULTS: There were 790,854 PLT transfusions during the study period (477,747 [60%] with APCs, 313,107 [40%] with PPCs). APCs were associated with more adverse reactions (6244 vs. 2469 per 1,000,000, p < 0.001) and more severe and life-threatening reactions (respectively, 241 vs. 131 per 1,000,000, p < 0.001; and 182 vs. 121 per 1,000,000, p = 0.04). Mortality rates due to an adverse transfusion reaction were similar (15 vs. 6 per 1,000,000, p = 0.5). In donors, the number of whole blood (WB) donations was 4,722,685 whereas 266,095 apheresis procedures were performed. Serious adverse reactions were more frequent for apheresis procedures than for WB donations (5445 vs. 803 per 1,000,000, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that apheresis PLTs may be more hazardous than pooled PLTs both in recipients and in donors. This study calls for randomized trials to confirm or refute these results.
BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the safety of the different types of platelet (PLT) concentrates. This study was aimed at comparing the rate of adverse reactions associated with apheresis PLT concentrates (APCs) and pooled PLT concentrates (PPCs) both in donors and in recipients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: From the French national hemovigilance system, types and numbers of recipient adverse reactions were compared over a period from 2009 to 2011. Donor adverse reactions were available for 2010 and 2011. This study involved 23 of 26 French regions. Main outcomes were the rates of adverse reaction in recipients and serious adverse reaction in donors. RESULTS: There were 790,854 PLT transfusions during the study period (477,747 [60%] with APCs, 313,107 [40%] with PPCs). APCs were associated with more adverse reactions (6244 vs. 2469 per 1,000,000, p < 0.001) and more severe and life-threatening reactions (respectively, 241 vs. 131 per 1,000,000, p < 0.001; and 182 vs. 121 per 1,000,000, p = 0.04). Mortality rates due to an adverse transfusion reaction were similar (15 vs. 6 per 1,000,000, p = 0.5). In donors, the number of whole blood (WB) donations was 4,722,685 whereas 266,095 apheresis procedures were performed. Serious adverse reactions were more frequent for apheresis procedures than for WB donations (5445 vs. 803 per 1,000,000, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that apheresis PLTs may be more hazardous than pooled PLTs both in recipients and in donors. This study calls for randomized trials to confirm or refute these results.
Authors: Sanjida J Mowla; Ian T Kracalik; Mathew R P Sapiano; Lynne O'Hearn; Chester Andrzejewski; Sridhar V Basavaraju Journal: Transfus Med Rev Date: 2021-04-02
Authors: Chris Edens; Kathryn A Haass; Melissa Cumming; Anthony Osinski; Lynne O'Hearn; Kelly Passanisi; Lynn Eaton; Paul Visintainer; Alexandra Savinkina; Matthew J Kuehnert; Sridhar V Basavaraju; Chester Andrzejewski Journal: Transfusion Date: 2018-11-14 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Stefano Orru'; Kay Poetzsch; Marcus Hoffelner; Margarethe Heiden; Markus B Funk; Brigitte Keller-Stanislawski; Doris Oberle Journal: Transfus Med Hemother Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 3.747
Authors: Fabrice Cognasse; Sandrine Laradi; Philippe Berthelot; Thomas Bourlet; Hubert Marotte; Patrick Mismetti; Olivier Garraud; Hind Hamzeh-Cognasse Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2019-06-28 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Veronika Brixner; Gesine Bug; Petra Pohler; Doris Krämer; Bernd Metzner; Andreas Voss; Jochen Casper; Ulrich Ritter; Stefan Klein; Nael Alakel; Rudolf Peceny; Hans G Derigs; Frank Stegelmann; Martin Wolf; Hubert Schrezenmeier; Thomas Thiele; Erhard Seifried; Hans-Hermann Kapels; Andrea Döscher; Eduard K Petershofen; Thomas H Müller; Axel Seltsam Journal: Haematologica Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Sahra Fonseca; Marie-Pierre Cayer; K M Tanvir Ahmmed; Nima Khadem-Mohtaram; Steve J Charette; Danny Brouard Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) Date: 2022-01-14