500 ml of blood loss does not decrease non-invasive tissue oxygen saturation (StO2) as measured by near infrared spectroscopy - A hypothesis generating pilot study in healthy adult women

Background The goal when resuscitating trauma patients is to achieve adequate tissue perfusion. One parameter of tissue perfusion is tissue oxygen saturation (StO2), as measured by near infrared spectroscopy. Using a commercially available device, we investigated whether clinically relevant blood loss of 500 ml in healthy volunteers can be detected by changes in StO2 after a standardized ischemic event. Methods We performed occlusion of the brachial artery for 3 minutes in 20 healthy female blood donors before and after blood donation. StO2 and total oxygenated tissue hemoglobin (O2Hb) were measured continuously at the thenar eminence. 10 healthy volunteers were assessed in the same way, to examine whether repeated vascular occlusion without blood donation exhibits time dependent effects. Results Blood donation caused a substantial decrease in systolic blood pressure, but did not affect resting StO2 and O2Hb values. No changes were measured in the blood donor group in the reaction to the vascular occlusion test, but in the control group there was an increase in the O2Hb rate of recovery during the reperfusion phase. Conclusion StO2 measured at the thenar eminence seems to be insensitive to blood loss of 500 ml in this setting. Probably blood loss greater than this might lead to detectable changes guiding the treating physician. The exact cut off for detectable changes and the time effect on repeated vascular occlusion tests should be explored further. Until now no such data exist.

[Measures for allogeneic blood conservation in surgery]

The aim of all efforts to reduce the need of allogeneic blood transfusions is to avoid associated risks. There should particularly be a favourable effect according to the rate of transfusion-transmitted virus infections and immunological side-effects. The acceptance of an individually adjusted lowest haematocrit level and the minimisation of intra-operative blood loss by the application of optimal surgical techniques are among the most essential strategies to reduce or even avoid allogeneic blood transfusions. In addition the following interventions are generally accepted: Preoperative autologous blood donation, where appropriate supported by erythropoietin Preoperative haemodilution, where appropriate supported by erythropoietin Intra- and postoperative blood salvage Topical or systemic pharmacologic interventions to accelerate haemostasis Controlled hypotension Efficacy and indication of the different measures always depend on the individual circumstances of the specific patient. Therefore one should develop an individual approach for every case. In this context the most important subjects are an optimal coordination and if required an appropriate combination of the discussed methods. Algorithms which preoperatively allow approximate calculation of expected transfusion need may be a meaningful tool to facilitate blood conservation planning. However, at the same time one must consider that all strategies to reduce allogeneic transfusion needs are also associated with particular risks. Therefore one has to weigh carefully the pros and cons prior to their application, including the possible alternative of allogeneic transfusion in one's decision making process.

Blood donor screening: how to decrease the risk of transfusion-transmitted hepatitis B virus?

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: The risk of transfusion-transmitted HBV remains significant in Switzerland, where routine screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) in blood donations relies solely on serological hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) testing. This study was designed to determine the prevalence of anti-hepatitis B core (anti-HBc) and HBV nucleic acid testing (NAT) positive donations in two different Swiss donor populations, to help in deciding whether supplemental testing may bring additional safety to blood products. METHODS: In a first population of donors, 18143 consecutive donations were screened initially for HBsAg, anti-HBc (with one EIA assay) and with HBV NAT in minipools of 24 donations. The screening repeatedly reactive anti-HBc donations were then "confirmed" with two supplemental anti-HBc assays, an anti-hepatitis B surface assay (anti-HBs) and with single donation HBV NAT. In a second population of donors, 4186 consecutive donations were screened initially with two different anti-HBc assays in addition to the mandatory HBsAg screening test. The screening repeatedly reactive donations with at least one anti-HBc assay were tested for anti-HBs. RESULTS: In the first subset of 18143 donations, 17593 (97.0%) were negative for HBsAg, anti-HBc and HBV NAT in minipools. 549 (3.0%) were HBsAg and HBV NAT negative, but repeatedly reactive for anti-HBc. Of these 549 donations, 287 could not be "confirmed" with two additional anti-HBc assays and were negative with an anti-HBs assay, as well as with single donation HBV NAT. Only 211 (1.2% of the total screened donations) were "confirmed" positive with at least one of two supplemental anti-HBc assays. One repeatedly reactive HBsAg donation, from a first-time donor, was confirmed positive for HBsAg and anti-HBc, as well as with single donation HBV NAT. In the second subset of 4186 donations, 4014 (95.9%) were screened negative for HBsAg and for anti-HBc, tested with two independent anti-HBc assays. 172 donations (4.1%) were HBsAg negative but repeatedly reactive with at least one of the two anti-HBc assays. Of these 172 samples, 86 were reactive with the first anti-HBc assay only, 13 were reactive with the second anti-HBc assay only and 73 (1.7% of the total screened donations) were "confirmed" positive with both anti-HBc assays. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of anti-HBc "confirmed" positive donations in the two Swiss blood donor populations studied was low (<2%) and we found only one HBV NAT positive (HBsAg positive) donation among more than 18000. Concerning blood product safety, an increase in the deferral rate of less than 2% of anti-HBc positive, potentially infectious donors, would in our opinion make routine anti-HBc testing of blood donations cost-effective. There is however still a need for more specific assays to avoid an unacceptably high deferral rate of "false" positive donors. In contrast, the introduction of HBV NAT in minipools gives minimal benefit due to the inadequate sensitivity of the assay. It remains to evaluate more extensively the value of individual donation NAT, alone or in addition to anti-HBc, as supplemental testing in the context of several Swiss blood donor populations.