Adverse Transfusion Reactions in Critically Ill Patients

Although transfusion therapy in the past 30 years has achieved high levels of safety, severe adverse reactions can still complicate a red blood cell, plasma, or platelet transfusion. Adverse events can be either of infectious nature (Infectious Adverse Reactions to Transfusion–IARTs) or noninfectious (NIARTs). The former are due to viruses, bacteria, or protozoa present in the transfused component. Medical doctors faced with an infectious disease in a hospitalized patient should always collect an accurate clinical history that must include transfusion of blood components and take into consideration that the viral/bacterial/protozoan infection could be related to a transfusion event. If a transfusion-transmitted infection is suspected, the clinician must contact the transfusion center that will provide a look-back of the blood products and a follow-up of the involved donors.

NIARTs may be of immunological and nonimmunological nature. This chapter provides an overview of pathogenesis, presentation, therapy, and prevention of the main NIARTs. Finally, organizational measures for the management of NIARTs are presented, in order to ensure the highest possible level of safety for the patients.

The use of rapid diagnostic tests for transfusion infectious screening in Africa: a literature review

Infectious risk associated with blood transfusion remains a major public health challenge in Africa, where prevalence rates of the major transfusion-transmissible infections (ie, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, human immunodeficiency virus, and syphilis) are among the highest in the world. Resource-limited blood services often operate with minimal predonation screening safeguards, prompting exclusive reliance on laboratory testing to mitigate infectious risk. Transfusion screening with rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) has been adopted in areas that lack the capacity to support the routine use of more sophisticated technologies. However, uncertainty surrounding the performance of some RDTs in the field has spurred debate regarding their application to blood donation screening. Our review of the literature identified 17 studies that evaluated RDTs for the infectious screening of blood donors in Africa. The review highlights the variable performance of available RDTs and the importance of their use in a quality-assured manner. Deficiencies in performance observed with some RDTs underscore the need to validate test kits prior to use under field conditions with locally acquired samples. Suboptimal sensitivities of some available tests, specifically hepatitis B virus rapid assays, question their suitability in single-test algorithms, particularly in high-prevalence regions. Although RDTs have limitations, many of which can be addressed through improved training and quality systems, they are frequently the only viable option for infectious screening in resource-poor African countries. Therefore, additional studies and specific guidelines regarding the use of RDTs in the context of blood safety are needed.