Fatal
Bacterial
Infections
Associated
With
Platelet
Transfusions—United
States, 2004
JAMA.
2005;293:2586-2591.
MMWR.
2005;54:168-170
Each
year,
approximately
9 million
platelet-unit
concentrates
are
transfused
in the
United
States1;
an estimated
one in
1,000-3,000
platelet
units are
contaminated
with
bacteria,
resulting in
transfusion-associated
sepsis in
many
recipients.2
To reduce
this
risk, AABB
(formerly
the American
Association
of Blood
Banks)
adopted a
new standard
on March 1,
2004, that
requires
member
blood banks
and
transfusion
services to
implement
measures
to
detect and
limit
bacterial
contamination
in all
platelet
components.3
This report
summarizes
two fatal
cases of
transfusion-associated
sepsis
in platelet
recipients
in 2004 and
describes
results
of a
2004 survey
of
infectious-disease
consultants
regarding
their
knowledge of
transfusion-associated
bacterial
infections
and
the new AABB
standard.
Health-care
providers
should be
aware
of the
new standard
and the need
for
bacterial
testing of
platelets
to
improve
transfusion
safety.
However,
health-care
providers
also
should be
able to
diagnose
transfusion-associated
infections,
because even
when testing
complies
with the new
standard,
false
negatives
can occur
and fatal
bacterial
sepsis can
result.
Case
Reports
Patient
A. In
October
2004, a man
aged 74
years in
Ohio with
leukemia
received a
transfusion
consisting
of a pool of
five
platelet
unit
concentrates.
Before
transfusion,
the pooled
platelet
unit
had been
tested for
bacterial
contamination
with a
reagent
strip
test (Multistix®,
Bayer
Diagnostics,
Tarrytown,
New
York)
to determine
the pH
level, a
means for
detecting
the presence
of
bacteria.
Because the
pH test
result was
within the
accepted
range
for quality
control
(i.e., pH >
6.4) of the
clinic’s
blood
bank, the
pooled unit
was approved
for
transfusion.
After
transfusion,
the patient
had
hypotension
the same day
and was
admitted to
a local
hospital.
The
patient’s
blood
cultures
grew
Staphylococcus
aureus,
and the
patient died
21 days
after
hospital
admission.
S. aureus
also was
cultured
from the
leftover
platelet
unit bag;
isolates
from the
patient’s
blood and
the
platelet bag
were
indistinguishable
by
pulsed-field
gel
electrophoresis
(PFGE).
Patient B.
In December
2004, a man
aged 79
years in
Utah
received
a
transfusion
of pheresis
platelets
for
thromobocytopenia
after
coronary
artery
bypass
surgery.
Before
transfusion,
platelets
from
the unit bag
were tested
for
bacterial
contamination
with
liquid
culture
media (BacT/Alert®,
BioMerieux
Inc.,
Durham,
North
Carolina) by
using 4 mL
in a
standard
aerobic
blood
culture
bottle
and were
found to be
negative
after 5
days’
incubation.
Approximately
1 hour after
transfusion,
the patient
had
shortness
of
breath,
chills, and
a
temperature
of 102.9°F
(39.4°C)
and
became
hypotensive.
Subsequently,
the patient
had multiple
thrombotic
events and
died 27
hours later.
S.
lugdunensis
was
cultured
from the
patient’s
blood and
the leftover
platelet
bag;
these
isolates
were
indistinguishable
by PFGE.
Survey of
Infectious-Disease
Consultants
To assess
clinician
experience
with
transfusion-associated
bacterial
infections
and
knowledge of
the new AABB
standard,
the
Infectious
Diseases
Society of
America (ISDA)
conducted a
survey of
infectious-disease
consultants
in the
United
States. The
survey was
distributed
via
e-mail and
fax during
July
27–August
24, 2004, to
all
870
infectious-disease
consultant
members of
the Emerging
Infections
Network, a
sentinel
provider
network of
ISDA.4
Completed
surveys were
received
from 399
(46%) of the
870 members.
Forty-eight
(12%)
respondents
recalled
consulting
on 85
reactions
to
blood
transfusions
(i.e., of
all types)
potentially
caused
by
bacterial
contamination;
10 reactions
were fatal.
In 26 (31%)
cases,
contamination
was
confirmed by
positive
cultures of
the
recipient’s
blood and
transfused
unit. The
most common
pathogens
recovered
were
Staphylococcus
and
Serratia
spp.
A total
of 143 (36%)
respondents
reported
they were
aware that
bacterial
contamination
of platelets
is one of
the most
common
infectious
risks of
transfusion
therapy.
Seventy-eight
(20%)
indicated
they had
been
familiar
with the new
AABB
standard
for
bacterial
detection in
platelets
before the
survey; 359
(90%)
believed
health-care
providers
need to be
aware of the
standard.
Reported by:
A Arendt,
MPH,
Cuyahoga
County Board
of Health;
J
Carmean, E
Koch, MD,
Ohio Dept of
Health. R
Rolfs, MD, S
Mottice,
PhD,
Utah Dept of
Health.
Infectious
Diseases
Society of
America
Emerging
Infections
Network,
Alexandria,
Virginia. L
Strausbaugh,
MD, L
Liedtke, MS,
Veterans
Affairs
Medical
Center and
Oregon
Health
and Science
Univ,
Portland,
Oregon. A
Srinivasan,
MD,
J
Hageman, MHS,
D Jernigan,
MD, Div of
Healthcare
Quality
Promotion,
M
Kuehnert,
MD, Div of
Viral and
Rickettsial
Diseases,
National
Center
for
Infectious
Diseases; P
Rao, PhD, S
Kazakova,
MD,
C
Porucznik,
PhD, EIS
officers,
CDC.
CDC
Editorial
Note:
Transfusion-associated
bacterial
sepsis
is the
second most
frequently
reported
cause of
transfusion-related
fatalities
in the
United
States,
accounting
for 46 (17%)
of
277
reported
transfusion
deaths
during
1990-1998.5
Contaminated
platelets
are
estimated to
cause
life-threatening
sepsis in
one in
100,000
recipients
and
immediate
fatal
outcome in
one
in
500,000
recipients.
These risks
are greater
than those
estimated
for
transfusion-transmitted
viral
infections
(e.g.,
hepatitis
C
virus [HCV]
or human
immunodeficiency
virus
[HIV]).6
In addition,
because
bacterial
infections
attributed
to
contaminated
platelets
are
underreported,
the actual
risk to
transfusion
recipients
is
likely
greater than
present
estimates.7
Health-care
providers
should
be aware of
bacterial
contamination
as a
potential
cause
of
transfusion
reaction so
they can
diagnose
illness,
treat
patients
appropriately,
and evaluate
interventions
that might
prevent
additional
transmissions.
Platelets
are
particularly
vulnerable
to bacterial
growth
because
they
are stored
at room
temperature
for up to 5
days,
whereas
other
blood
components
are
refrigerated
or frozen.
Gram-positive
bacteria
(e.g.,
Staphylococcus
spp.) found
on skin are
the most
frequent
contaminants
of platelet
units.
Although
less
commonly
recognized
as
contaminants,
gram-negative
bacteria
(e.g.,
Serratia,
Enterobacter,
or
Salmonella
spp.)
account for
more severe
and
often
fatal
infections
and are
attributed
to donor
bacteremia
or
contamination
during
product
processing.6
Bacterial
contamination
of the
blood
component
often is not
considered
in the
differential
diagnosis at
the time of
transfusion
reaction
because
signs
and
symptoms
(e.g.,
fever,
rigors, or
change in
blood
pressure)
are
similar to
those
expected
from sepsis
from other
causes.7
AABB has
suggested
several
strategies
to assist
transfusion
services and
blood banks
in reducing
transfusion
of
bacterially
contaminated
platelet
components
and
complying
with the new
standard,
including
testing for
contamination
and methods
for
improved
skin
disinfection.
The College
of American
Pathologists
has
also added
bacterial
contamination
testing to
the
transfusion
medicine
checklist of
their
Laboratory
Accreditation
Program.8
The
Food and
Drug
Administration
(FDA) has
approved
three
bacterial
culture
systems for
use in
quality-control
testing to
monitor
contamination
of platelets
(BacT/Alert®;
Scansystem®,
Hemosystem,
S.A.,
Marseille,
France; and
Pall eBDS,
Medsep
Corporation,
Covina,
California).
However,
despite the
new AABB
standards,
approaches
to testing
vary and do
not always
include
culture-based
methods. The
use of pH
tests such
as the one
used on the
platelet
unit
for patient
A are also
an option
under the
AABB
standard.
Apheresis
platelets
are derived
from single
donors;
whole-blood–derived
platelets
are pooled
from
multiple
donors. Most
blood-collection
centers
culture only
apheresis
platelets
and release
the unit
after
culture;
most
commonly,
the unit is
held for
12-48 hours
of
incubation
before
release.
Hospital
transfusion
services
are
responsible
for
bacterial
testing of
whole-blood–derived
platelets.
Because
pooling is
performed
immediately
before
transfusion,
culture-based
tests are
logistically
difficult
and costly
to
implement
for
whole-blood–derived
platelets.
Some
hospitals
have
implemented
non–culture-based
methods
(e.g.,
glucose
or pH
indicators)
to test
whole-blood–derived
platelets,
although the
sensitivity
of these
methods
generally is
less
than
culture-based
methods and
can result
in frequent
false-negative
results.9
However, as
the cases
described in
this report
illustrate,
false-negative
results can
result from
both culture
and
nonculture
testing
methods. In
addition,
deviation
from culture
methods
that
meet
manufacturer’s
recommendations
(e.g.,
decreased
blood
volume) can
result in
reduced
sensitivity
and produce
false
negatives.
For patient
B, the
volume of
the platelet
sample
was
less than
the
manufacturer’s
recommended
volume for
platelet
screening.
The
survey of
infectious-disease
consultants
provides an
indication
of the
gap in
clinician
knowledge of
transfusion-associated
bacterial
infections.
Only 36% of
respondents
were aware
that
bacterial
contamination
of platelet
transfusion
is one of
the
most
common
infectious
risks from
transfusion,
and only 20%
were
familiar
with the new
AABB
standard for
bacterial
testing
of
platelets.
AABB and
other
accrediting
organizations
recommend
that
health-care
facilities
implement
protocols to
help
clinicians
recognize
and
manage
transfusion
reactions,
including
those
potentially
caused
by bacterial
contamination.
Post-transfusion
notification
of
appropriate
persons
(e.g.,
clinicians
caring for
the patient)
is
recommended
if cultures
identify
slow-growing
bacteria
after
product
release or
transfusion.
If bacterial
contamination
of
a
component is
suspected,
the
transfusion
should be
stopped
immediately,
the unit
should be
saved for
further
testing, and
blood
cultures
should be
obtained
from the
recipient.
Bacterial
isolates
from
cultures of
the
recipient
and unit
should be
saved
for
further
investigation.
To
improve
bacterial
testing and
reporting,
AABB
provided
additional
guidance10
on
standardized
definitions
for test
results,
investigation
and
management
of
implicated
units and
associated
co-components,
and
laboratory
testing of
detected
organisms.
Guidance
relevant
for
clinicians
includes (1)
situations
in which a
positive
test
result
is
encountered
after
transfusion
of the unit
or a
recipient
has
post-transfusion
bacteremia
after
receiving
platelets
that
tested
negative,
(2)
management
of
potentially
infected
donors,
and
(3)
algorithms
to be
followed
when
organisms
detected in
donor
testing are
of clinical
concern or
public
health
importance
(e.g.,
nationally
notifiable
to state and
local health
departments).
Despite
challenges
in
implementation
since the
AABB
standard
was
introduced
in 2004,
bacterial
testing of
platelets is
important
to
improving
transfusion
safety.
Detection of
contaminated
units
can
protect not
only the
potential
recipient of
the platelet
unit,
but
potential
recipients
of other
blood units,
by
identification
and
recall of
co-components
that also
might be
contaminated.
However,
regardless
of method,
bacterial
screening is
unlikely
to
detect all
pathogens.
Health-care
providers
should be
aware
of the
risk for
bacterial
contamination
of blood
products,
particularly
platelets,
and consider
the
possibility
of bacterial
contamination
when
investigating
febrile
transfusion
reactions.
Clinicians
should
collaborate
with
hospital
transfusion
services,
blood-collection
centers, and
public
health
agencies to
manage
suspected
infections
in
blood donors
and
recipients.
Transfusion-related
fatalities
should
be reported
to FDA,
Center for
Biologic and
Evaluation
Research
(telephone,
301-827-6220;
e-mail,
fatalities2@cber.fda.gov
).
REFERENCES
|
1.
Sullivan MT,
Wallace EL.
Blood
collection
and
transfusion
in the
United
States in
1999.
Transfusion.
2005;45:141-148.
CrossRef
|
ISI
|
MEDLINE
2.
Yomtovian R,
Lazarus HM,
Goodnough
LT, et al. A
prospective
microbiologic
surveillance
program to
detect and
prevent the
transfusion
of
bacterially
contaminated
platelets.
Transfusion.
1993;33:902-909.
CrossRef
|
ISI
|
MEDLINE
3.
AABB.
Standards
for blood
banks and
transfusion
services.
Bethesda,
MD: AABB;
2004.
4.
Executive
Committee of
the
Infectious
Diseases
Society of
America
Emerging
Infections
Network. The
emerging
infections
network: a
new venture
for the
Infectious
Diseases
Society of
America.
Clin Infect
Dis.
1997;25:34-36.
ISI
|
MEDLINE
5.
Center for
Biologics
Evaluation
and
Research;
Food and
Drug
Administration.
Workshop on
bacterial
contamination
of
platelets.
Bethesda,
MD: Food and
Drug
Administration,
Center for
Biologics
Evaluation
and
Research;
1999.
Available at
http://www.fda.gov/cber/minutes/workshop-min.htm.
6.
Kuehnert MJ,
Roth VR,
Haley NR, et
al.
Transfusion-transmitted
bacterial
infection in
the United
States, 1998
through
2000.
Transfusion.
2001;41:1493-1499.
CrossRef
|
ISI
|
MEDLINE
7.
Zaza S,
Tokars JI,
Yomtovian R,
et al.
Bacterial
contamination
of platelets
at a
university
hospital:
increased
identification
due to
intensified
surveillance.
Infect
Control Hosp
Epidemiol.
1994;15:82-87.
ISI
|
MEDLINE
8.
College of
American
Pathologistics.
Transfusion
medicine.
In: Sarewitz
SJ, ed.
Laboratory
accreditation
program
inspection
checklists.
Northfield,
IL: College
of American
Pathologists;
2004.
Available at
http://www.cap.org/apps/docs/laboratory_accreditation/checklists/checklistftp.html.
9.
Burstain JM,
Brecher ME,
Workman K,
et al. Rapid
identification
of
bacterially
contaminated
platelets
using
reagent
strips:
glucose and
pH analysis
as markers
of bacterial
metabolism.
Transfusion.
1997;37:255-258.
CrossRef
|
ISI
|
MEDLINE
10.
AABB.
Guidance on
implementation
of new
bacteria and
reduction
standard.
Bulletin
04-07.
Bethesda,
MD: AABB;
2004.
|