Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||A Centre-Based Comparison of Double vs Single Prevention Strategy on Transfusion Transmitted-Cytomegalovirus in At-Risk Haemopoietic stem cell transplant Patients and a State Survey on CMV-Seronegative Ordering Practices.||Austin Authors:||Zantomio, Daniela ;Bayly, Emma;Wong, Kimberly;Spencer, Andrew;Ritchie, David;Morgan, Susan;Kelsey, Giles;Dennington, Peta M||Affiliation:||Clinical Haematology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia..
Laboratory Haematology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia..
Laboratory Haematology, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia..
Department of Haematology and Bone Marrow Transplant, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia..
Pathology Services, Australian Red Cross Lifeblood, Australia..
|Issue Date:||23-Mar-2022||Date:||2022||Publication information:||Internal medicine journal 2022; online first: 23 March||Abstract:||Universal leucocyte depletion reduces the risk of transfusion transmitted Cytomegalovirus; however, many clinicians still prescribe Cytomegalovirus seronegative units. Our retrospective study aims to confirm the low risk of transfusion transmitted Cytomegalovirus with leucocyte depletion alone and demonstrate the ongoing variability in Cytomegalovirus seronegative transfusion prescribing. Over a 9 year period (7/2009-7/2018), occurrences of transfusion transmitted Cytomegalovirus in Cytomegalovirus seronegative donor/recipient haemopoietic stem cell transplant pairs were compared at one allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplant centre providing Cytomegalovirus seronegative blood products and leucocyte depletion (double prevention) versus another providing leucocyte depletion only (single prevention). Retrospective chart audit identified patient demographics, blood product exposure and Cytomegalovirus infection by polymerase chain reaction. A separate audit examined Cytomegalovirus seronegative blood product ordering in a broader range of hospital types. We identified 122 and 66 Cytomegalovirus negative donor/recipient haemopoietic stem cell transplant pairs using double and single transfusion prevention strategy respectively. Transfusion exposure to red cells and pooled platelets was similar, though more apheresis platelets were used in the double prevention group. Cytomegalovirus infection rate was 3 (2.4%) and zero in the double and single prevention groups respectively. Cytomegalovirus seronegative unit ordering was not limited to hospitals with obstetric or neonatal populations, suggesting ongoing reliance of Cytomegalovirus seronegative units outside this population. The analysis suggests a double prevention strategy does not provide additional protection against transfusion transmitted Cytomegalovirus. There is ongoing variability in the acceptance of leucocyte depletion alone despite the low risk of Cytomegalovirus infection This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.||URI:||https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/29612||DOI:||10.1111/imj.15751||ORCID:||https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3832-6335||Journal:||Internal medicine journal||PubMed URL:||35319139||PubMed URL:||https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35319139/||Type:||Journal Article||Subjects:||Cytomegalovirus
haemopoietic stem cell transplant
|Appears in Collections:||Journal articles|
Show full item record
checked on Dec 1, 2023
Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.