Pathogen reduced plasma products: a clinical practice scientific review from the AABB

Abstract

BACKGROUND A small body of literature assessing the efficacy and safety of pathogen reduced (PR) plasma has been published. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS An AABB committee systematically reviewed the literature and graded the clinical trial evidence with the assistance of a GRADE expert. RESULTS Most studies identified were low quality and had a small sample size; in addition, efficacy and safety were monitored in many different ways making it difficult to quantify therapeutic benefit and risk. The data analyzed in this systematic review showed that pathogen inactivation did not adversely affect the efficacy of S/D or amotosalen plasma transfusions in any patient population studied. In addition, there were no significant safety issues for these patient populations, other than the specific contraindications noted in their respective package inserts. CONCLUSION Larger, well‐designed trials are needed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of all of the PR plasma products.

New strategies for the control of infectious and parasitic diseases in blood donors: the impact of pathogen inactivation methods

“…Plasma, for the first time treated with solvent detergent (S/D) was used in Europe in 1992 and only six years later, in North America (54).…”

The Alterations in Methylene Blue/Light-Treated Frozen Plasma Proteins Revealed by Proteomics

“…Preventive blood transfusion is mainly performed before surgery or invasive procedures, and a large volume of trial data suggest that the use of FFP in many patients is only indicated when major bleeding occurs. For all individuals born after January 1, 1996, pathogen-inactivated plasma is recommended because the associated risk of infection with known test viruses is very low [5,6]. The safety of blood donation has been improved through quarantine, but due to the incubation period of potential pathogens, there is still a risk for infection transmitted by blood transfusion.…”