血小板输注无效患者的血小板抗体分析

目的分析临床血小板输注无效的主要原因并寻找解决的方法.方法应用酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)方法,对223例临床发生血小板输注无效的病人进行血小板抗体检测和鉴定.结果血小板抗体阳性80例(35.87%),其中人类白细胞抗原(HLA)抗体阳性75例(33.63%),血小板特异性抗原(HPA)抗体阳性1例(0.45%),同时含有HLA和HPA抗体者4例(1.79%).结论引起血小板输注无效的抗体以HLA抗体为主;针对不同抗体,可采取不同方法选择血小板供者.     

血小板输注无效患者的血小板抗体分析

目的　分析临床血小板输注无效的主要原因并寻找解决的方法。方法　应用酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)方法 ,对 2 2 3例临床发生血小板输注无效的病人进行血小板抗体检测和鉴定。结果　血小板抗体阳性80例 ( 3 5 .87% ) ,其中人类白细胞抗原 (HLA)抗体阳性 75例 ( 3 3 .63 % ) ,血小板特异性抗原 (HPA)抗体阳性 1例( 0 .45 % ) ,同时含有HLA和HPA抗体者 4例 ( 1.79% )。结论　引起血小板输注无效的抗体以HLA抗体为主 ;针对不同抗体 ,可采取不同方法选择血小板供者     

血小板输注无效患者血小板抗体的检测

长期依靠血小板支持治疗的患者,常发生血小板输注无效（Ｐlatelet Transfusion Refractories,PTR）。其免疫性因素主要为ＨＬＡ抗体、ＨＰＡ抗体等。Ｄoughty等报道,４４％的恶性血液病患者血小板输注无效,其中８８％是与非免疫性原因有关,单独非免疫性原因占６７％,另２１％与免疫性原因共同存在。血小板抗体存在于２５％的ＰＴＲ患者中,国内对ＰＴＲ患者血小板抗体的筛选和鉴定,仍缺乏足够的研究。笔者采用美国ＧＴＩ－ＭＡＣＥ１试剂盒,通过ＥＬＩＳＡ方法对ＰＴＲ患者血清中的血小板抗体进行鉴别,现报道如下。     

血小板输注无效的临床分析

目的通过实验室检查和临床资料统计分析,明确感染、发热、肝脾肿大和血小板抗体等因素对血小板输注效果的影响。方法血小板的输注效果通过CCI等指标进行综合评价,血小板抗体采用ELISA法进行检测,感染、发热、肝脾肿大等因素的分析经临床资料统计获得。结果观察的30例患者共输注血小板568次,有174次发生血小板输注无效,其中输注前有感染症状的占59．8％（104／174）,发热症状的占14．9％（26／174）,肝脾肿大的占11．5％（20／174）,血小板抗体的占13．8％（24／174）。结论感染是导致血小板输注无效的主要原因。     

血小板输注无效的临床分析及预防措施

目的对血小板输注无效(PTR)进行临床分析,探讨可能引起PTR的原因,讨论寻找预防PTR的措施。方法选取2014年输注血小板的患者92例,进行血小板抗体筛检,调查分析血小板输注患者的病因、血小板抗体的产生与PTR的关系,探讨PTR的预防措施。结果 92例血小板输注患者中,血小板抗体阳性者30例,其中输注无效19例,血小板抗体阳性输注无效率为63.3%;血液病患者PTR率为36.4%,明显高于其他疾病患者。结论血液病患者的血小板无效输注率明显高于其他疾病患者;多次输注血小板或红细胞悬液的患者,血小板抗体阳性率较高易引起PTR。对抗体阳性者要进行血小板配型,选择相配合的血小板输注,以减少PTR的发生。     

血小板输注无效患者的血小板抗体筛查与配合性输注

目的分析血小板输注无效（PTR）的主要原因,为患者选择适用的血小板,用以提高输注疗效。方法对多次输血患者于输血前后监测血小板计数值,并计算1h和24h血小板增高指数（CCI值）,对判断为血小板输注无效者,采用简易致敏血小板血清学技术（SEPSA）进行血小板抗体筛查,并进行血小板交叉配型,对配合性输注效果进行分析。结果278例多次输血患者发生PTR共88例（31．7％）;88例PTR患者中血小板抗体阳性67例（76．1％）;67例抗体阳性患者,血小板交叉配型成功37例,血小板输注有效32例,有效率达86．5％。结论血小板抗体的产生是导致血小板输注无效的主要免疫性因素,血小板配合性输注能显著提高血小板输注效果。     

血液病患者单采血小板输注无效的原因及对策分析

选取148例单采血小板输注的血液病患者,按病种分为急性白血病(AL)组,再生障碍性贫血(AA)组,骨髓异常综合征(MDS)组,特发性血小板减少性紫癜(ITP)组各37例,输注单采血小板后判断输注效果,讨论输注无效的原因并总结对策;结果同种疾病中有并发症组的PTR发生率显著较高而ITP的PTR发生率显著高于其他病种;随着输注血小板频率的增高,PTR的发生率显著增高(P<0.05)。血液病患者输注单采血小板无效的原因较多,但只要有正确处理好原发病及同种免疫反应,则可有效降低PTR发生率,保证疗效。     

血小板输注无效

血小板输注适用于预防和治疗血小板减少或血小板功能缺陷患者的出血,并已成为各种血液病及肿瘤患者放?化疗的有效支持疗法,但患者在多次输血(全血?红细胞?白细胞?血小板),妊娠及器官移植后,易产生血小板相关抗体,导致血小板输注无效(PTR)。我们结合近几年国内外研究进展,对血小     

血小板输注无效的原因分析

正血小板输注无效(PTR)是指患者在连续2次输注ABO血型相合且足够剂量的血小板悬液后仍处于无反应状态,即血小板计数(PLT)未见显著升高、有时反而下降;输入的血小板在体内存活期很短;CCI和PPR不能达标;临床出血倾向未见减轻等。从而未能防治由于血小板数量不足或功能缺陷导致的出血~([1])。引起PTR的原因较多,主要原因可概括为2大类,免疫性因素和非免性疫因素。     

血小板抗体检测及配型对血小板输注无效的临床意义

目的 通过对比血小板配型前后血小板的输注效果,评估血小板抗体检测及配型对血小板输注无效的临床意义.方法 以出血症状改善情况、血小板计数增高指数(CCI)、血小板恢复百分率(PPR)为标准,对比配型前后血小板的输注效果.结果 25例血小板输注无效患者的血小板抗体筛查阳性9例; 9例血小板抗体阳性患者血小板交叉配型前后血小板输注有效率差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),配型后输注的 1 h和24 h CCI、PPR数值明显高于配型前输注的.结论 血小板抗体检测及血小板配型输注可以为患者选择适用的血小板,提高单采血小板的输注有效率,避免滥用血小板.     

The definition of refractoriness to platelet transfusions

The relationship between the 1 and 20 h post-transfusion platelet count and three parameters used to define refractory transfusions, namely the corrected increment (CI), platelet increment (PI), and percentage platelet recovery (%REC), was studied in 437 non-HLA matched platelet transfusions given to 102 patients with bone marrow failure. The percentage agreement between common definitions of refractoriness was calculated based on these parameters. As the maintenance of platelet counts above 20 x 10(9)/l is a relevant clinical goal for platelet support, the values of the CI, PI and %REC, which best corresponded to 1- and 20-h post-transfusion counts of 20 x 10(9)/l, were identified. A 1-h post-transfusion CI < 3 (PI < 7 x 10(9)/l or % REC < 8%) corresponded to clinically unsuccessful transfusions with a 1-h platelet count < 20 x 10(9)/l. A 1-h CI > or = 5.5 (PI > or = 12 x 10(9)/l or %REC > or = 14%) corresponded to clinically successful transfusions with a 20-h post-transfusion count of > or = 20 x 10/l. These data tie together the end points reported in the literature for defining refractory transfusions.     

HPA配型在免疫性血小板输注无效中的应用研究

目的探讨以HPA配型解决免疫性血小板输注无效的方案。方法 1)建立PCR-SSP方法检测HPA-1～5基因型检测方法,建立机采血小板供者库;2)采用微柱凝胶法和Capture-P法对32名血小板输血无效患者作血小板同种抗体筛查,并对2种方法比较;3)对血小板同种抗体筛查阳性患者采用已知HPA基因型的标准谱血小板作抗体鉴定并采取HPA基因型同型输注的原则寻找供者。结果 1)采用PCR-SSP方法成功检测出HPA-1～5基因型,并对1 000名血小板供者的HPA-1～5基因型定型;2)32例血小板输注无效病例中,微柱凝胶法检测血小板同种抗体阳性率为50%,Capture-P法血小板抗体阳性检出率为40%;3)32例血小板输血无效病例中2种方法同时血小板抗体阳性13例,其中2例鉴定为抗-HPA,分别为抗-HPA-5b(P=1/84)、抗-HPA-1a(P=1/55)。结论对抗-HPA引起的血小板输注无效患者采用HPA基因型相合的方法寻找供者是有效的。     

Platelet transfusion refractoriness and anti-HLA immunization

Platelet transfusion refractoriness (PTR), defined as an unsatisfactory post-transfusion platelet count increment, is a common complication of patients receiving multiple transfusions. Different strategies are described in the management of PTR. In this work, we demonstrate the efficacy of the detection and identification of anti-HLA antibodies in the recipient using a threshold of 3000 mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), and the seek of donors not expressing HLA antigens against which the patient is immunized.     

Pooled platelet concentrates provide a small benefit over single-donor platelets for patients with platelet refractoriness of any etiology

BackgroundAt our institution, patients with platelet refractoriness (of any etiology) are sometimes switched from apheresis platelets to pooled platelets before human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched units become available.Study design and methodsSeven patients were analyzed. Platelet counts were available from 57 single-unit transfusions (26 pooled, 31 apheresis). A mixed linear effects model was used and significance was determined using a likelihood ratio test.ResultsWhen analyzed as the only fixed effect in the model, the use of pooled versus single-donor units and time from transfusion to post-transfusion blood sampling each showed a significant effect on platelet count increments. A mixed linear effect model including both factors showed that transfusing a pooled unit correlated with a 4500±2000/µL greater platelet count increment compared with a single-donor unit, and an increase in time from transfusion to post-transfusion blood sampling lowered the platelet count increment by 300±100/µL per hour.ConclusionA small but potentially clinically relevant benefit was observed in transfusing pooled random-donor platelets compared with single-donor units for patients with platelet refractoriness (of any etiology).     

血液病反复输血患者血小板抗体、交叉配型结果与血小板输注效果的相关性分析

目的探讨血液病反复输血患者血小板抗体、交叉配型试验结果与血小板输注效果的关系。方法回顾性分析112例血液病反复输血患者临床资料,根据入院时血小板抗体检验结果将其分为阳性组与阴性组,配型到阴性或弱阳性供者标本纳入相合亚组,多次配型均为阳性供者标本纳入不合亚组。比较阳性组与阴性组首次输注后,相合亚组与不合亚组本次输注后,1 h、24 h血小板校正增高计数(CCI)及血小板回收率(PPR)差异,采用Spearman相关系数模型分析1 h、24 h血小板CCI及PPR与血小板抗体检验、交叉配型试验结果的相关性。结果阳性组1 h CCI、24 h CCI、1 h PPR、24 h PPR水平均明显低于阴性组(P<0.05),相合亚组1 h CCI、24 h CCI、1 h PPR、24 h PPR水平均明显高于不合亚组(P<0.05)。血小板抗体测试结果与1 h CCI、24 h CCI、1 h PPR、24 h PPR水平均呈显著负相关(P<0.05);交叉配型试验结果与1 h CCI、24 h CCI、1 h PPR、24 h PPR水平均呈显著正相关(P<0.05)。结论血小板抗体检测及交叉配型结果与反复输血患者血小板输注效果关系较为密切,临床需积极开展上述试验以避免不必要的血小板资源浪费。     

Efficacy of anti-thymocyte globulin for platelet transfusion refractoriness in serious aplastic anemia patients

Platelet transfusion refractoriness (PTR) is a life threatening, intractable clinical issue suffered by some serious aplastic anemia (SAA) patients. Unlike immune thrombocytopenia, effective treatments for PTR remain largely unknown. In our clinical work, we noted that PTR in some SAA patients could be rapidly relieved with the application of anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG), therefore, we retrospectively analyzed its management and outcomes for PTR in SAA patients. A cohort including 29 SAA with PTR patients who received ATG administration was enrolled in this study. All patients suffered from PTR before ATG administration. Among the 29 PTR patients treated with ATG, 21 (72.4.0 %) patients had response, importantly, 13 (44.8 %) patients had an immediately response following the first dose of ATG administration. Bleeding events of grade 3 or above occurred in 23 patients (79.3 %). With the recovery of effective platelet transfusion, the bleeding events in responders could be quickly relieved. The non-responders suffered from aggravated bleeding, including intracranial bleeding in two non-responders, which appeared on eighth and 29th days after ATG administration. Our study indicated that ATG was an effective and safe intervention in the management of PTR in SAA patients.     

Platelet transfusion refractoriness responding preferentially to single donor aphaeresis platelets compatible for both ABO and HLA

Platelet transfusion refractoriness is challenging to manage. When human leucocyte antigens (HLA)‐sensitized patients fail to respond to HLA‐matched (HLA‐m) platelets, non‐immune destruction may be assumed, and collections of HLA‐m platelets abandoned. We report cases of highly HLA‐sensitized patients whose only satisfactory platelet transfusion responses were consistently associated with products compatible for both HLA‐ and ABO‐matched (HLA‐m/ABO‐m) platelets, and in whom unsatisfactory increments occurred if either form of major incompatibility was permitted (HLA‐u or ABO‐u). Absolute platelet increments (APIs) were measured and classified as satisfactory if ≥10 and unsatisfactory if <10. Patient 1, age 59 years, group O, with myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myelogenous leukemia (MDS/AML), was unresponsive to either fresh ABO‐m or HLA‐m platelets. Of 17 HLA‐m platelets, satisfactory responses occurred for 75% of HLA‐m/ABO‐m units, and failures for 100% of HLA‐m/ABO‐u, with mean API differing significantly (14·1 vs 1·1, P = 0·0059). Of 36 HLA‐m platelets given to patient 2, age 49 years, group O, Gravida 2 Para 2, with severe aplastic anaemia, a satisfactory response occurred with 75% of HLA‐m/ABO‐m units, and failures for 63% of the HLA‐m/ABO‐u (mean API 26·7 vs 7·6, P = 0·008). Increment failures from HLA‐m platelets need not imply intractable refractoriness. If resources permit, selection of HLA‐m/ABO‐m platelets may optimise the incremental response.