Blood Transfusion Side Effects
 Custom Search Blood transfusion side effects continue to persist in spite of the many advances in transfusion practice. Although numerous steps to reduce the risk of blood transfusions have been put in place by the blood collection industry, there is still considerable risk. Perhaps a blood transfusion has never been safer than in current times. However, transfusions are not risk free. According to research and numerous scientific studies, a blood transfusion causes some degree of harm to every recipient. This is because of the properties of stored blood. It also is due to the resulting impairments of the immune system function, called immune modulation. These untoward effects of blood transfusions are considered side effects. Blood Transfusion Side Effects Not surprisingly, viruses are not the leading causes of transfusion caused illness and death (called transfusion-related morbidity and mortality). Illness and death from blood transfusions are more often caused by bacterial contamination of platelets (1:2000- 3000 transfusions), transfusion errors from patient misidentification (1:16,000- 19,000) and transfusion related acute lung injury (TRALI) (1:1000- 5000). Blood transfusions could be likened to chemotherapy. A blood transfusion will only improve outcomes when used in the right patient for the right indication and in the right dose. Many doctors take a carte blanche or blank cheque approach to blood transfusions. It is still not uncommon to see doctors ordering blood with hemoglobin levels of 10 in small rural hospitals. Yet in the more progressive hospitals like Sloan Kettering, they trigger or the value where a blood transfusion is automatically ordered is closer to 6. In the gold standard of blood transfusion care, actually no blood is given. Patients with Hemoglobin's as low as 1.2 have been successfully treated. Note: In my experience as a Case Manager, the lowest count for a patent was a hemoglobin of 2.9. In over 600 patients treated by the doctors I worked with, not one died. Many got out of the hospital faster than those who got blood. Statistically by 1/2 to 3 days faster. This begs the question, Why? Why Are Blood Transfusions Given Liberally by Some Doctors? Why do some give blood liberally and others conservatively. Considering the blood transfusion side effects, wouldn't doctors want to avoid them? Why do more doctors not buy into the blood transfusion avoidance since the outcomes are so much better. Even JAMA said every hospital should have a Bloodless Program. Numerous studies show that bloodless medicine is associated with positive outcomes, including financial ones. In an era of hospitals losing money, this is a business model that can make them barrels or pardon the pun, numerous units of profits. Understanding Health Care Politics will answer the question in part. Secondly, there is a lot of money to be made in blood and selling blood products. Follow the money and see where it leads. An economic term called actuarial analysis is used to in effect say that the risk and down side of a transfusion are far outweighed by the up side. However, there are no high level studies that show that a blood transfusion saves lives. Actually, all of the high level studies say the opposite. From any to the more blood that is transfused, the higher the risk of death or getting sick. Past Blood Transfusion Side Effects The plastic bags used to store blood were found to leach carcinogenic chemicals into blood. Even though the common opinion was that blood transfusions were safe. Then came Hepatitis C. Even though the blood was considered safe, thousands were infected. Then cam AIDs. In Canada alone, over 50 thousand people got AIDS from contaminated blood. Every year, only a few get AIDS today. It is considered clinically insignificant. That is unless you are one of the ones who got a tainted transfusion. Perhaps even worse, if you got a transfusion that you did not need, such as Jonathan White, a 6 year old who got a table spoon full of blood and AID's at the same time. Why? Because the family was told that he needed the transfusion to save his life. A table spoon of blood is an insignificant amount. If these blood transfusion side effects can result in such damage and yet the blood supply was considered safe, then what will the future hold for the current so called safe blood. Sources of the Above Information on Blood Transfusion Side Effects Boucher BA, Hannon TJ. Blood management: a primer for clinicians. Pharmacotherapy 2007;27:1394-411.Goodnough LT. Risks of blood transfusion. [Review] [124 refs]. Critical Care Medicine 2003;31:S678-S686. Note: Dr Goodnough was one of the most published and vocal doctors promoting blood transfusions at one time. As he continued his research and practice, he changed camps. He is now one of the most prolific writers on the subject of treating patients with out blood transfusions. Toy P, Popovsky MA, Abraham E et al. Transfusion-related acute lung injury: definition and review. Crit Care Med 2005;33:721-6.Dzik WH. Emily Cooley Lecture 2002: transfusion safety in the hospital. Transfusion 2003;43:1190-9.
Go to the top of Blood Transfusion Side Effects
|
