Tag: Donor Processing

Automated and manual component processing including Reveos, Mirasol, PAS

International Perspective

drzeyd

When I first moved overseas from the United States, I brought the perspective of my American training and experience.  I saw everything in my new blood bank through those eyes.

Yet, most of my staff were not American or even North American.  Few were even native in English, and most of those  were not American.  They had different qualifications, many of which would not have been accepted by the American schemes.  Still, they functioned well.

I also worked with the US military technologist staff during Gulf War One.  Some did not even have a Bachelor’s degree;  yet, they performed the work well.

I used many technologies that were not yet (or never) US FDA approved such as gel or glass bead typings and pooled buffy coat platelet production.  There were rare reagents I could buy off the shelf (e.g. anti-Tja/PP1Pk).

Later, I adopted pathogen-reduction technology (Mirasol), automated component production (Atreus then Reveos), and platelet additive solution.  I achieve a level of good manufacturing practice that would have been difficult to achieve by the FDA-approved methods.

My perspective had changed.  In the Middle East, I studied many frameworks and came to the conclusion that the best approach was to customize them to our local needs.  My particular experience was to start with one framework, i.e. Council of Europe CE, and then localize it.

To do this, I could not use an American turnkey blood bank software for either the donor or patient operations.  I needed a flexible system that could be customized to my needs.  Again, I chose a CE-marked system, Medinfo Hematos IIG that had already been adapted to many frameworks.

It is much easier to work solely within one system such as FDA.  However, if I had done that, I would have lost so much flexibility and not had a system optimized for local conditions.  I would not have used Mirasol, Reveos, Diamed, and many other reagents.

One big disappointment at such international meetings is the perspective by one country’s regulatory agency that they feel its regulations and framework will work well overseas.  I would wager that those people were not well acquainted with international conditions.

Another frustration was attending another international meeting in which the presenters apologized for the source of information since it came from a foreign country (France) and not their own (United States).

No country has a monopoly on what is best for everyone.  To share our experiences and compare is so valuable.  No one assume his way is the best.  In my career, I have had the richest experiences studying other perspectives and my organizations have benefited greatly from the exchange.  We can all learn from each other.  We are citizens of the world.

Reposted: Granulocyte Concentrates Prepared from Reveos Buffy Coats

drzeyd

The Reveos buffy coat is not approved for clinical use.  In my laboratory, I have offered this discard product to the stem cell laboratory and researchers as a quality control QC and a substrate to extract CD34+ cells for expansion and modification.

In this article (abstract attached) from Transfusion and Apheresis Science 59 (2020) 102682, the authors study pools of ABO-identical Reveos buffy coats for their granulocyte functionality and as a possible emergency replacement for granulocyte concentrates when the latter are not available.

I want to thank Terumo BCT (Brussels, Belgium) for referring me to this article and to the authors for a very interesting paper.

1/1/21

Medinfo COVID Convalescent Plasma Workflow Revisited

drzeyd

It now has been over eight 8 months since I prepared the CCP workflow in Medinfo.  It was built on the framework of the manual CCP process including donor prescreening with an abbreviated donor questionnaire.  It was really quite simple and used the donor and patient modules to create quarantine areas for donor screening, collection, processing, and hospital patient blood bank release.

Here are my current comments on the process:

Donor Qualification:

I would still exclude malaria and HTLV from the donor questionnaire and would update to UDQ 2.1.  Since these donors have recovered from a potentially life-threatening illness, I would keep the Hgb threshold at 11 g/dl.

Donor Collection:

In the future, I would consider using one of the soon-to-be-released portable devices that continuously monitor vital signs with pO2 and EKG lead to rule out asymptomatic pulmonary or cardiac problems.

I would also consider using low-ABO-titer, group A, universally to meet the demand for group B and AB patients.

Donor Testing:

There is still no need to segregate and separately test CCP donor specimens from regular blood donor specimens.  I would perform SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing and set a threshold for qualifying donors—that threshold will be based on the manufacturer’s recommendations.  However, if the treating physician wanted to use a low-titer unit, I would permit this.

Donor Processing:

There is no need to change this from the current processes.  Keep the CCP processing separate from the regular operations.

CCP Plasma Release:

I would keep the quarantine release and restrict it to the locations used for treating COVID-19 patients

Medinfo Software Modifications:

I would record the IgG and IgM titers for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in each donation record.  This would include testing and entering the results on donations prior to this testing.  ISBT labels should include this antibody titer.

Hospital Information Software Modifications:

Set up restricted CCP ordering for the actual treating physicians only.  Also provide the ISBT code and shortened descriptors to it if necessary (certain HIS vendors still cannot read ISBT codes natively).

The original CCP workflow is attached for reference.

Manual Collection of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma

drzeyd

This process was originally done in the first phase of CCP collection.  I have updated it to include SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing.

Principle:

Due to the pandemic, we will initially MANUALLY collect an experimental, investigational-use-only plasma product from apheresis donors and treat it with Mirasol.  THIS IS A EMERGENCY INTERIM PROCESS UNTIL THE MEDINFO HEMATOS IIG PROCESSES ARE PREPARED AND VALIDATED.

Policy:

  1. Good Manufacturing Practice applies:
    1. Manufacturers’ recommended processes for equipment and materials usage applies.
    1. All staff engaged in these processes must be competency assessed successfully.
  2. Pre-Screening:
    1. Clinical staff will use the prescreening document to select donors for pre-donation screening.
  3. Quarantine:
    1. All processes (day 0, day 1, day 2, and product modification and release) will be done in quarantine areas SEPARATE and DISTINCT from regular Transfusion Medicine activities.  This includes:
      1. Separate space and equipment must be provided.
        1. Equipment for this project may NOT be used for regular, non-quarantine processes
    2. Non-Transfusion Medicine staff will not be permitted in operational areas.
    3. Prospective donors will not be permitted in the processing, testing, storage, or blood bank work areas.
  4. Donation Process:
    1. Day 0:  Registration, check donor deferral database, questionnaire, physical exam including arm check, and specimen collection using ISBT specimen labels
    2. Use latest manual donor questionnaire.
    3. Day 1:  Donor marker and immunohematology testing, review of results, accept or reject donor for actual plasmapheresis
    4. Day 2:  Collect manufacturer’s recommended volume of plasma (500 ml if < 80 kg, 600 ml if >= 80 kg), aliquot, pathogen-inactivate (Mirasol), freeze at minus 80C
  5. Testing:
    1. Testing will be performed with regular blood donor specimens using ISBT specimen labels
    2. Testing must be done by donor-specific processes (not those for clinical patients)
      1. Exclude malaria and HTLV testing.
    3. Testing must be directly interfaced to Medinfo Hematos IIG donor module
    4. CCP COVID antibody testing:
      1. SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing to be performed to determine cut-off for donor eligibility for CCP collection.
      2. Use of donors with antibody levels below threshold is at the discretion of the treating clinician.
  6. Processing:
    1. Aliquoting, pathogen-inactivation, and labelling may proceed if the pre-donation screening results are acceptable.
  7. Storage:
    1. Long-term in minus 80C quarantine freezer
    2. Short-term at 1-6 C just after thawing in quarantine refrigerator
    3. Standard temperature monitoring and alarms apply
  8. Labelling:
    1. The backup manual labelling process applies
    2. The ISBT specimen label will the donor unit number
      1. Outdate will be 6 years if the product is stored at -65C, 1 year if stored at -18C
  9. Product Release:
    1. Orders must be on the PAPER requisition (old Blood Bank Order Form) with a patient prescription and signed by a physician designated to treat COVID patients.
      1. No orders in Cerner
    2. Thawing plasma at 37C upon receipt of order by Transfusion Medicine staff
    3. Signing out component to clinical unit by Transfusion Medicine Staff to locations treating COVID-19 patients.
  10. Information Technology:  Medinfo Hematos IIG customized software to be implemented as soon as possible for all processes
  11. Not covered:  Transfusion Medicine is NOT responsible for:
    1. Triage of request for convalescent plasma
    2. Pickup and transport of components

References:

  1. Level 1-4 documents for donation, testing, processing, and release of blood components
  2. COVID-19 Plasma Donor Prescreening Document, 8/4/20

Bacterial Risk Control Strategies for Platelets—USA

drzeyd

I am attaching the US Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research CBER Guidance for Industry revision dated December 2020 to replace the one issued in September 2019.

This is a very detailed document that will require US blood centers to comply with newer more stringent safeguards to minimize the risk of bacterial contamination of platelet components.

The easiest way to comply is to universally pathogen-inactivate all platelet components:  then the rest of the algorithm does not apply.  I am happy that for over 10 years I have used pathogen-inactivation (riboflavin-based Mirasol, Terumo BCT) and not experienced any bacterial sepsis from platelet or plasma components.

For those of us practicing outside the USA, please note:

The US still does not permit pooled, buffy coat platelets to have either a 5 or 7 day outdate.  For pooled components stored at 20-24 C, the FDA only allows a four-hour outdate, regardless what the rest of the world permits.  Thus, the USA mainly uses apheresis platelets.

If you have pathogen-inactivated platelets, you are so fortunate that you don’t have to follow these other recommendations to have a low risk of bacterial contamination.

Reference:

Bacterial Risk Control Strategies for Blood Collection Establishments and Transfusion Services to Enhance the Safety and Availability of Platelets for Transfusion, Guidance for Industry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, September 2019 updated December 2020

CBER Guidance for Bacterial Contamination Guidance, Revised December 2020 (PDF)

COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma CCP Series Introduction

drzeyd

I will be posting a detailed series about the manual and software-enhanced COVID-19 processes that I set up in Qatar at HMC Doha in March-April 2020.

In this series I will provide you with screen shots of my Medinfo Hematos IIG software design for each step in the process:  collection, processing, testing, inter-depot transfer, and hospital transfusion service/blood bank release.

This GMP-compliant software-enhanced system is based on the manual system I set up in early March 2020 at HMC.

I want to thank Medinfo Hematos IIG for their rapid response to building this parallel system based on my standard processes in so short a time (two weeks) and my special thanks to the software engineering team at Vital Health Technologies, the agent for Medinfo in Qatar.

To start the series, I am providing the basic workflow for the system.  As is normal in Medinfo software design, a full mapping of the processes are made.  This workflow shows the new CCP ISBT codes and the quarantine collection and processing steps.  The donor testing (marker and immunohematology) processes are similar to those for regular donor units.

This is basically the same process both manually and in the software.  I always say:

A good software process is based on a good manual process!!

Please note the following workflow for our initial discussion.

Use of Universal Low-Titer Group A Plasma

drzeyd

Principle:

Since group AB plasma is in short supply, use of group A plasma with low anti-B titers may be substituted based on inventory levels.

Policy:

  1. If the AB inventory is low, we will test group A donors at the time of collection for anti-B titers.
    1. The numbers to be tested will depend on the level of the shortage and the availability of equipment to perform titration.
  2. Use the automated analyzer to perform saline anti-B.
    1. If the saline titer is less than or equal to 1:64, the plasma may be used for recipients of any ABO blood group and will be labelled as group AU—A Universal.
  3. Process the unit routinely and perform pathogen-inactivation.
  4. Medinfo Hematos IIG will only label for universal use if the titer is below the cutoff.
    1. The ISBT label must explicitly show group AU plasma and the actual anti-B titer.
  5. Allocation rules for low-titer group A plasma will be identical to group AB except:
    1. For neonates, preferentially use group AB.
    2. For children < 20 kg, use ABO-compatible plasma (non-group AB) before selecting group AB or if not available, low-titer A in that order.
  6. Donors must have a new anti-B titer performed each donor encounter.

References:

  1. Technical Manual, Current Edition, Bethesda, MD, USA
  2. Standards for Blood Banks and Transfusion Services Current Edition, AABB, Bethesda, MD, USA

Framework for Establishing the Use of Universal Low-Titer Group A Plasma

drzeyd

This post outlines a framework for establishing the use of low-titer group A plasma as a universal donor.  Manual titering large number of donor specimens in my organization is not practical.  Using an automated system will also increase the precision of the results.

Process:

  1. Select a cut-off anti-B titer.  This should be determined by the blood bank medical director.
    1. I selected saline 1:64 based on recent THOR (Thrombosis Hemostasis Oxygenation Research) meetings
  2. Perform a survey of the anti-B titers in your blood donor population.
    1. At my sites, about 50% had titers less than or equal to 1:64.
    2. Determine how stable the titer is:
      1. For serial donor plasmapheresis, how long could you accept the donor as low-titer?
      2. Does the titer change between whole blood donations?
  3. Determine the target inventory level for universal plasma (group AB and low-titer A) based on current/past usage.
  4. Assess availability of automated immunohematology analyzers for titration.
    1. Titration may take up to 30 minutes per sample, during which time the machine cannot be used for any other purpose.
  5. Add a new blood type AU (for group A universal) for plasma in your blood typing algorithm.
    1. AU should be used interchangeably with group AB.
  6. Software:
    1. Set up new truth table in your blood bank computer system.
    2. Validate the modification in your blood bank donor and patient modules.
    3. Update ISBT code for this new product, verify your transfusion service module can read this.

Special notes:

  1. At my last location, we had only 3 analyzers capable of doing the titration.  Thus, we could only do 6 titrations per hour at the expense of stopping all other testing.  You will have to coordinate the titration with your other immunohematology testing.  Also, verify if all these equipment interface to your production software.  In my system, any test (including titration) could be performed at any location and its results be used for production purposes.
  2. Donor ABO antibody titers may fluctuate.  I would not use previous results to qualify a donor to be AU.  I would repeat the anti-B titer each donor encounter.  If I collect donor plasmapheresis, I would determine for how long the titer can be used (see 2.2.1 above).

References:

  1. Technical Manual, Current Edition, Bethesda, MD, USA
  2. Standards for Blood Banks and Transfusion Services Current Edition, AABB, Bethesda, MD, USA
  3. Medinfo Hematos IIG Donor Production Module

Data Entry Verification: Updated Version

drzeyd

This is an update from the previous version posted to include low-titer group A FFP/FP24 and low ABO-titer group O whole blood.

Principle:

This policy outlines steps taken to minimize the risk of data entry errors and is based on a dualistic approach:  review of results by a senior technologist and/or supervisor and various computer safeguards built into the Medinfo Hematos IIG blood bank computer HIIG system.  This policy also discusses the verification (here called authorization) and purge processes of HIIG.

Policy:

  1. Review by senior technical, supervisory, or transfusion medical staff:
    1. Designated test procedures require review by a second technologist before authorization.
    2. Complex immunohematology testing and specimens showing aberrant results (e.g. ABO/D discrepancies) are reviewed by the supervisors or designates and ultimately a transfusion medicine physician before authorization.
  2. Computer system HIIG rules:
    1. Privileges:
      1. System restricts which staff can perform specific tests
    2. Patient/donor identity:
      1. System asks end-users to verify patient/donor identity before starting any access to the patient/donor record.
      2. System performs historical database checking and flags any inconsistencies (e.g. historical ABO/D typing differences, etc.)
    3. Testing:
      1. Only selected staff have privileges to authorize or purge.
      2. ABO/D testing algorithms require entry of reactions, not interpretation of results and are compared to a truth table.
        1. Aberrant results require special review before ABO/D typing results can be authorized/purged.
        2. D-controls must be negative to allow D typing results to be authorized for liquid D-typing reagents.
      3. DAT results require appropriate controls to meet truth-table criteria.
      4. Eluates require last wash to be negative before authorization
    4. Blood components:
      1. Selection of RBC or plasma units requires two independent sample determinations within 72 hours of each other.
      2. ABO-incompatible RBC or FFP/FP24 transfusions are not allowed.
      3. Titer-based ABO blood group selection:
        1. Low titer group A FFP may be used as universal plasma like group AB.
        2. Group O whole blood with low anti-A and anti-B titers may be used for all ABO types.
        3. Acceptable titer threshold is specifically defined as parameters in Medinfo.
      4. Donors with any detectable clinically significant antibodies are permanently deferred.
      5. Depending on the patient’s antibody history, release of RBC units may require antigen-matched units.  Examples:
        1. Mandatory matching (only antigen negative matched units allowed—no antigen positive or antigen-untyped units):  Antibodies against H, D, c, K, k, Kpa, Kpb, Jsa, Jsb, Jka, Jkb antigens, anti-PP1Pk
        2. Priority matching (incompatible or untested can be approved by a transfusion medicine physician):  C,E, e, Fya, Fyb, M, S, s
        3. Antigen matching not required:  Lea, Leb, N
      6. Least-incompatible crossmatch require special authorization to release
      7. Protocols to force irradiation or other modified components can be setup in HIIG.
    5. Donors:
      1. Donor tests have same criteria as the same test used in patient testing for controls, etc.
      2. Donor demographics are read directly from the Ministry of Interior database—no manual entry (bar code only used).

References:

  1. Workflows for Hematos IIG (1001 through 1005), 2013-2020
  2. Standards for Blood Banks and Transfusion Services, Current Edition, AABB, Bethesda, MD, USA
  3. Guidelines to the Preparation, Use, and Quality Assurance of Blood Components, European Committee (Partial Agreement) on Blood Transfusion (CD-P-TS), Current Edition

Opinion: Understanding Each Step of the Process

drzeyd

During an AABB inspection many years ago, I observed the Lead Assessor interacting with a medical technologist at the bench.  As expected, the Assessor asked in detail about the test and where the documentation and any teaching aids were located.  Most importantly, the tech was asked to explain the procedure step-by-step and if they knew WHY each step was done and how the various outcomes affected the test.

In my opinion, the WHY is the most important issue.  In our testing and processing, we are not baking a cake.  We do not need a mindless automaton to perform the steps without knowing what they are doing.  To get it right, the technologist must understand why he/she does each and everything—and what are the consequences for not following the procedure precisely.  If the staff member knows this, he/she has respect for the process and is more likely to adhere to the proper method.

In my interactions with my staff, I want to engage them in the importance of their testing to the patient’s care.  If they know that the result may affect the care, they may become more respectful of their work since they are part of the patient care team.

I want them to understand what each of the various results will mean to the patient, i.e. how he will be handled.  I give them updates about the patient’s condition.  A caring technologist is more likely to follow the steps properly.  They understand that a deviation from the process may adversely affect the patient.

To this day, I often go to the technologists and quiz them about what they are doing, e.g. why do they add a particular reagent, why the incubation time is 15 minutes versus 60 minutes.  I encourage them to check and recheck what they are doing if they have any doubts.  Working the bench is not a quiz or examination.  If they are uncertain, I want them to seek out the information, ask questions.  In fact, I tell them there is no shame in saying, “I don’t know”—but be certain to add, “I will find out what to do.”

Blood bank can be fatal to those who guess.  Each of us must know our individual limitations and seek the necessary knowledge.  In fact, many of my assessments are open-book.  They can use any resource in the blood bank or references on-line.  This is real life:  I discourage them from relying on memory if they are understand.  Our end point is the correct action.

13/12/20