Immunoprophylaxis using intravenous Rh immune globulin should be standard practice when selected D-negative patients are transfused with D-positive random donor platelets

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Immunohematology

American National Red Cross

Subject: Medical Laboratory Technology

GET ALERTS SUBSCRIBE

ISSN: 0894-203X
eISSN: 1930-3955

DESCRIPTION

4
Reader(s)
10
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue / page

Archive
Volume 37 (2021)
Volume 36 (2020)
Volume 35 (2019)
Volume 34 (2018)
Volume 33 (2017)
Volume 32 (2016)
Volume 31 (2015)
Volume 30 (2014)
Volume 29 (2013)
Volume 28 (2012)
Volume 27 (2011)
Volume 26 (2010)
Volume 25 (2009)
Volume 24 (2008)
Volume 23 (2007)
Volume 22 (2006)
Volume 21 (2005)
Volume 20 (2004)
Volume 19 (2003)
Volume 18 (2002)
Volume 17 (2001)
Volume 16 (2000)
Volume 15 (1999)
Volume 14 (1998)
Volume 13 (1997)
Volume 12 (1996)
Volume 11 (1995)
Volume 10 (1994)
Volume 9 (1993)
Volume 8 (1992)
Volume 7 (1991)
Volume 6 (1990)
Volume 5 (1989)
Volume 4 (1988)
Volume 3 (1987)
Related articles

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 4 (December 1998) > List of articles

Immunoprophylaxis using intravenous Rh immune globulin should be standard practice when selected D-negative patients are transfused with D-positive random donor platelets

Clinton A. Ewing / Dawn H. Rumsey / Albert F. Langeberg / S. Gerald Sandler

Keywords : Rh alloimmunization, anti-D, RhIG, blood transfusion standards, platelet transfusion

Citation Information : Immunohematology. Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages 133-137, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/immunohematology-2019-680

License : (Transfer of Copyright)

Published Online: 03-November-2020

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

A 67-year-old female developed excessive bleeding and thrombocytopenia following cardiovascular surgery. Her blood type was group A, D–. The only platelet products available in the transfusion service were random donor platelet concentrates from D+ donors. She was transfused with a pool of 6 D+ random donor platelet concentrates. Anti-D undetected in her pretransfusion serum by solid-phase antibody screen was present 11 days later. Retrospectively, the patient provided a history of having two pregnancies more than 40 years ago, prior to the availability of immunoprophylaxis by Rh immune globulin (RhIG). Although studies have shown that as many as 19 percent of D– people may develop anti-D following transfusion of platelets from D+ donors, there is no specific standard requiring immunoprophylaxis with RhIG to prevent Rh alloimmunization after transfusion of random donor platelet concentrates from D+ donors. In contrast, vigorous efforts are routine for preventing Rh alloimmunization in D– patients requiring red cell transfusions or D– females during pregnancy or after delivery of D+ newborns. The absence of a comparable practice standard for platelet transfusions is based, in part, on concern that intramuscular injections of conventional RhIG may cause local hemorrhage in thrombocytopenic persons. The recent availability of a Food and Drug Administration-approved preparation of intravenous RhIG makes Rh immunoprophylaxis in thrombocytopenic patients safe and practical. We recommend that intravenous RhIG be considered if it is necessary to transfuse random donor platelet concentrates from D+ donors to D– recipients. As a minimal standard, intravenous RhIG should be administered to all D– females of childbearing age who are recipients of pools of random donor platelet concentrates from D+ donors.

You don't have 'Full Text' access of this article.

Purchase Article Subscribe Journal Share