Journals / Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni / 2008 / Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2

Is serologic screening necessary in the donor bloods for cytomegalovirus seronegative blood transfusion to risk patients

Riskli gruplara sitomegalovirus seronegatif kan transfüzyonu için bağışçı kanlarında tarama gerekli mi?

Pages
337–341
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was estimated that CMV-IgG screening was not cost-effective to provide seronegative blood donations because of the high rate of seropositivity in Kocaeli as well as other regions of Turkey, so it would be more favorable to apply alternative methods such as leukocyte reduction.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections are commonly seen in humans and are usually mild or asymptomatic.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, these infections have significant medical risks in pregnant women, newborns and immunocompromised patients.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was estimated that CMV-IgG screening was not cost-effective to provide seronegative blood donations because of the high rate of seropositivity in Kocaeli as well as other regions of Turkey, so it would be more favorable to apply alternative methods such as leukocyte reduction.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2006 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections are commonly seen in humans and are usually mild or asymptomatic. However, these infections have significant medical risks in pregnant women, newborns and immunocompromised patients. Seronegative subjects and infants acquire CMV through infected blood products or direct contact with infected people. The use of seronegative blood products for selected patients, as in newborns and/or immunosuppressed patients has vital importance in medical management. Providing seronegative blood in countries where the prevalence of CMV is high (>90%), is difficult since this requires screening of a great number of blood donations. The aim of this study was to detect the CMV seroprevalence among voluntary blood donors in Kocaeli (located at northwestern region of Turkey) and to determine whether the screening procedure was cost-effective. CMV-IgG was investigated by a commercial ELISA method (AXSYM, Abbott, USA) in 1264 blood donors who were voluntarily admitted to donate blood for newborns between January to December 2006. In 1229 (97.2%) of these donors CMV-IgG was found positive while it was negative in 35 (2.8%). It was estimated that CMV-IgG screening was not cost-effective to provide seronegative blood donations because of the high rate of seropositivity in Kocaeli as well as other regions of Turkey, so it would be more favorable to apply alternative methods such as leukocyte reduction.

Özet

İnsanlarda yaygın olarak görülen ve genellikle asemptomatik ya da hafif seyreden sitomegalovirus (CMV) enfeksiyonları, gebeler, yenidoğanlar ve immün sistemi baskılanmış kişilerde önemli tıbbi riskler taşıyan enfeksiyonlardır. Seronegatif kişiler ve yenidoğanlar CMV'u enfekte kan ürünleri veya enfekte kişiler ile temasla alırlar. Seronegatif kan ürünlerinin, yeni doğanda olduğu gibi, seçilmiş hastalarda kullanılması bu hastaların tedavisinde hayati bir öneme sahiptir. Ülkemiz gibi CMV seropozitiflik oranının yüksek (>%90) olduğu bölgelerde seronegatif kan bağışçılarını bulmak, fazla sayıda kanın taranmasını gerektiren, pahalı ve zaman alıcı bir süreçtir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Kocaeli'nde gönüllü kan bağışçılarında CMV seroprevalansını saptamak ve bu taramaların maliyet-etkin olup olmadığını belirlemektir. Bu amaçla, Ocak-Aralık 2006 tarihleri arasında yenidoğan bebekler için kan bağışlayacak 1264 bağışçının kanında CMV IgG antikor pozitifliği ticari bir ELISA yöntemi (AXSYM, Abbott, ABD) ile araştırılmıştır. Bağışçıların 1229'unda (%97.2) anti- CMV IgG pozitif, 35'inde (%2.8) ise negatif olarak bulunmuştur. İlimizde CMV seropozitiflik oranının ülkemizin diğer bölgelerinde olduğu gibi oldukça yüksek bulunması nedeniyle, seronegatif kan bağışçısı temini için yapılacak taramanın maliyet-etkin olmayacağı ve bağışçı kanlarında lökosit redüksiyonu gibi alternatif yöntemlerin kullanılmasının daha uygun olabileceği düşünülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

MUTLU, B., GÜNLEMEZ, A., TÜRKER, G., GÖKALP, A. S., WILLKE, A. (2008). Is serologic screening necessary in the donor bloods for cytomegalovirus seronegative blood transfusion to risk patients. Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni, Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2, 337–341. https://ajindex.com/articles/298958

References (13)

  1. Alford GA, Stagno S, Pass RF, et al. Epidemiology of cytomegalovirus, pp: 159-71. İn: Nahmias A, Dowdle W, Schinazi R (eds), The Human Herpesvirus: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. 1981. Elsevier, New York
  2. Kositanont U, Wasi C, Chandanayingyong D, et al. Prevalence of cytomegalovirus antibodies in Thai blood donors. Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol 1985; 3: 179-82
  3. Urwijitaroon Y, Teawpatanataworn S, Kitjareontarm A. Prevalence of cytomegalovirus antibody in Thai- northeastern blood donors Southeast Asian. J Trop Med Public Health 1993; 24 (Suppl 1): 180-2
  4. Gratacap-Cavallier B, Bosson JL, Morand P, et al. Cytomegalovirus seroprevalence in French pregnant women: parity and place of birth as major predictive factors. Eur J Epidemiol 1998; 14: 147-52
  5. Gargouri J, Elleuch H, Karay H, et al. Prevalence of anti-CMV antibodies in blood donors in the Sfax region (value in blood transfusion). Tunis Med 2000; 78: 512-7
  6. Kothari A, Ramachandran VG, Grupta P, et al. Seroprevalence of cytomegalovirus among voluntary blood donors in Delhi, India. J Health Popul Nutr 2002; 20: 348-51
  7. Alanen A, Kahala K, Vahlberg T, Koskela P, Vainionpaa R. Seroprevalence, incidence of prenatal infections and reliability of maternal history of varicella zoster virus, cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex virus and parvovirus B19 infection in South- Western Finland. BJOG 2005; 112: 50-6
  8. Ahmed ŞA, Al-Joudi FS, Zaidah AW, et al. The prevalence of human cytomegalovirus seropositivity among blood donors at the Unit of Blood Transfusion Medicine, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 2006; 37: 294-6
  9. Ataman Ş, Çolak D, Günseren F, Çolak T, Şenol Y, Aktekin MR, Gültekin M. Antalya'da sitomegalovirus seroepidemiyolojisinin toplum kaynaklı kesitsel bir çalışma ile araştırılması ve Türkiye verilerinin derlenmesi. Mikrobiyol Bul 2007; 41: 545-55
  10. Günhan C. Cytomegalovirus infeksiyonları, s: 1191-6. Willke Topçu A, Söyletir G, Doğanay M (ed) İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları ve Mikrobiyolojisi. 2002. Nobel Tıp Kitapevleri, İstanbul
  11. Stehel EK, Sanchez PJ. Cytomegalovirus infection in the fetus and neonate. NeoReviews 2005; 6: e38-e45
  12. Strauss RG. Transfusion approach to neonatal anemia. NeoReviews 2000; 1: 74-80
  13. Bowden RA, Slichter SJ, Sayers M, et al. A comparison of filtered leukocyte-reduced and cytomegalovirus (CMV) seronegative blood products for the prevention of transfusion-associated CMV infection after marrow transplant. Bloo