Arbovirus - a threat to transfusion safety in Spain: a narrative review. / Arbovirus como amenaza para la seguridad transfusional en España: revisión narrativa.

Arboviruses represent a threat to transfusion safety for several reasons: the presence of vectors and the notification of autochthonous cases in our region, the recent increase in the number of cases transmitted through blood and/or blood component transfusion, the high prevalence rates of RNA of the main arboviruses in asymptomatic blood donors, and their ability to survive processing and storage in the different blood components. In an epidemic outbreak caused by an arbovirus in our region, transfusion centres can apply different measures: reactive measures, related to donor selection or arbovirus screening, and proactive measures, such as pathogen inactivation methods. The study of the epidemiology of the main arboviruses and understanding the effectiveness of the different measures that we can adopt are essential to ensure that our blood components remain safe.

Pathogen reduction with methylene blue does not have an impact on the clinical effectiveness of COVID-19 convalescent plasma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a concern about a possible deleterious effect of pathogen reduction (PR) with methylene blue (MB) on the function of immunoglobulins of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP). We have evaluated whether MB-treated CCP is associated with a poorer clinical response compared to other inactivation systems at the ConPlas-19 clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was an ad hoc sub-study of the ConPlas-19 clinical trial comparing the proportion of patients transfused with MB-treated CCP who had a worsening of respiration versus those treated with amotosalen (AM) or riboflavin (RB). RESULTS: One-hundred and seventy-five inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia were transfused with a single CCP unit. The inactivation system of the CCP units transfused was MB in 90 patients (51.4%), RB in 60 (34.3%) and AM in 25 (14.3%). Five out of 90 patients (5.6%) transfused with MB-treated CCP had worsening respiration compared to 9 out of 85 patients (10.6%) treated with alternative PR methods (p = 0.220). Of note, MB showed a trend towards a lower rate of respiratory progressions at 28 days (risk ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-1.50). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that MB-treated CCP does not provide a worse clinical outcome compared to the other PR methods for the treatment of COVID-19.