Receipt of RhD-positive whole blood for life-threatening bleeding in female children: A survey in alloimmunized mothers regarding minimum acceptable survival benefit relative to risk of maternal alloimmunization to anti-D.

BACKGROUND: Low-titer group O whole blood (LTOWB) for treatment of hemorrhagic shock sometimes necessitates transfusion of RhD-positive units due to short supply of RhD-negative LTOWB. Practitioners must choose between using RhD-positive LTOWB when RhD-negative is unavailable against the risk to a female of childbearing potential of becoming RhD-alloimmunized, risking hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) in future children, or using component therapy with RhD-negative red cells. This survey asked females with a history of red blood cell (RBC) alloimmunization about their risk tolerance of RhD alloimmunization compared to the potential for improved survival following transfusion of RhD-positive blood for an injured RhD negative female child. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A survey was administered to RBC alloimmunized mothers. Respondents were eligible if they were living in the United States with at least one red cell antibody known to cause HDFN and if they had at least one RBC alloimmunized pregnancy. RESULTS: Responses from 107 RBC alloimmmunized females were analyzed. There were 32/107 (30%) with a history of severe HDFN; 12/107 (11%) had a history of fetal or neonatal loss due to HDFN. The median (interquartile range) absolute improvement in survival at which the respondents would accept RhD-positive transfusions for a female child was 4% (1%-14%). This was not different between females with and without a history of severe or fatal HDFN (p = .08 and 0.38, respectively). CONCLUSION: Alloimmunized mothers would accept the risk of D-alloimmunization in a RhD-negative female child for improved survival in cases of life-threatening bleeding.

Use of Low-Titer O-Positive Whole Blood in Female Trauma Patients: A Literature Review, Qualitative Multidisciplinary Analysis of Risk/Benefit, and Guidelines for Its Use as a Universal Product in Hemorrhagic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Whole blood transfusion is associated with benefits including improved survival, coagulopathy, and decreased transfusion requirements. The majority of whole blood transfusion is in the form of low-titer O-positive whole blood (LTOWB). Practice at many trauma centers withholds the use of LTOWB in women of childbearing potential due to concerns of alloimmunization. The purpose of this article is to review the evidence for LTOWB transfusion in female trauma patients and generate guidelines for its application. STUDY DESIGN: Literature and evidence for LTOWB transfusion in hemorrhagic shock are reviewed. The rates of alloimmunization and subsequent obstetrical outcomes are compared to the reported outcomes of LTOWB vs other resuscitation media. Literature regarding patient experiences and preferences in regards to the risk of alloimmunization is compared to current trauma practices. RESULTS: LTOWB has shown improved outcomes in both military and civilian settings. The overall risk of alloimmunization for Rhesus factor (Rh) - female patients in hemorrhagic shock exposed to Rh + blood is low (3% to 20%). Fetal outcomes in Rh-sensitized patients are excellent compared to historical standards, and treatment options continue to expand. The majority of female patients surveyed on the risk of alloimmunization favor receiving Rh + blood products to improve trauma outcomes. Obstetrical transfusion practices have incorporated LTOWB with excellent results. CONCLUSIONS: The use of whole blood resuscitation in trauma is associated with benefits in the resuscitation of severely injured patients. The rate at which severely injured, Rh-negative patients develop anti-D antibodies is low. Treatments for alloimmunized pregnancies have advanced, with excellent results. Fears of alloimmunization in female patients are likely overstated and may not warrant the withholding of whole blood resuscitation. The benefits of whole blood resuscitation likely outweigh the risks of alloimmunization.

Buprenorphine in the United States: Motives for abuse, misuse, and diversion.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and its consequences are a major public health concern. The partial agonist buprenorphine is a safe and effective treatment for OUD, but concerns about abuse, misuse, and diversion of buprenorphine have been raised. This narrative review examined the rates and motives for use of illicit buprenorphine in the United States. Findings from the 17 included studies suggest the majority of study participants using illicit buprenorphine do so for reasons related to misuse (to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms or achieve or maintain abstinence from other opioids). A smaller percentage of study respondents reported using buprenorphine for reasons related to abuse (to get high). There appears to be a gap between need for buprenorphine and access to adequate treatment. Attenuation of policy-related barriers and adoption of appropriate buprenorphine use by the treatment community are critical tools in the continued effort to reduce the burdens associated with OUD.