An ongoing map record showing confirmed cases of donor blood being infected with Chagas disease 07-09. Put out by the AABB (see below). These AABB labs account for 65% of the total blood collected in the U.S.
“Blood Donations in the U.S. testing positive for Chagas’ Disease”
Associated Content
21 Oct 2007
Is blood donated to aid people in life-saving transfusions safe from being buggy? Probably, according to the CDC. Yet discoveries of blood donations infected with the Chagas parasite have highlighted not only the higher-than-anticipated prevalence of Chagas in the U.S. but also the need for better screening to ensure blood donation recipients aren’t getting infected. We know from the last "Buggy Blood" post that blood donations in the U.S. are infected with the Chagas parasite, but another eye-opening article really elaborates on the extent of the problem, the barriers to better screening, and what steps have been taken to ensure blood donations are safe.
An October ‘07 article recounts the release of info from the American Association of Blood Banks (AABB) indicating that about 241 blood donations in the U.S. had tested positive for Chagas disease since the advent of an FDA-licensed blood detection method in January ‘07. Within the year Chagas-positive blood donations had been spotted in 34 states, prompting Dr. James Maguire, former head of the CDC’s parasitic diseases division, to describe the results as “surprising”.
Yes, the results suggest the horrifying possibility that an unknown number of patients receiving untested blood donations may have been exposed to and possibly infected by transfusions containing the deadly T.cruzi parasite. Blood safety experts and the Red Cross were looking into new disease cases that may have involved transmission via blood transfusions with infected blood, but details were not disclosed in the article. Experts estimated that roughly 70% of blood donations were being screened for Chagas--- meaning that about a third of all blood donations in the country are being used in transfusions without being screened for infection. Meaning that for a third of blood donations, you run the risk, if not minuscule, of being infected with a potentially fatal disease without even knowing it.
…..yeah, that’s not very reassuring to me either. And the 2009 CDC Q&A factsheet on screening blood donations for Chagas is even less helpful. In response to a blood donors’ question “Will I be tested automatically (for Chagas)?” the CDC states “Probably. Most blood banks are testing for Chagas disease”. I’m guessing any person about to receive a blood transfusion would prefer the answer regarding the infection status of the blood they’re receiving to be a little more definitive than “probably”.
The good news from this: we now possess an effective blood test for detecting Chagas’ (the T.cruzi ELISA test, developed by Ortho boasts 100% sensitivity and 99.99% sensitivity), and it seems that we have taken the first steps towards developing a biovigilance network and screening blood for Chagas in blood donors as a medical standard. Plus, the donors who test positive are now becoming aware of their own infection status, allowing for them to take any precautionary measures and contributing to the growing pool of evidence on the true prevalence of Chagas in the U.S. Info put out by the AABB includes an ongoing biovigilance map where you can see confirmed cases where donor blood tested positive for Chagas.
Building on the last "Buggy Blood" post, this article really is eye-opening in terms of infected blood donations. Yet more emphasis needs to be put on screening ALL donors for Chagas, rather than just some. How can we do this? Educating the public and publicizing the issue.
CDC factsheet http://www.cdc.gov/chagas/factsheets/screening.html
AABB Biovigiliance Network http://www.aabb.org/Content/Programs_and_Services/Data_Center/Chagas
Article: http://www.noblood.org/news-hot-topics-such-hepatitis-c-sars-aids/3907-us-blood-donations-testing-positive-chagas-disease.html
No comments:
Post a Comment