Monday, June 27, 2011

Too many blood transfusions? New standards urged (AP)

WASHINGTON � Check into the hospital and you may get a blood transfusion you didn't really need.

There's a lot of variation around the country in how quick doctors are to order up a few pints � not in cases of trauma or hemorrhage where infusing blood fast can be life-saving, but for a range of other reasons.

Anemia is common in older patients, for example, who may get a transfusion as an easy boost even when the anemia's too mild to matter or instead of treating the underlying problem. Need open-heart surgery or another complex operation? There are steps surgeons could take to minimize blood loss instead of trying to replace it later.

Now a government advisory committee is calling for national standards on when a transfusion is needed � and how to conserve this precious resource.

All the variability shows "there is both excessive and inappropriate use of blood transfusions in the U.S.," advisers to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius concluded earlier this month. "Improvements in rational use of blood have lagged."

Blood banks welcome the idea, important as they try to balance how to keep just enough blood on the shelves without it going bad or running short.

"Better patient care is what's being advocated here," says Dr. Richard Benjamin, chief medical officer of the American Red Cross. "If a transfusion is not necessary, all you can do is harm."

The U.S. uses a lot of blood, more than 14 million units of red blood cells a year. Between 1994 and 2008, blood use climbed 40 percent, Benjamin told the HHS Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability. In many years, parts of the country experienced spot shortages as blood banks struggled to bring in enough donors to keep up.

Surprisingly, blood use dropped a bit with the recession, roughly 6 percent over two years, Benjamin says. He couldn't say why. That dip has leveled off, but specialists say demand is sure to rise again in coming years as the population rapidly grays and people who once were prime donors become more ill and frail.

Right now, overall donation levels are good with one exception, Benjamin says: There's a big need for more Type O-negative blood, especially as banks prepare for the usual summertime donor drop. Few donors are Type O negative, but it's compatible with all other blood types and hospitals have begun using more of it in recent years.

What's the evidence for avoidable transfusions?

One study published last fall tracked more than 100,000 people who underwent open-heart surgery, a transfusion-heavy operation. Just 8 percent of those patients received transfusions at some hospitals, while a startling 93 percent did at other hospitals. But survival wasn't significantly different at hospitals that used more blood than at hospitals that used less.

That's important, because transfusions are not risk-free. While the risk of HIV or other viruses is very rare in blood today, people also can experience allergic-style transfusion reactions and other complications, sometimes fatal ones.

Another study last fall examined Medicare patients who received blood for various reasons over a 10-year period, and found those who live in the South are the most likely to get a transfusion and those who live in the West are the least likely.

Overall, the U.S. uses about 49 units of blood for every 1,000 patients, substantially more than Canada or Britain where those transfusion rates are in the 30s, Benjamin says.

One solution that the HHS advisers urged the government to explore: Some hospitals have begun what's called "patient blood management," instituting their own guidelines on when a transfusion is avoidable.

Consider Eastern Maine Medical Center. Transfusion chief Dr. Irwin Gross described how doctors now order blood via a computerized form that warns if they're about to deviate from the guidelines and tracks who uses the most.

Planning a hip replacement? Patients are supposed to be checked for anemia before elective surgery is scheduled, so they can be treated with iron or other therapies beforehand and lower chances of a post-surgery transfusion. For non-surgery patients, other guidelines spell out when anemia is bad enough to warrant a transfusion or when a patient should just be monitored.

In cardiac and back surgeries, equipment captures a patient's own blood and pumps it back right away, reducing the need for post-surgery transfusions.

The program reduced the amount of blood drawn just for laboratory tests, and limited when doctors can order multiple transfusions rather than checking first to see if one did the trick.

The result: The Bangor hospital is giving blood to nearly half as many patients as it did in 2006, the year before the program began. And there are no signs of patient harm, Gross told the HHS committee. He calculated that the hospital saved $5.4 million over four years in the cost of buying blood.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE � Lauran Neergaard covers health and medical issues for The Associated Press in Washington.



Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement | WordPress Tutorials

Diabetics receive blood vessels grown in lab (AP)

For the first time, scientists have given several diabetic patients blood vessels grown in a lab from donated skin cells.

The work is a key step toward creating a supply of ready-to-use veins and arteries that could be implanted in dialysis patients, soldiers with damaged limbs, children with heart defects, people having heart bypass surgery and others.

The blood vessels are made by a California company, Cytograft Tissue Engineering Inc. Three dialysis patients in Poland have received them so far, and they are working well two to eight months later. A larger study in Europe is planned.

The research is considered so promising that the American Heart Association featured it Monday in the first of a new series of webcasts about cutting-edge science.



Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement | WordPress Tutorials

E. coli death toll up to at least 47 (AP)

BERLIN � The death toll in Europe's E. coli outbreak has risen by three to at least 47, German authorities said Monday, even as new infections continue to tail off.

Germany's disease control center, the Robert Koch Institute, said 46 deaths have now been reported in the country.

One person has died in Sweden, and officials say one death in the U.S. may be linked to the outbreak � but it isn't yet confirmed that the Arizona man, who had visited Germany, was sickened by the same bacterial strain.

The number of new infections has declined significantly over recent weeks but overall numbers are still rising, due largely to delays in notification.

The disease control center said 3,801 people have been reported sick in Germany. That includes 834 suffering from a complication that can lead to kidney failure.

A further 119 cases have been reported in a total of 15 other countries. The source has been traced to a vegetable sprout farm in northern Germany.

Officials still don't know how the sprouts were contaminated, said Nina Bansbach, a spokeswoman for the German Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety.

The World Health Organization said it considers an E. coli outbreak in France in recent days as separate.

"Investigations are ongoing, but the first findings suggest that locally grown sprouts might be involved," the WHO said in a statement Monday of the outbreak. It said that, of eight French cases so far, three of them carried the same bacteria strains as in Germany.

"Intensive traceback is under way to identify a possible common source of the German and French sprout seeds," it added. But "other potential vehicles are also under investigation."

France has halted the sale of fenugreek, mustard and arugula sprout seeds from British mail order seed and plant company Thompson & Morgan. The company says the link is unsubstantiated.

There was "no direct supply relationship" between the farm in Germany at the center of the outbreak and the British company, German spokeswoman Bansbach said.

______

Kirsten Grieshaber contributed to this report.



Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement | WordPress Tutorials

Philip Morris fights Australian packaging rules (AP)

SYDNEY � Tobacco giant Philip Morris launched legal action on Monday against the Australian government over the country's plans to strip company logos from cigarette packages and replace them with grisly images of cancerous mouths, sickly children and bulging, blinded eyes.

The government believes the new rules will make the packages less attractive to smokers and turn Australia into the world's toughest country on tobacco advertising. Several outraged cigarette makers have threatened lawsuits, arguing the move illegally diminishes the value of their trademarks. Philip Morris is the first of those companies to file a claim for compensation.

"We would anticipate that the compensation would amount to billions," Philip Morris spokeswoman Anne Edwards told The Associated Press.

The legislation, which will be introduced to Parliament in July, would ban cigarette makers from printing their logos, promotional text or colorful images on cigarette packs. Brand names will instead be printed in a small, uniform font and feature large health warnings and gruesome, full-color images of the consequences of smoking. The law would be phased in over six months, starting in January 2012.

Hong Kong-based Philip Morris Asia Limited, which owns the Australian affiliate Philip Morris Limited, filed a notice of claim on Monday arguing the legislation violates a bilateral investment treaty between Australia and Hong Kong.

The tobacco company says the treaty protects companies' property, including intellectual property such as trademarks. The plain packaging proposal severely diminishes the value of the company's trademark, Edwards said.

"Our brands are really one of the absolute key valuable assets that we have as a company � it's what helps us compete, it's what enables us to distinguish our products," Edwards said. "This move ... would essentially amount to confiscation of our brand in Australia."

The government denied the plan breaks any laws and said it would not back down.

"Our government is determined to take every step we can to reduce the harm by tobacco," Health Minister Nicola Roxon said. "We won't be deterred by tobacco companies making threats or taking legal action."

Prime Minister Julia Gillard also brushed off Philip Morris' threats. "We're not going to be intimidated by big tobacco's tactics," she told Australian Broadcasting Corp.

The legal notice filed Monday opens up a three-month period of negotiation between the two sides. Philip Morris said if a "satisfactory outcome" isn't achieved by the end of the three months, it will seek arbitration.

Similar steps are being taken in the U.S., where cigarette packs will soon feature new warning labels with graphic images of the negative health effects of smoking, including diseased lungs and the sewn-up corpse of a smoker.

The labels also feature phrases like "Smoking can kill you" and "Cigarettes cause cancer." They will take up the top half � both front and back � of a pack of cigarettes and be featured in advertisements.

The labels are a part of a campaign by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that aims to convey the dangers of tobacco, which is responsible for about 443,000 deaths in the U.S. a year. The warnings must appear on cigarette packs by the fall of 2012.

The U.S and Australia are following the lead of other countries.

Uruguay's government requires that 80 percent of the front and back of all cigarettes packages be devoted to warnings. In Brazil, labels feature graphic images of dead fetuses, hemorrhaging brains and gangrened feet.



Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement | WordPress Tutorials