Heal J M, Rowe J M, Blumberg N
American Red Cross, Rochester Region, NY 14607.
Ann Hematol. 1993 Jun;66(6):309-14. doi: 10.1007/BF01695973.
Historically, ABO compatibility between donor and recipient has been considered of minor importance for platelet transfusion. However, in a recent randomized trial we showed that provision of only ABO-identical platelets was associated with a significantly higher corrected count increment (CCI) in the early transfusions and with a twofold reduction in refractoriness, as compared with platelets given unmatched for ABO. In older studies this phenomenon was not observed. We wondered whether in these previous studies the use of the conventional term "ABO compatible", whereby ABO-identical platelet transfusions are grouped with those that are merely ABO compatible, might have obscured the advantages of the ABO-identical platelets. In this paper the CCI from our original study are compared with what would have been found had the conventional terminology of "ABO compatible" and "ABO incompatible" been used. In our original study the mean CCI in patients receiving only ABO-identical platelets was 64% higher than that achieved with ABO-unmatched products. However, when the transfusions were reanalyzed according to conventional terminology of ABO "compatible" and "incompatible," the actual benefits of ABO-identical platelets were no longer detected. Thus, had we used the conventional terminology in the original study we would have come to completely different conclusions about the importance of ABO in platelet transfusion. We hypothesize that transfusion of ABO-incompatible plasma leads to the formation of immune complexes that can destroy compatible platelets by indirect mechanisms. This model predicts that the success of a transfusion could be affected by previous incompatible transfusions. When transfusions were classified as to whether they were first, second, or third unmatched transfusion, increasing numbers of transfusions of ABO-incompatible plasma were associated with progressively poorer mean increments. The same was true for platelet ABO-incompatible transfusions. In contrast, increasing numbers of ABO-identical transfusions were not associated with poorer increments. The failure to appreciate that (a) transfusions containing ABO-incompatible plasma yield poor increments and (b) the effects of ABO-nonidentical transfusions are cumulative, and therefore affect the success of subsequent identical transfusions, may have led in the past to the incorrect conclusion that ABO matching was of minor importance in repetitively transfused patients.
从历史上看,供体与受体之间的ABO血型相容性一直被认为对血小板输注不太重要。然而,在最近的一项随机试验中,我们发现,与输注ABO血型不匹配的血小板相比,仅输注ABO血型相同的血小板在早期输注时校正计数增加值(CCI)显著更高,难治性降低了两倍。在早期研究中未观察到这种现象。我们想知道,在这些先前的研究中,使用传统术语“ABO相容”(即将ABO血型相同的血小板输注与仅仅ABO相容的输注归为一类)是否掩盖了ABO血型相同的血小板的优势。在本文中,我们将原研究中的CCI与如果使用“ABO相容”和“ABO不相容”的传统术语可能得到的结果进行了比较。在我们的原研究中,仅接受ABO血型相同的血小板的患者的平均CCI比接受ABO血型不匹配产品的患者高64%。然而,当根据ABO“相容”和“不相容”的传统术语重新分析这些输注时,ABO血型相同的血小板的实际益处不再被检测到。因此,如果我们在原研究中使用传统术语,我们会对ABO在血小板输注中的重要性得出完全不同的结论。我们推测,输注ABO不相容的血浆会导致免疫复合物的形成,这些免疫复合物可通过间接机制破坏相容的血小板。该模型预测,输血的成功可能会受到先前不相容输血的影响。当将输血分类为首次、第二次或第三次不匹配输血时,ABO不相容血浆的输血次数增加与平均增加值逐渐降低相关。血小板ABO不相容输血也是如此。相比之下,ABO血型相同的输血次数增加与增加值降低无关。过去未能认识到:(a)含有ABO不相容血浆的输血增加值较低;(b)ABO血型不同的输血的影响是累积性的,因此会影响后续相同输血的成功,这可能导致过去得出错误的结论,即ABO血型匹配在反复输血的患者中不太重要。