Aoki S K, Kuramoto I K, Anderson S, Schoening V, Rodriguez R, Fernando L, Sazama K, Holland P V
Sacramento Medical Foundation Blood Center, CA 95816, USA.
J Viral Hepat. 1994;1(1):73-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2893.1994.tb00064.x.
The aim of this study was to determine if using hepatitis C antibody (anti-HCV) enzyme immunoassay version 2.0 (EIA2) in addition to version 1.0 (EIA1) increased the safety of the blood supply. Blood non-reactive by anti-HCV EIA1 was transfused in 1990-92. Stored samples from 40098 units, donated prior to 13 March 1992 were later tested by EIA2. For donor units reactive for anti-HCV by EIA2, a recombinant immunoblot assay (RIBA2) was also carried out. In 63 cases, recipients of transfusions which were EIA2 negative or EIA2 reactive were tested for anti-HCV and elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels 9-12 months after transfusion; pretransfusion anti-HCV status of recipients was unknown. Among these multitransfused patients receiving units that were negative by both EIA1 and EIA2, 1/26 (4%) had anti-HCV. Among transfusion recipients of units negative by EIA1, but who received at least one unit reactive by EIA2, 4/37 recipients (11%) were anti-HCV reactive (P = 0.59). For the recipients of EIA2 reactive blood, when the donor unit was RIBA2 non-reactive, 0/23 recipients were reactive by anti-HCV. Among the recipients of a RIBA2 indeterminate unit, 1/10 recipients had anti-HCV, but for patients who received at least one RIBA2 reactive unit, 3/4 recipients had anti-HCV (P = 0.03). Hence, second-generation anti-HCV testing detected additional units capable of transmitting hepatitis C that were not detected by first-generation testing. However, RIBA2 is a more specific method than EIA2 for determining units capable of transmitting HCV.
