Unscreened blood posed danger

[Guest guest]

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104 & article=61960

Report: Unscreened blood posed danger

By J. Tritten, Stars and Stripes

Mideast edition, Saturday, April 11, 2009

For years, the use of unscreened blood transfusions exposed severely wounded

servicemembers and other trauma patients in Iraq and Afghanistan to the inherent

risk of diseases such as HIV, hepatitis and malaria, according to medical

experts who advise the secretary of defense.

Battlefield attacks that resulted in mass casualties or severe injuries often

overtaxed the military’s blood supply system until 2007, meaning medics

collected fresh blood from those on site for emergency treatment of the wounded,

the Defense Health Board wrote in a June 2008 report.

The unscreened blood transfusions, however, did not meet federal safety

standards required of all other military blood supplies.

It was used in a " significant " number of cases until the practice was curbed

dramatically due to the board’s criticism and advances in the war zone blood

supply about two years ago, according to the report and the military’s blood

supplier, the Armed Services Blood Program.

Use of unscreened blood has dropped by about 80 percent since 2007, when

facility upgrades and new high-tech storage facilities allowed the military to

provide more federally regulated blood downrange, said Col. Francisco Rentas,

director of the Armed Services Blood Program.

But the emergency transfusions meant " wounded servicemembers may survive the

acute event only to suffer from potentially fatal or chronically debilitating

transfusion-associated infectious diseases in the future, " the Defense Health

Board found.

Unscreened blood transfusions are still used in cases of severe trauma and mass

casualties if no other option is available, officials said.

Incomplete picture

It is unclear exactly how many servicemembers, civilians and combatants have

received the unscreened blood and how many subsequently contracted diseases.

Medical statistics paint an incomplete picture but indicate the transfusions

occurred regularly in Iraq and Afghanistan and have resulted in at least a

handful of recorded health issues.

The U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research tested 2,831 units of unscreened

blood transfused in Iraq and Afghanistan between May 2003 and February 2006.

Testing showed three units were tainted with hepatitis C and two were positive

for human T-cell lymphotropic virus, which can later develop into untreatable,

fatal leukemia and other debilitating diseases, the institute reported in a 2007

study.

None of the samples tested positive for hepatitis B or human immunodeficiency

virus, which causes AIDS, the report said.

" No more than seven U.S. casualties have been exposed to [emergency unscreened

blood] which was subsequently found to be reactive for viral markers, " the U.S.

Army Medical Command said in a statement to Stars and Stripes last week.

One of those cases became a hepatitis C infection, the Army said.

The transfusions also were used on Iraqi patients, other foreign civilians and

coalition servicemembers.

The practice has the approval of the Department of Defense when no federally

screened blood is available, but has never been encouraged. No formal guidelines

for the transfusions have ever been created, the Defense Health Board found.

The vast majority of the military’s blood supply is collected, tested and

supplied by the Armed Services Blood Program under the same U.S. Food and Drug

Administration blood safety standards adhered to by the Red Cross and other

civilian blood banks.

The emergency unscreened transfusions on the battlefield are used only when ASBP

blood is unavailable.

Downrange storage limited

Blood donations have flowed into the ASBP from the United States since the wars

in Iraq and Afghanistan began but the storage capacity can be limited downrange,

said Maj. Toni Mattoch, deputy director of the ASBP from 2004 to 2007.

The military often overstocked blood, and it would often expire before it could

be used, the Defense Health Board reported. Only 2 percent of the blood stocked

in the first year of the Iraq war was used.

The report pointed out that sporadic large-scale attacks could quickly deplete

locally stored blood supplies, driving up the need for the emergency

transfusions.

Instant testing kits for HIV and hepatitis that are more than 90 percent

accurate are now supplied in combat zones to provide safer emergency

transfusions when necessary, Rentas said.

[Guest guest]

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104 & article=61960

Report: Unscreened blood posed danger

By J. Tritten, Stars and Stripes

Mideast edition, Saturday, April 11, 2009

For years, the use of unscreened blood transfusions exposed severely wounded

servicemembers and other trauma patients in Iraq and Afghanistan to the inherent

risk of diseases such as HIV, hepatitis and malaria, according to medical

experts who advise the secretary of defense.

Battlefield attacks that resulted in mass casualties or severe injuries often

overtaxed the military’s blood supply system until 2007, meaning medics

collected fresh blood from those on site for emergency treatment of the wounded,

the Defense Health Board wrote in a June 2008 report.

The unscreened blood transfusions, however, did not meet federal safety

standards required of all other military blood supplies.

It was used in a " significant " number of cases until the practice was curbed

dramatically due to the board’s criticism and advances in the war zone blood

supply about two years ago, according to the report and the military’s blood

supplier, the Armed Services Blood Program.

Use of unscreened blood has dropped by about 80 percent since 2007, when

facility upgrades and new high-tech storage facilities allowed the military to

provide more federally regulated blood downrange, said Col. Francisco Rentas,

director of the Armed Services Blood Program.

But the emergency transfusions meant " wounded servicemembers may survive the

acute event only to suffer from potentially fatal or chronically debilitating

transfusion-associated infectious diseases in the future, " the Defense Health

Board found.

Unscreened blood transfusions are still used in cases of severe trauma and mass

casualties if no other option is available, officials said.

Incomplete picture

It is unclear exactly how many servicemembers, civilians and combatants have

received the unscreened blood and how many subsequently contracted diseases.

Medical statistics paint an incomplete picture but indicate the transfusions

occurred regularly in Iraq and Afghanistan and have resulted in at least a

handful of recorded health issues.

The U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research tested 2,831 units of unscreened

blood transfused in Iraq and Afghanistan between May 2003 and February 2006.

Testing showed three units were tainted with hepatitis C and two were positive

for human T-cell lymphotropic virus, which can later develop into untreatable,

fatal leukemia and other debilitating diseases, the institute reported in a 2007

study.

None of the samples tested positive for hepatitis B or human immunodeficiency

virus, which causes AIDS, the report said.

" No more than seven U.S. casualties have been exposed to [emergency unscreened

blood] which was subsequently found to be reactive for viral markers, " the U.S.

Army Medical Command said in a statement to Stars and Stripes last week.

One of those cases became a hepatitis C infection, the Army said.

The transfusions also were used on Iraqi patients, other foreign civilians and

coalition servicemembers.

The practice has the approval of the Department of Defense when no federally

screened blood is available, but has never been encouraged. No formal guidelines

for the transfusions have ever been created, the Defense Health Board found.

The vast majority of the military’s blood supply is collected, tested and

supplied by the Armed Services Blood Program under the same U.S. Food and Drug

Administration blood safety standards adhered to by the Red Cross and other

civilian blood banks.

The emergency unscreened transfusions on the battlefield are used only when ASBP

blood is unavailable.

Downrange storage limited

Blood donations have flowed into the ASBP from the United States since the wars

in Iraq and Afghanistan began but the storage capacity can be limited downrange,

said Maj. Toni Mattoch, deputy director of the ASBP from 2004 to 2007.

The military often overstocked blood, and it would often expire before it could

be used, the Defense Health Board reported. Only 2 percent of the blood stocked

in the first year of the Iraq war was used.

The report pointed out that sporadic large-scale attacks could quickly deplete

locally stored blood supplies, driving up the need for the emergency

transfusions.

Instant testing kits for HIV and hepatitis that are more than 90 percent

accurate are now supplied in combat zones to provide safer emergency

transfusions when necessary, Rentas said.

[Guest guest]

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104 & article=61960

Report: Unscreened blood posed danger

By J. Tritten, Stars and Stripes

Mideast edition, Saturday, April 11, 2009

For years, the use of unscreened blood transfusions exposed severely wounded

servicemembers and other trauma patients in Iraq and Afghanistan to the inherent

risk of diseases such as HIV, hepatitis and malaria, according to medical

experts who advise the secretary of defense.

Battlefield attacks that resulted in mass casualties or severe injuries often

overtaxed the military’s blood supply system until 2007, meaning medics

collected fresh blood from those on site for emergency treatment of the wounded,

the Defense Health Board wrote in a June 2008 report.

The unscreened blood transfusions, however, did not meet federal safety

standards required of all other military blood supplies.

It was used in a " significant " number of cases until the practice was curbed

dramatically due to the board’s criticism and advances in the war zone blood

supply about two years ago, according to the report and the military’s blood

supplier, the Armed Services Blood Program.

Use of unscreened blood has dropped by about 80 percent since 2007, when

facility upgrades and new high-tech storage facilities allowed the military to

provide more federally regulated blood downrange, said Col. Francisco Rentas,

director of the Armed Services Blood Program.

But the emergency transfusions meant " wounded servicemembers may survive the

acute event only to suffer from potentially fatal or chronically debilitating

transfusion-associated infectious diseases in the future, " the Defense Health

Board found.

Unscreened blood transfusions are still used in cases of severe trauma and mass

casualties if no other option is available, officials said.

Incomplete picture

It is unclear exactly how many servicemembers, civilians and combatants have

received the unscreened blood and how many subsequently contracted diseases.

Medical statistics paint an incomplete picture but indicate the transfusions

occurred regularly in Iraq and Afghanistan and have resulted in at least a

handful of recorded health issues.

The U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research tested 2,831 units of unscreened

blood transfused in Iraq and Afghanistan between May 2003 and February 2006.

Testing showed three units were tainted with hepatitis C and two were positive

for human T-cell lymphotropic virus, which can later develop into untreatable,

fatal leukemia and other debilitating diseases, the institute reported in a 2007

study.

None of the samples tested positive for hepatitis B or human immunodeficiency

virus, which causes AIDS, the report said.

" No more than seven U.S. casualties have been exposed to [emergency unscreened

blood] which was subsequently found to be reactive for viral markers, " the U.S.

Army Medical Command said in a statement to Stars and Stripes last week.

One of those cases became a hepatitis C infection, the Army said.

The transfusions also were used on Iraqi patients, other foreign civilians and

coalition servicemembers.

The practice has the approval of the Department of Defense when no federally

screened blood is available, but has never been encouraged. No formal guidelines

for the transfusions have ever been created, the Defense Health Board found.

The vast majority of the military’s blood supply is collected, tested and

supplied by the Armed Services Blood Program under the same U.S. Food and Drug

Administration blood safety standards adhered to by the Red Cross and other

civilian blood banks.

The emergency unscreened transfusions on the battlefield are used only when ASBP

blood is unavailable.

Downrange storage limited

Blood donations have flowed into the ASBP from the United States since the wars

in Iraq and Afghanistan began but the storage capacity can be limited downrange,

said Maj. Toni Mattoch, deputy director of the ASBP from 2004 to 2007.

The military often overstocked blood, and it would often expire before it could

be used, the Defense Health Board reported. Only 2 percent of the blood stocked

in the first year of the Iraq war was used.

The report pointed out that sporadic large-scale attacks could quickly deplete

locally stored blood supplies, driving up the need for the emergency

transfusions.

Instant testing kits for HIV and hepatitis that are more than 90 percent

accurate are now supplied in combat zones to provide safer emergency

transfusions when necessary, Rentas said.

[Guest guest]

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104 & article=61960

Report: Unscreened blood posed danger

By J. Tritten, Stars and Stripes

Mideast edition, Saturday, April 11, 2009

For years, the use of unscreened blood transfusions exposed severely wounded

servicemembers and other trauma patients in Iraq and Afghanistan to the inherent

risk of diseases such as HIV, hepatitis and malaria, according to medical

experts who advise the secretary of defense.

Battlefield attacks that resulted in mass casualties or severe injuries often

overtaxed the military’s blood supply system until 2007, meaning medics

collected fresh blood from those on site for emergency treatment of the wounded,

the Defense Health Board wrote in a June 2008 report.

The unscreened blood transfusions, however, did not meet federal safety

standards required of all other military blood supplies.

It was used in a " significant " number of cases until the practice was curbed

dramatically due to the board’s criticism and advances in the war zone blood

supply about two years ago, according to the report and the military’s blood

supplier, the Armed Services Blood Program.

Use of unscreened blood has dropped by about 80 percent since 2007, when

facility upgrades and new high-tech storage facilities allowed the military to

provide more federally regulated blood downrange, said Col. Francisco Rentas,

director of the Armed Services Blood Program.

But the emergency transfusions meant " wounded servicemembers may survive the

acute event only to suffer from potentially fatal or chronically debilitating

transfusion-associated infectious diseases in the future, " the Defense Health

Board found.

Unscreened blood transfusions are still used in cases of severe trauma and mass

casualties if no other option is available, officials said.

Incomplete picture

It is unclear exactly how many servicemembers, civilians and combatants have

received the unscreened blood and how many subsequently contracted diseases.

Medical statistics paint an incomplete picture but indicate the transfusions

occurred regularly in Iraq and Afghanistan and have resulted in at least a

handful of recorded health issues.

The U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research tested 2,831 units of unscreened

blood transfused in Iraq and Afghanistan between May 2003 and February 2006.

Testing showed three units were tainted with hepatitis C and two were positive

for human T-cell lymphotropic virus, which can later develop into untreatable,

fatal leukemia and other debilitating diseases, the institute reported in a 2007

study.

None of the samples tested positive for hepatitis B or human immunodeficiency

virus, which causes AIDS, the report said.

" No more than seven U.S. casualties have been exposed to [emergency unscreened

blood] which was subsequently found to be reactive for viral markers, " the U.S.

Army Medical Command said in a statement to Stars and Stripes last week.

One of those cases became a hepatitis C infection, the Army said.

The transfusions also were used on Iraqi patients, other foreign civilians and

coalition servicemembers.

The practice has the approval of the Department of Defense when no federally

screened blood is available, but has never been encouraged. No formal guidelines

for the transfusions have ever been created, the Defense Health Board found.

The vast majority of the military’s blood supply is collected, tested and

supplied by the Armed Services Blood Program under the same U.S. Food and Drug

Administration blood safety standards adhered to by the Red Cross and other

civilian blood banks.

The emergency unscreened transfusions on the battlefield are used only when ASBP

blood is unavailable.

Downrange storage limited

Blood donations have flowed into the ASBP from the United States since the wars

in Iraq and Afghanistan began but the storage capacity can be limited downrange,

said Maj. Toni Mattoch, deputy director of the ASBP from 2004 to 2007.

The military often overstocked blood, and it would often expire before it could

be used, the Defense Health Board reported. Only 2 percent of the blood stocked

in the first year of the Iraq war was used.

The report pointed out that sporadic large-scale attacks could quickly deplete

locally stored blood supplies, driving up the need for the emergency

transfusions.

Instant testing kits for HIV and hepatitis that are more than 90 percent

accurate are now supplied in combat zones to provide safer emergency

transfusions when necessary, Rentas said.