Abstract Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) are useful to identify syphilis cases, particularly for hard-to-reach populations and if laboratory services are scarce. However, RDT performance may be suboptimal. We aimed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of a syphilis RDT using well-characterized blood donors’ samples. We categorized samples from 811 blood donors into five groups: 1 - Samples with reactive Chemiluminescence (QML), FTA-Abs, and VDRL; 2 - Samples with reactive QML and FTA-Abs, and nonreactive VDRL; 3 - Samples with reactive QML, and nonreactive for other markers (false-positives); 4 - Controls with nonreactive QML; and 5 - Samples reactive for HIV, with nonreactive QML. Sensitivity was tested in groups 1 (overall and according to VDRL titers) and 2; specificity was tested in groups 3‒5. The RDT had high specificity, even in samples reactive for HIV. The sensitivity was high (91.9%) in samples with reactive VDRL but varied between 75.0%‒100% according to VDRL titers. The overall sensitivity was lower (81.3%) in samples with reactive FTA-Abs and nonreactive VDRL. The RDT is a useful tool to detect active syphilis but may be more limited for cases with very early or remote infection, or those with prior treatment. When higher sensitivity is needed, additional strategies including recurrent testing or laboratory-based tests may be required.

ABSTRACT Objective: Describe the clinical and laboratory characteristics and the transfusion strategy of patients at Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein with platelet refractoriness and identify their etiological characteristics. Standardize the platelet immunofluorescence technique by flow cytometry as a test for platelet compatibility in immune platelet refractoriness in transfusion support. Methods: Review of medical records of refractory platelet patients followed at HIAE from January 2011 to May 2017. Clinical-demographic data, laboratory data and identification of the use of compatible genotyped platelets for patients in need of transfusion therapy were collected. The analyzed patients were classified according to the etiology of their platelet refractoriness. To standardize the FC-PIFT technique, blood group O platelets were incubated with serum from blood group AB donors and anti-IgG monoclonal antibody to determine the negative control. In order to verify the influence of the ABO system, monoclonal anti-IgG antibodies were incubated with blood group A or B platelets and with blood group O donor serum with isohemagglutinins below and above 1/64. Results: A total of 47 patients were evaluated, a 51% (24/47) preponderance of associated immune and non-immune factors (NIPR + IPR). The most common causes of NIPR + IPR were splenomegaly (54%) and the development of HLA antibodies (88%), consistent with the literature. For patients who required therapeutic transfusion, only a small portion received compatible genotyped platelets. Conclusion: Although 60% of patients could benefit from the therapeutic transfusion of genotyped platelets, only 10% were actually transfused with this type of blood component. This reaffirms the need for investments in a bank of genotyped platelet donors.

ABSTRACT Blood transfusion is still an irreplaceable therapeutic modality, widely applied to medical care. Clinical interviews and laboratory testing for transfusion-transmitted infections (TTI) are routinely performed to prevent TTI among the recipients. However, there is still a residual risk of TTI, and some blood banks have adopted the confidential unit exclusion (CUE) as an additional safety strategy. In this study, we investigated the demographic characteristics and laboratory results of the screening of TTI among blood donors who opted for the CUE, compared to blood donors who did not opt for the CUE. In this study, we included 32,261 blood donations collected in a single blood bank in Sao Paulo, Brazil. A very small proportion of donors (0.25%) opted for the CUE. They were mainly single males and were more likely to have HBV, syphilis, and other positive results in the combined screening for TTI, in comparison with those who did not opt for the CUE. This difference was statistically significant in both the univariable and the multivariable analysis adjusted for age, gender , marital status and years of schooling. Our findings highlight that CUE may be a useful tool to improve the safety for blood recipients, but its efficiency is context-dependent.