Medical specialists have always pondered over the association of transfused blood with higher rates of heart diseases and death. This fact, which remains after adjusting for infectious blood-borne diseases, or allergic reactions that often follow transfusions, is a disturbing problem that is seen in almost every group of critically ill patients — from trauma sufferers in the ER to heart attack victims, patients with anemia and those undergoing chemotherapy.
Says Dr. Jonathan Stamler, a professor of medicine at Duke University Medical Center: "After you control for sickness and all sorts of things, patients who receive transfusions still have more heart attacks. It makes no sense.”As per logic and medical sense too, patients who need transfusions - those with low blood counts, should benefit immediately from a transfusion of new oxygen-laden red blood cells. Yet many get sicker.
Intrigued by this paradox, Stamler and his colleagues undertook a study on banked blood. This was mainly to figure out whether it underwent certain changes that turned it from life-saving in the donor to potentially deadly in the bag. The findings were published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
In the report, the scientists inform that nitric oxide (NO)- a workhorse of the blood, is a gas which helps red blood cells ferry oxygen to tissues and props open tiny vessels to allow freer blood flow. From the study, they were able to deduce that within hours of leaving the body, levels of nitric oxide in the blood begin to drop, until, by the time donated blood expired after 42 days, the gas was almost nonexistent. "The reality is that we are giving blood that cannot deliver oxygen properly," says Stamler, lead author of the study. "Many patients who are getting blood are being put at increased risk."
Previous trials have shown that heart disease patients, for example, who receive a blood transfusion to help restore oxygen to deprived tissues, have a 25% chance of having a heart attack and an 8% chance of dying within 30 days; similar patients who do not get transfused have an 8% chance of a cardiac event and a 3% chance of death. Stamler hypothesizes that without NO, red blood cells cannot drill their way into tiny blood vessels; rather, they pile up in narrow passageways, blocking blood flow instead of increasing it and hampering the heart.
Though blood transfusions alone may not be directly responsible for these health hazards, such data from other recent studies has been enough to convince physicians to change their so-called transfusion trigger. Doctors have traditionally waited until the patient's hematocrit — the proportion of the blood made up of red blood cells — drops below the normal range of 45% to 55% before transfusing. Now, doctors prefer to wait longer, until it falls below 30%.
Advertisement
Can banked blood simply be improved? Stamler's study suggests it can: by replacing nitric oxide in stored blood. In his study, Stamler showed that the risk of heart attack and death from transfusion dropped dramatically, at least in mice. And there's reason to believe such replenishment could work in human patients as well; already, premature babies born with lung and respiratory problems are placed in NO-rich environments to ensure that their still developing tissues get the oxygen they need to grow properly.
Advertisement
Stamler argues that it might be possible to supercharge the NO content in blood and use it as a treatment for everything from heart disease to angina to diabetes. "We all want to open up blood vessels, and blood knows how to do that," he argues. "The opportunities to manipulate the system to do even better are now available."
Source-Medindia
ANN/C
