Asian journal of transfusion science · 2026
Prevalence of hepatitis B and C markers in blood donors deferred from donating blood due to hepatitis-related risk factors.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ravula Ushasree, Sachdev Suchet, Duseja Ajay Kumar, Pal Arnab, Kaur Jasmeet, Hans Rekha, Sharma Ratti Ram, Marwaha Neelam
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The donor selection criteria are developed to identify and defer the blood donors at risk of infections for an appropriate duration of time to allow time for the infectious agent to elicit an immune response for the purpose of diagnostic detection.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was an observational study to compare the prevalence of markers of hepatitis B and hepatitis C in 1000 donors deferred on hepatitis-related risk factors, with 62,328 donors selected for donations on quality-assured enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and individual unit nucleic acid testing (NAT).
RESULTS: In 1000 deferred donors, 8 (0.8%), 10 (1%), and 17 (1.7%) were reactive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibodies, and initial NAT; 8 (0.8%) and 7 (0.7%) discriminated against hepatitis B virus (HBV) and HCV, respectively. In 62,328 selected donors, 260 (0.4%), 267 (0.4%), and 76 (0.12%) were reactive for HBsAg, anti-HCV antibodies, and initial NAT; 26 (0.04%) and 8 (0.01%) discriminated against HBV and HCV, respectively. NAT yield was 4 (0.4%, n = 982) in deferred donors and 76 (0.1%, n = 62253) in selected blood donors. The deferral could exclude 1-2 HBV and/or HCV-reactive blood donors from entering the quarantine blood supply for every 100 donors with a history of hepatitis-related risk factors. The history of high-risk behavior was a statistically significant risk factor for the presence of markers of hepatitis B and C in deferred donors.
CONCLUSION: The study highlights the need for surveillance of hepatitis-related risk factors in the potential blood donor population to generate evidence for periodic updates to the donor selection criteria.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was an observational study to compare the prevalence of markers of hepatitis B and hepatitis C in 1000 donors deferred on hepatitis-related risk factors, with 62,328 donors selected for donations on quality-assured enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and individual unit nucleic acid testing (NAT).
RESULTS: In 1000 deferred donors, 8 (0.8%), 10 (1%), and 17 (1.7%) were reactive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibodies, and initial NAT; 8 (0.8%) and 7 (0.7%) discriminated against hepatitis B virus (HBV) and HCV, respectively. In 62,328 selected donors, 260 (0.4%), 267 (0.4%), and 76 (0.12%) were reactive for HBsAg, anti-HCV antibodies, and initial NAT; 26 (0.04%) and 8 (0.01%) discriminated against HBV and HCV, respectively. NAT yield was 4 (0.4%, n = 982) in deferred donors and 76 (0.1%, n = 62253) in selected blood donors. The deferral could exclude 1-2 HBV and/or HCV-reactive blood donors from entering the quarantine blood supply for every 100 donors with a history of hepatitis-related risk factors. The history of high-risk behavior was a statistically significant risk factor for the presence of markers of hepatitis B and C in deferred donors.
CONCLUSION: The study highlights the need for surveillance of hepatitis-related risk factors in the potential blood donor population to generate evidence for periodic updates to the donor selection criteria.