University of Colorado HospitalAurora Colorado
O'Leary M.F.,Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center |
Draper N.L.,University of Colorado HospitalAurora Colorado |
Schwartz J.,New York University |
Miller Y.,American Red CrossDonor and Client Support CenterCharlotte North Carolina |
And 4 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Apheresis | Year: 2016
Purpose: Hematopoietic Progenitor Cell (HPC) collection by apheresis is performed in patients and donors to obtain HPCs for transplantation. Although studies have shown these procedures to be safe, successful collection cannot be performed without establishment of venous access. This project's objective was to ascertain the current practices of donor vein assessment and central venous catheter (CVC) usage. Methods: The American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) HPC subcommittee created an electronic survey about precollection vein assessment and line placement, care, and removal in autologous and allogeneic donors. It was distributed to >5,000 possible participants, with one response analyzed per institution. Results: One hundred centers performing autologous and/or allogeneic procedures provided adequate responses for analysis. Donor vein assessment is most often performed by apheresis staff more than 1 week prior to collection. For patients with questionable access, the next step performed most often is secondary assessment for autologous procedures and CVC placement for allogeneic procedures. Most centers use interventional radiology to place CVCs in jugular veins on collection day with placement verification through electronic medical records. Verbal and written postinsertion CVC care instructions are routinely provided. The apheresis team frequently provides postinsertion CVC care for autologous patients. Heparin is used most often for CVC lock. When used, tissue plasminogen activator is usually instilled for up to 60 min. Conclusion: These data summarize the largest single survey of donor vein assessment at institutions performing HPC collections by apheresis. The variations identified in donor venous access practice warrant further investigation and consensus to establish best practices. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.