Search Results

This week, I graduate from my transfusion medicine fellowship at the NIH. It’s the culmination of a year that was equal parts challenging and productive — a year in which I learned not just by observing, but by building. And now that I’m closing this chapter, I want to take a moment to reflect on what I built. 🛠 Process and Quality Improvement From day one, I gravitated toward problems I could fix. I helped rewrite the Blood Services Section guide for fellows, corrected longstanding issues in key computation tools, and developed new order sets to streamline workflows and reduce risk. I also authored a standardized transfusion reaction holy book with impressions and recommendations for over 12 different transfusion reactions, including literature citations, and I also created a standardized note template to support more consistent documentation across the team. And I made major updates to the platelet script — a vital tool used to guide transfusion medicine physicians through complex platelet ordering decisions. 📄 Publications My research on total blood volume estimation in obesity yielded two first-author publications. I also first-authored a case report (in press) and published a formal response to a letter to the editor — sharpening both my scientific voice and my advocacy for evidence-based transfusion. 🎓 Professional Development Along the way, I completed the AABB Cell Therapies Certificate Program, earned QIA certification, and participated in ASCP's leadership institute. I also worked through the entire Transfusion Medicine Self-Assessment and Review  to prepare for boards — a reminder that learning doesn’t stop between projects or during service. 🩸 Writing and Outreach I shared my perspectives through essays in Critical Values  and The Pathologist , tackling complex and sometimes uncomfortable issues in laboratory medicine. And I kept writing here — publishing multi-part blog series on platelet products and fresh frozen plasma (FFP), with the goal of making nuanced transfusion topics a little more accessible to busy clinicians and curious trainees alike. 🧑‍🏫 Education I delivered formal lectures on pediatric transfusion, obstetrical transfusion, and hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) mobilization — each one tailored to the specific challenges of learners and the clinical context in which they were practicing. 🤝 Supporting the Team I covered service and call for colleagues when needed and made a point of writing commendations (“High Quality Service STARs”) to recognize the work of others. Because part of building something good — especially in medicine — is noticing what others are building, too. Graduating from fellowship isn’t just about checking boxes. For me, it’s about knowing I left something better than I found it. That I contributed to the field in a meaningful way. And that I’m heading into the next phase of my career not just trained, but ready. Next stop: Assistant Professor of Pathology at the University of Wisconsin. Onward.

We’ve spent the last three posts talking about plasma as a transfusion product — thawed, typed, delivered in a blood bag, and used (too often) without a clear plan. But plasma isn’t just a transfusion product. It’s also the raw material for a whole class of plasma-derived pharmaceuticals — therapies that are purified, concentrated, and engineered for targeted clinical use. These aren’t “just” blood products. They’re manufactured biologics, held to rigorous standards, and often used with precision in hematology, neurology, rheumatology, immunology, and beyond. Let’s look at some of the most important players — and how they work. Albumin: The Volume Expander That Isn’t Just Volume Derived from pooled human plasma and purified to 5% or 25% concentrations. Maintains oncotic pressure, draws fluid into the intravascular space. Used in volume-sensitive resuscitation (e.g., cirrhosis with tense ascites, nephrotic syndrome, plasmapheresis), but not for general volume expansion. Doesn’t correct coagulopathy or replace clotting factors. Also used as a replacement fluid in some apheresis protocols. Pearl: If you’re reaching for FFP "for volume," ask yourself: is albumin the right choice instead? IVIG: Immune Modulator with Broad Utility Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is made from pooled plasma from thousands of donors. Contains primarily IgG, with small amounts of other immunoglobulin classes. Used to neutralize autoantibodies, modulate immune response, or replenish IgG in patients with antibody deficiencies. Common indications: ITP, autoimmune hemolytic anemia Guillain-Barré syndrome, myasthenia gravis, CIDP Primary immunodeficiencies Kawasaki disease Risks: Headache, thromboembolic events, aseptic meningitis, renal dysfunction (especially with sucrose-containing products). Pearl: IVIG is expensive, powerful, and slow to infuse — use with intention, not desperation. Rh Immune Globulin (RhIg/RhoGAM): Small Dose, Big Impact Concentrated anti-D antibodies made from Rh-negative donors sensitized to D antigen. Administered to Rh-negative patients exposed to Rh-positive RBCs — most commonly pregnant patients or following transfusion errors. Primary use: Preventing alloimmunization in Rh-negative pregnant individuals carrying Rh-positive fetuses. Also used in ITP as an alternative to IVIG (particularly in children), though less commonly now. Mechanism in ITP: Coats D-positive RBCs, redirecting macrophage clearance and sparing platelets. Pearl: One of the oldest, most elegant forms of targeted immune modulation — and a triumph of transfusion medicine. Other Plasma-Derived Therapies Anti-Tetanus, Anti-Rabies, and Other Hyperimmune Globulins Pooled antibodies from vaccinated donors. Used for post-exposure prophylaxis or treatment of rare infections. Includes hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG), cytomegalovirus immune globulin (CMV-IG), and more. Antithrombin Concentrate Used in hereditary antithrombin deficiency, especially during pregnancy or surgery. Also considered in select ECMO or cardiac surgery patients with heparin resistance. C1 Esterase Inhibitor For hereditary angioedema (HAE), where C1-INH deficiency leads to bradykinin-mediated swelling. Plasma-derived and recombinant versions exist. Factor Concentrates Covered in Part III, but worth reiterating: purified concentrates for hemophilia A/B, factor XIII deficiency, von Willebrand disease, and more. Far more effective than FFP when a specific deficiency is known. Patient-Centered Considerations Plasma-derived therapies aren’t just pharmacologic tools — they’re also part of the complex, personal decision-making that happens between patients and providers. For example, some Jehovah’s Witnesses — who decline transfusion of whole blood, red cells, platelets, or plasma — may accept plasma-derived fractions such as albumin, IVIG, or clotting factor concentrates. Whether these are acceptable is a deeply individual decision, often informed by religious interpretation and personal conviction. Respecting these boundaries, and knowing what options exist beyond standard transfusion, is essential to providing care that aligns with a patient’s values. It’s also worth remembering the complicated history of clotting factor concentrates. In the 1980s and ’90s, many recipients — particularly people with hemophilia — were devastated by transfusion-transmitted infections like HIV and hepatitis C, sometimes acquired through pooled plasma products. For decades afterward, even their sexual partners were deferred from blood donation, based on perceived risk. Today, thanks to modern donor screening, pathogen reduction, and manufacturing safeguards, those policies have changed. While individuals with hemophilia are still generally deferred from donating blood due to the risk of bleeding from venipuncture, their sexual partners are no longer automatically excluded under current FDA guidelines. It’s a reminder that the story of plasma — like all of transfusion medicine — is one of evolving science, ethics, and trust. Final Thought: Precision Is the Point Fresh frozen plasma is broad and blunt — it works when you don’t know exactly what’s wrong, or when you need many things at once. But these plasma-derived pharmaceuticals? They’re sharp tools. Precision instruments. Each one represents decades of innovation aimed at solving specific physiologic problems. So before you grab FFP “just in case,” consider: Is there a better-targeted option? Could the patient benefit more from albumin, or a specific concentrate? Are you using plasma because it’s easy — or because it’s best? Transfusion medicine doesn’t end with a blood bag. Sometimes the most powerful plasma products don’t look like blood at all.

This is the third installment in my four-part series on plasma. In Part I, we broke down the different types of plasma products — from FFP and PF24 to thawed and cryopoor plasma. In Part II, we focused on appropriate indications: when plasma actually helps, why it works, and how to assess response. Today, we’re talking about what plasma doesn’t  do — and why so much of its use is misguided. Fresh frozen plasma often gets ordered in moments of uncertainty. A mildly elevated INR before a procedure. A confusing coagulopathy in a bleeding patient. A nagging feeling that “we should do something.” And too often, that “something” is FFP. But plasma isn’t harmless. It’s a blood component — with all the risks that come with transfusion: TRALI, TACO, allergic reactions, alloimmunization. It takes time to type, thaw, and deliver. And most importantly, it only works when there’s a factor deficiency, and even then, its effect is modest and unpredictable. Let’s start with the INR, because it’s the most common reason people reach for plasma. When the INR creeps above 1.3 — 1.4 — maybe 1.6 — it starts to feel uncomfortable, especially if a procedure is coming up. But the truth is, an INR in this range does not predict bleeding, and FFP won’t reliably correct it. In fact, most units of FFP have an INR around 1.3–1.5 themselves. That means even if you transfuse 2 or 3 units, you’re not pushing the needle much — just adding volume and risk without meaningful change. This is especially true in liver disease, where INR elevation doesn’t tell the full story. Patients with cirrhosis have decreased synthesis of both procoagulant and anticoagulant factors — including protein C, protein S, and antithrombin. The result is a rebalanced hemostatic system, one that may actually lean prothrombotic , not bleeding-prone. That’s why routine correction of INR before procedures in liver patients has fallen out of favor — particularly for paracentesis, central lines, and even some biopsies. The INR may look alarming, but it doesn’t reflect true bleeding risk in this context. Another common misuse: using FFP as a volume expander. It isn’t. FFP is high-volume (about 200–250 mL per unit), but it comes with clotting proteins, antibodies, and potential for serious reactions. If your patient needs volume, give crystalloids. If they need oncotic support, give albumin. Plasma should never be used to “fill the tank” — especially in patients at risk of TACO or other volume-sensitive complications. What To Use Instead If FFP is off the table, what is  appropriate? That depends on what you’re treating. I. Prothrombin Complex Concentrates (PCCs) First-line for urgent warfarin reversal (e.g., in bleeding or before emergent surgery). Contains factors II, VII, IX, and X — more concentrated and faster-acting than plasma. Administered in small volumes, reducing risk of volume overload. Effectively lowers INR and restores coagulation within minutes. Often used in trauma, neurosurgical bleeds, or GI hemorrhage in anticoagulated patients. II. Cryoprecipitate Contains fibrinogen, vWF, factor VIII, and factor XIII. Best option when fibrinogen is low (<100–150 mg/dL), especially in DIC, trauma, or obstetric hemorrhage. FFP contains some fibrinogen, but not enough to meaningfully raise levels in hypofibrinogenemia. Dose is typically 1 unit per 10 kg body weight. III. Platelets Appropriate for bleeding due to thrombocytopenia or qualitative platelet defects. If platelet count is <50K and the patient is bleeding or undergoing surgery, platelets are your answer — not plasma. Also critical in DIC, bone marrow failure, and massive transfusion protocols. IV. Vitamin K Often overlooked, but essential for non-urgent reversal of warfarin or correction of nutritional/coagulopathic deficiencies. Can be given orally or IV depending on urgency; IV acts faster but should be infused slowly to avoid rare anaphylactoid reactions. Especially helpful in malnourished patients, those with fat malabsorption, or prolonged NPO status. Prolonged antibiotic use — especially with broad-spectrum agents — can cause deficiency by disrupting gut flora that synthesize vitamin K₂ (menaquinone). Won’t stop bleeding immediately, but plays a critical role in restoring normal hemostasis over hours to days. V. Factor Concentrates (Targeted Use Only) Recombinant or plasma-derived factor VIII, IX, XIII, and vWF concentrates exist for hereditary deficiencies or inhibitor-related bleeding. FEIBA (Factor Eight Inhibitor Bypassing Activity) is used in patients with hemophilia A and inhibitors — it contains activated clotting factors that bypass the need for factor VIII. These are expensive, potent agents — used under specialist guidance, not general coagulopathy. Transfusion Isn’t a Substitute for a Plan Before you reach for FFP, ask yourself: Do I know what I’m treating? Is there a documented or suspected factor deficiency? Is plasma the right product, or am I just trying to do something? How will I assess response? If you don’t have clear answers, don’t transfuse. Bottom Line: FFP isn’t for mild coagulopathy. It’s not for pre-procedure reassurance. And it’s definitely not for volume. Transfusing “just in case” isn’t good medicine — it’s defensive, imprecise, and wasteful. Plasma saves lives when used well. But that requires clarity, restraint, and a commitment to treating the patient — not the INR. Next up: the pharmaceutical cousins of plasma — albumin, IVIG, and more.

This is the second post in my four-part series on plasma products — what they are, when to use them, and why they’re so often misunderstood. In Part I, we broke down the differences between FFP, PF24, thawed plasma, and cryopoor plasma. Today, we’re turning to indications: the clinical scenarios where plasma actually helps, how it works in those settings, and what to consider when deciding whether it’s the right tool for the job. Once upon a time, fresh frozen plasma (FFP) was the Swiss Army knife of coagulation management. Long before recombinant factors, PCCs, or viscoelastic testing, we had plasma — frozen within 8 hours of collection, rich in clotting factors, and theoretically capable of correcting just about anything. And so we used it for everything. For decades, FFP was infused for elevated INRs, thrombocytopenia, mild oozing, or even just a bad “feeling” in the OR. In the early days of trauma resuscitation, the concept of 1:1:1 transfusion (plasma:platelets:RBCs) emerged from military and civilian protocols aiming to mimic whole blood and prevent dilutional coagulopathy. But as tools and evidence evolved, we learned something critical: FFP only works when the problem is a true factor deficiency — and even then, it’s not always the best option. Despite these advances, FFP still gets ordered reflexively. That elevated INR? Plasma. Platelets a little low? Plasma. Bleeding? Plasma — even when the root cause has nothing to do with factor levels. Let’s move past that. Because FFP is not a vitamin. It’s a blood product with real risks, finite benefits, and a narrow set of appropriate indications. Appropriate Indications for FFP (and Related Plasma Products) I. Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (TTP) Plasma is essential, not optional, in this rare but life-threatening condition. Why it works: TTP is caused by a deficiency or inhibition of ADAMTS13, a protease that cleaves vWF multimers. FFP replenishes functional ADAMTS13 during plasma exchange. How it’s used: FFP is the standard replacement fluid for therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), often given daily for 5–7 days or more. Alternatives: Cryopoor plasma can be used if vWF reduction is also desired, though it's not widely available. Measuring effectiveness: Monitor LDH, platelet count, and neurologic symptoms daily — improvement signals clinical response. Pearl: This is one of the few times plasma is curative, not just supportive. II. Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC) with Active Bleeding In DIC, widespread clotting consumes platelets and factors, leading to bleeding. Why it works: FFP replaces the consumed clotting factors — especially in patients with bleeding and prolonged PT/aPTT. When to use: Only in the setting of active bleeding or an upcoming invasive procedure; don’t transfuse based on labs alone. Dosing: Usually 10–15 mL/kg, guided by clinical status and factor levels. Measuring effectiveness: Watch for stabilization of bleeding and normalization of PT/aPTT — but correction may be partial or transient. Pearl: Platelets and cryoprecipitate may also be needed. FFP alone won’t fix low fibrinogen. III. Liver Disease with Bleeding or High-Risk Procedure The cirrhotic liver synthesizes most clotting factors — when it fails, so does hemostasis. Why it works: FFP provides a broad spectrum of factors, especially when PT/INR are prolonged and bleeding is present. Caution: Elevated INR in cirrhosis doesn’t always reflect bleeding risk; thromboelastography (TEG/ROTEM) may give better insight. When to use: For active bleeding or before high-risk interventions (e.g., liver biopsy, large paracentesis), if there's demonstrable coagulopathy. Measuring effectiveness: Clinical bleeding control matters more than INR correction; labs often lag behind or mislead. Pearl: Overtransfusion may worsen portal hypertension and increase the risk of TACO. Use intentionally. IV. Massive Transfusion Protocols (MTPs) Hemorrhagic shock can rapidly dilute clotting factors, even without baseline coagulopathy. Why it works: Plasma helps restore clotting capacity during large-volume resuscitation (typically >1 blood volume within 24h). When to use: In trauma, obstetric hemorrhage, or surgical bleeding with major blood loss. Typical ratios: 1:1:1 of plasma, platelets, and RBCs is often used, though this may vary based on institution and patient response. Measuring effectiveness: Clinical stabilization, viscoelastic testing (if available), fibrinogen >150–200 mg/dL, PT/aPTT trends. Pearl: MTP is about anticipation, not reaction. Plasma should be ready before the patient becomes coagulopathic. V. Rare Factor Deficiencies (When Specific Factor Concentrates Aren’t Available) FFP is still a fallback in rare cases. Examples: Factor V and other factors that lack commercial concentrates. Why it works: FFP provides small amounts of each factor, enough to bridge mild to moderate bleeding risk. When to use: During bleeding episodes or peri-procedurally in known deficiency patients. Dosing and response: Requires large volumes to achieve even modest factor increases; monitor with specific assays if available. Pearl: Always check whether recombinant or plasma-derived factor concentrates exist first — they’re safer and more effective. VI. Cryopoor Plasma (Niche Use) Rarely needed — but notable. What it is: The plasma that remains after cryoprecipitate is removed from FFP. Why it’s used: Occasionally used in refractory cases of TTP. Availability: May be restricted to certain centers; not a routine product. Pearl: Know that it exists — and when to call the blood bank about it. One More Thing: FFP Changes Over Time Once thawed, both FFP and plasma frozen within 24 hours (PF24) are stored at 1–6°C and relabeled thawed plasma after 24 hours. They’re typically good for 5 days, but labile factors like V and VIII degrade with time. That means thawed plasma may not be appropriate when you need high levels of those factors — such as in TTP or factor V deficiency — but it’s usually adequate for liver disease or DIC. Final Thought: Know What You’re Treating Before ordering FFP, ask: Is there a documented or strongly suspected factor deficiency? Is the patient bleeding or about to bleed? Will plasma meaningfully change the outcome? Do you have a way to measure effectiveness? Transfusing FFP without an indication is like prescribing antibiotics for a viral sore throat — satisfying in the moment, but clinically empty. And it isn’t harmless. FFP is powerful. But only when used with precision. Coming up next: When not  to order FFP — and what to use instead.

This post kicks off a four-part series on plasma transfusion — starting with the types of plasma products and how they differ. In upcoming posts, we’ll look at common (and not-so-common) indications for plasma, examine where and why plasma is often misused, and explore alternatives to plasma. When someone says “FFP,” they often mean any  kind of plasma product. But not all plasma is created equal — and the distinctions matter. Different processing timelines and storage conditions lead to real differences in coagulation factor content, stability, and shelf life. These variations can impact clinical decisions, especially when patients need rapid hemostasis or factor replacement. Let’s break it down: I. Fresh Frozen Plasma (FFP) FFP is plasma separated and frozen within 8 hours of whole blood collection. It contains the highest levels of labile coagulation factors, especially factor V and factor VIII, which are the most sensitive to degradation during processing and storage. Storage: Up to 1 year at –18°C or colder. After thawing: Can be stored at 1–6°C for up to 24 hours and still labeled "FFP." Beyond that, it is relabeled as thawed plasma. Indications: Replacement of multiple coagulation factors in active bleeding with documented coagulopathy, especially when specific factor levels are unknown. Massive transfusion protocols. Liver disease ONLY IF bleeding is present and the patient has a prolonged PT/aPTT. DIC, again with bleeding and prolonged PT/aPTT. Rarer inherited factor deficiencies (e.g., factor V or XI deficiency) when specific concentrates or recombinant factors are unavailable. Plasma exchange for TTP. II. Plasma Frozen Within 24 Hours (PF24 or FP24) PF24 is plasma that is frozen between 8 and 24 hours after collection. It contains slightly lower levels of factor VIII, and potentially modest reductions in other labile factors, but is still considered hemostatically effective in most clinical contexts. Storage: Up to 1 year at –18°C or colder. After thawing: Stored at 1–6°C for up to 24 hours as "PF24." After that, it becomes thawed plasma, just like true FFP. Indications: Functionally interchangeable with FFP for most transfusion scenarios. Suitable for warfarin reversal when prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) is unavailable. Can be used in TTP or other plasma exchange protocols. Often preferred for inventory reasons due to longer processing windows and availability. III. Thawed Plasma Thawed plasma refers to FFP or PF24 that has been thawed and stored at 1–6°C for more than 24 hours, up to a maximum of 5 days. After the initial 24 hours, it's no longer considered “fresh” due to degradation of labile factors — particularly factors V and VIII. Factor decline: Factor VIII can decline by 30–50% within 5 days of refrigerated storage. Factor V activity typically decreases more slowly but still shows a measurable drop (~20–30%). Stable factors (e.g., II, VII, IX, X) remain largely intact. Despite this, thawed plasma retains adequate coagulation activity for most clinical indications. Indications: Rapid availability in trauma, massive transfusion, or bleeding scenarios where delay is unacceptable. Routine plasma transfusions where full labile factor levels are not essential. Inventory management — hospitals often keep thawed plasma “on the shelf” to reduce wastage and provide faster turnaround. IV. Cryopoor Plasma (CPP) Cryopoor plasma is the supernatant remaining after removal of cryoprecipitate from FFP or PF24. It contains significantly reduced levels of: Fibrinogen Factor VIII von Willebrand factor Factor XIII But it retains: Factor V Factor II, VII, IX, X (the vitamin K–dependent factors) Indications: Rarely used, but may be considered in: TTP, as an exchange fluid when minimizing large multimers of vWF is desirable. Research protocols or specific institutional use cases. CPP is not routinely stocked at most hospitals and is unfamiliar to many clinicians. V. Bottom line: The plasma product you transfuse might be referred to as “FFP,” but it could be PF24 or thawed plasma. These distinctions aren’t just academic — they can affect hemostatic potential, shelf life, and even clinical utility in certain contexts. When we’re precise about plasma, we reinforce precision in practice — and help ensure the right product reaches the right patient at the right time. Next up: the historical context of FFP and current good practice for using FFP.

Some of the most meaningful things I built this year weren’t papers or presentations or new protocols. They were systems. Templates. Manuals. Scripts. Shared folders with links that worked. A “transfusion reaction holy book” with impression templates and scaffolded recommendations. An updated note template to make documentation faster and more consistent. New order sets that removed friction and reduced errors. Substantial improvements to the Excel workbook used for clinical calculations, cleaning up structure and adding missing tools. Manuals for services that had nothing—designed for fellows, by someone who had lived the gaps. And yes, the platelet script —short, sharp, and deeply satisfying to deploy. These weren’t glamorous projects. Most didn’t come with authorship or awards. But they changed things. Quietly. Steadily. Measurably. Because when you’re exhausted, overwhelmed, and still trying to learn, there’s nothing more powerful than a system that works . One that says: “Here. I’ve thought about this. I’ve built something to make it easier.” W. Edwards Deming once said, “A bad system beats a good person every time.” He was right. I’ve seen it. The smartest, kindest, hardest-working people can be flattened by broken processes. But the reverse is also true: a good system can lift people up. It can make it easier to be good at your job—even when you’re tired, new, or unsure. Medicine loves the heroic gesture—the brilliant diagnosis, the dramatic rescue, the high-impact publication. But the real work, the work that keeps the ship afloat, lives in process improvement. In clarity. In tools that actually help . I wasn’t always sure I was doing enough this year. But then I saw someone use the materials I built and say, “Oh thank god.” That’s enough for me.

This week, I handed off the call phone to a new fellow. I walked her through the MTP protocol, gave her a holy book of transfusion reactions, practiced finding HLA compatible platelets, and went over every weird little NIH-specific quirk I could think of. I gave her floaties. And now she has to jump in the pool. That’s how it works. I did everything possible to soften the landing, but eventually someone hands you the pager, and you are the one on call. You answer the consults. You make the decisions. You’re still learning—and you always will be—but suddenly the weight shifts. It’s your name on the line. This is the rhythm of medical training. You will constantly be asked to do things you don’t feel ready to do. Sometimes it feels like the system is pushing you forward too fast. Sometimes it feels like you  are holding yourself back. But every single step—from student to resident to fellow to attending—requires a quiet leap of faith. Not that you’re already good enough, but that you’re committed enough to get better. That’s what I tell the new fellows: you’re not supposed to know everything yet.  But you do  have to show up. You do  have to try. Because medicine isn’t about perfection—it’s about participation. It’s about engaging with uncertainty, asking for help when you need it, and making the best decision you can with the information you have. Floaties help. So does preparation. But the truth is, we all learn to swim the same way: by jumping in, flailing a little, and slowly figuring it out. The good news is that you’re not alone in the water. There’s a whole team behind you—faculty, colleagues, nurses, pharmacists, techs, and more—all ready to catch you if you start to sink. That’s the hidden strength of medical training. It feels like you’re doing it alone, but you never really are. And here’s the part I didn’t understand when I was the one wearing floaties: that feeling of not knowing never really goes away. But with time, you start to trust yourself more. Not because you suddenly know everything, but because you’ve seen yourself navigate uncertainty before—and come out the other side. You build confidence not in having the answers, but in your ability to find them. So jump in. You'll be okay.

In the intensive care unit, we often reach for blood tests as our window into the body’s response to critical illness. But what happens when the very tests we order begin to chip away at the patient’s ability to recover? Iatrogenic anemia—anemia caused or worsened by medical intervention, particularly diagnostic blood draws—is a well-documented but underappreciated complication of hospitalization, especially in critically ill patients. And while transfusion can be life-saving, it comes with its own risks, costs, and carbon footprint. Preventing the anemia in the first place is often safer, cheaper, and more sustainable. The Scope of the Problem In one large observational cohort from a U.S. academic medical center, critically ill patients underwent a median of 41 laboratory draws per hospitalization, with a median blood loss of 232 mL per patient—about half a unit of red cells (Luke et al., 2023). Daily losses in some ICUs approached 29 mL, and discard volumes—blood drawn but not analyzed—accounted for more than 10% of this loss. The consequences are not benign. Hemoglobin levels decline in proportion to phlebotomy intensity, and each 100 mL of blood drawn was associated with a 1.15x increase in red cell transfusion use. Patients with the highest cumulative blood loss had the lowest nadir hemoglobin values, longest hospital stays, and highest transfusion requirements. In neonatal ICU patients, the burden is even more staggering: up to 90% of circulating blood volume can be removed in the first two weeks of life alone (Widness et al., 1996). Strategies to Reduce Iatrogenic Blood Loss Patient Blood Management (PBM) strategies focus on three pillars: Optimizing anemia management Reducing iatrogenic blood loss Enhancing tolerance of anemia This post focuses on the second pillar—particularly blood-sparing techniques like: Small volume tubes (SVT) Closed blood sampling devices (CBSD) Point-of-care testing (POCT) Educational and policy interventions Bundled strategies combining the above Systematic reviews consistently show that SVT and CBSD both reduce blood draw volumes, but the data are mixed regarding their ability to reduce transfusion rates or prevent hemoglobin decline (Whitehead et al., 2019; François et al., 2022; Keogh et al., 2023). The most substantial blood conservation has been achieved through CBSD, which returns unused blood to the circuit, eliminating discard volume altogether. Yet one tool in particular—point-of-care testing—offers an especially compelling combination of blood conservation, clinical responsiveness, and workflow efficiency. Point-of-Care Testing: High Impact, Low Volume Unlike conventional lab draws, POCT uses minimal sample volumes—often 100–250 µL—and delivers results in minutes. While often framed as a convenience tool, POCT may play a crucial role in blood conservation strategies. In a NICU cohort, Madan et al. found that switching to a bedside POCT analyzer for blood gas and electrolyte testing resulted in a 46% reduction in transfusions and a 43% reduction in total transfused volume among extremely low birth weight infants (Madan et al., 2005). Notably, the frequency of testing remained unchanged, suggesting the volume savings alone made the difference. Mahieu et al. similarly observed a 48% reduction in transfusion volume among very low birth weight infants following the introduction of a POCT analyzer (Mahieu et al., 2017). Blood loss per test was significantly reduced, and the intervention was cost-saving for the national health system. In an adult ICU cohort, Salem et al. demonstrated that POCT instruments provided accurate analyte results while using only 250 µL of blood. They highlighted the role of microchemistry technology in reducing blood loss, particularly in high-acuity settings like emergency departments and operating rooms. Despite differences in study populations and methodologies, these studies converge on one key finding: POCT can reduce diagnostic blood loss and transfusion needs without compromising care. The Benefits and Risks of POCT The benefits of POCT in critical care go beyond sample volume: Faster turnaround times allow more rapid clinical decisions. Less blood drawn per test reduces the risk of phlebotomy-induced anemia. Testing at the bedside minimizes pre-analytical errors (like transport delays or sample degradation). Capillary sampling options may eliminate the need for venipuncture entirely in some cases. But there are trade-offs to consider: Differences between capillary and venous/arterial blood can affect interpretability, especially for certain analytes. Some devices have lower throughput and limited test menus compared to central labs. Repeat testing or confirmation may still be necessary, particularly for critical or unexpected values. Integration into clinical workflows—from staff training to EMR connectivity—requires planning. POCT is not a replacement for central labs, but a complementary tool. When deployed strategically—especially in high-volume testing environments like the ICU—it offers a meaningful reduction in both blood volume drawn and time to actionable data. Implementing Change: More Than Just Tubes While no single intervention prevents iatrogenic anemia on its own, the evidence supports integrating POCT and other blood-sparing strategies into routine practice, especially for ICU patients with prolonged stays or at high risk of transfusion. Barriers remain—cost, workflow adaptation, and concerns about test redundancy or accuracy—but as the data accumulate, so does the imperative to act. This is not just a patient safety issue; it’s also a sustainability issue. As one review noted, each routine lab test generates measurable carbon emissions, with full blood counts producing the equivalent of 770 meters of car travel (McAlister et al., 2022). Conclusion Iatrogenic anemia is not an inevitable side effect of ICU care—it’s a modifiable risk. By leveraging technologies like POCT, rethinking default test ordering, and aligning with PBM principles, we can reduce unnecessary blood loss, avoid transfusions, and improve outcomes for some of our sickest patients. Because sometimes, doing less really is doing more.

Introduction: When most people—doctors included—think of transfusion medicine, they picture someone approving blood products from a distance. Maybe they imagine a pathologist tucked away in the lab, rubber-stamping PRBC requests. But the reality is far more complex. Transfusion medicine physicians are clinical consultants, working at the intersection of hematology, immunology, and patient blood management. Our value lies not just in saying “yes” or “no” to transfusion, but in guiding clinicians through diagnostic uncertainty, navigating difficult cases, and improving outcomes across a wide variety of specialties. 1. A Consultative Specialty Hidden in Plain Sight Transfusion medicine isn’t a field most people choose—it’s one they discover. And when they do, they realize how central it is to patient care. TM physicians are consulted for cases that don’t fit cleanly into another box: A patient with a positive DAT and unclear hemolysis A stem cell transplant patient with febrile reactions to every unit A Jehovah’s Witness patient needing complex surgery A trauma patient with coagulopathy and no clear path forward We're brought in not just to approve blood, but to ask: Is this the right product? At the right dose? At the right time? 2. Diagnostic Expertise in Complex Cases TM consults often involve layered diagnostic reasoning. Is this hemolysis immune or non-immune? Is this thrombocytopenia ITP or drug-induced? Are we dealing with a warm autoantibody or an alloantibody in disguise? Transfusion medicine physicians integrate lab data, clinical context, and patient-specific nuances to provide recommendations that change management—not just transfusion plans, but workups, drug choices, and timelines. 3. Interdisciplinary Communication We speak many clinical dialects—cardiology, surgery, hematology, anesthesia—and translate lab findings into actionable recommendations. TM physicians regularly facilitate multidisciplinary conversations: Should we give platelets before this LP in a thrombocytopenic patient with MDS? Can we safely delay transfusion until after antibody identification? Is there a non-transfusion alternative that fits this patient’s values or goals of care? We're often the glue in communication between lab and floor, between policy and practice. 4. Blood as a Finite Resource—and a Clinical Tool Transfusion is not a benign act. Every unit carries risk: alloimmunization, TRALI, volume overload, and more. TM physicians help balance benefit and harm, especially in gray-zone cases. We advise not just on when to transfuse, but when not to: Recommending alternatives to transfusion in chronic anemia Guiding single-unit transfusion strategies Implementing PBM protocols in the ICU or OR 5. Beyond the Bedside: Policy, Quality, and Stewardship We’re also system stewards. TM physicians lead hospital transfusion committees, write massive transfusion protocols, track utilization metrics, and intervene when transfusion practices drift. Our consultative lens applies at the system level as well as the bedside. Conclusion: Transfusion medicine is not just technical—it’s clinical. Every blood product order is a clinical decision, and TM physicians are consultants in the truest sense: integrators of data, translators between teams, and advocates for safe, appropriate, patient-centered care. So next time you call the blood bank, remember: you’re not just calling to release a unit. You’re calling a consultant.

In just a few short weeks, I’ll finish fellowship. It’s not my first goodbye — far from it. But it’s the first one that might be my last. The last rotation. The last ID badge with an expiration date. The last institutional email address that will vanish the moment I step out the door. Then again, maybe not. I’ve done this enough times to know better. For the past six years, I’ve been in training. Which means I’ve also been leaving — constantly. Four major moves, three different states, countless rotations, and more logins and locker combinations than I could ever remember. Every space was temporary. Every system required re-onboarding. Every community came with an asterisk: not yours, not forever. That’s just how training works. We are a profession built on transience. You adapt quickly. You learn which bathrooms are cleanest, how to label your samples so they don’t get lost, which attendings want you to speak up and which don’t. You settle in fast, because you won’t be there long. And eventually, you learn to stop unpacking fully — not just your suitcase, but yourself. Some things I expect to miss — the bespoke patient care at the NIH. The way consults end with research questions, not billing concerns. The handful of people who made the day easier, who made you smarter without making you feel small. Other things I won’t miss at all. That’s part of it, too. But the grief that sticks with me isn’t always about the work. It’s the friendships that faded after the group chat went quiet. The cities I never really got to know. The long nights trying to decide what to throw out, because it wouldn’t fit in the moving truck. The Dresden doll from my grandmother — broken in one move. The journals I kept when I was 15 — lost in another. The people I was in those places, with those objects, doing that work — gone, or at least out of reach. I’ve spent six years learning how to leave. Sometimes gracefully, sometimes frantically, always carrying a little less than when I arrived. But for all the things I’ve lost, some things stayed. A few friendships, kept alive through effort and luck. A favorite pen. A writing ritual. The conviction that my voice matters, even in rooms that don’t expect to hear it. That’s what transition teaches you, if you pay attention: how to find meaning in borrowed space. How to build a life in 4-week blocks. How to say goodbye before it feels finished. How to carry forward what matters when most of it can’t come with you. This next move — to a faculty job, a new home, a place with no scheduled end date — is supposed to be permanent. But I’ve lived enough life in medicine to know that permanence is a story we tell ourselves to feel safe. I’ve moved too many times to believe in permanence. But I believe in showing up — even when the future is uncertain. So I’ll show up. I’ll care. I’ll build something worth keeping, even if I might have to let it go.

James is a 20-pound tabby with a big personality and, until recently, a very small urethra. A few weeks ago, he ended up in the emergency hospital with a urinary obstruction. He was stable, uncomfortable, and unimpressed. I was stressed out, sleep-deprived, and fully bracing for chaos. But the chaos never came. While James was still in the hospital, the specialty vet electronically sent detailed updates to his primary vet. When complications came up post-op, his primary vet reviewed the plan, prescribed the necessary meds, and followed through without punting anything back. Everyone seemed to know his case, take it seriously, and work together to make sure he got what he needed. It was surreal. Because somewhere between admission and discharge, I realized that my cat was getting better healthcare than I’ve ever had as a human patient. Or, honestly, even as a physician. Coordinated. Competent. Electronic. It’s hard to overstate how smoothly the logistics went during this latest hospitalization. The specialty team didn’t just say  they’d update his PCP — they did  it, electronically, before I even asked. His outpatient vet received the records in real time and acted on them. No phone tag. No “you’ll have to call them for that.” No “we don’t prescribe meds from another facility.” And it wasn’t even the first time veterinary medicine made me feel this way. Last summer, James needed a cardiac workup. He had a same-day echocardiogram, full radiologist interpretation, lab work, and a printed summary with a diagnosis and treatment plan — before we left the office . The total cost was under $1,000. That same  summer, I also needed a cardiac workup — for a new arrhythmia. It took over two months to get scheduled. I had to ask repeatedly just to find out what the test showed. And it cost nearly $10,000. Two separate systems. Two separate workups. And the only one that felt coordinated, compassionate, and efficient was the one provided to my precious fur baby. I’ve Never Been Heard Like This What I didn’t expect was how seen  I would feel throughout the process of James' hospitalization. Everyone listened. Every question was taken seriously. I wasn’t made to feel dramatic, or pushy, or irrational for advocating for my cat’s care — even when I brought up logistics, behavior changes, or subtle shifts in appetite. It hit me harder than I expected. Because I’ve spent years navigating healthcare — as a physician, as a patient, and as a caregiver. And I’ve never had this many people listen to me without needing to fight for it. Not once. Not when I brought my own symptoms to the table. Not when I managed a family member’s decline. Not when I offered clinical context as a fellow physician. It was veterinary medicine, not human medicine, that finally made me feel heard. The System Isn’t Perfect — But It Works Of course, veterinary medicine has its own barriers. Cost can be crushing. There’s no equivalent of Medicaid. There are no safety nets. But in terms of the actual delivery  of care — communication, coordination, respect — the system worked shockingly well. There was no deferral, no fragmentation, no fax-machine absurdity. There was thoughtful, consistent, and humane care. And I can’t stop thinking about it. Because if we can offer that kind of continuity and compassion to a 20-pound tabby recovering from major surgery, why is it still so hard to do the same for people? He’s Fine. I’m Grateful. And A Little Furious. James is doing great now. He had his perineal urethrostomy and bounced back without complications. His appetite is back. His fur is shiny. He’s napping aggressively in sunbeams like nothing ever happened. I, on the other hand, keep thinking about the fact that he had a smoother clinical course, a faster diagnosis, more continuity of care, and a clearer discharge plan than I’ve ever had for my own body. And I keep thinking: If my cat can have that kind of care, maybe people should too.

Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is an immunomodulatory therapy increasingly used in the management of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), particularly in pediatric patients for whom traditional therapies may fall short. Despite promising outcomes, pediatric ECP remains a niche practice characterized by significant variability in technique, access, safety protocols, and clinical outcomes. This post integrates insights from two comprehensive reviews to explore practical and clinical aspects of pediatric ECP, combining real-world experience with calls for standardization and research. 1. What is ECP and How Does it Work? ECP is a cellular therapy involving: Leukapheresis  to collect white blood cells (WBCs) Incubation  with 8-methoxypsoralen (8-MOP), a photosensitizer Exposure to UVA light Reinfusion  of the treated WBCs into the patient This process is thought to promote immune tolerance by shifting immune responses from inflammatory (Th1) to regulatory (Th2) profiles, inducing apoptosis of pro-inflammatory cells, and increasing regulatory T-cell populations. While the exact mechanism in GVHD remains unclear, multiple pathways including cytokine modulation, monocyte differentiation, and B-cell regulation have been implicated. 2. ECP Systems: In-Line vs. Off-Line Feature In-Line (UVAR XTS, CELLEX) Off-Line (COBE Spectra, COM.TEC, etc.) System Type Closed, automated Open, manual Leukapheresis & Irradiation Integrated Performed on separate devices Flow Type Discontinuous (XTS) / Continuous (CELLEX) Continuous preferred Extracorporeal Volume (EV) XTS: up to 480 mL, CELLEX: ~216–266 mL Variable (lowest: COM.TEC at 137 mL) Continuous flow systems yield more mononuclear cells (MNCs) and reduce EV, making them preferable for pediatric use. 3. Indications and Clinical Outcomes in Pediatrics In children, ECP is primarily used for: Steroid-refractory acute GVHD : response rates 50–100%, depending on organ involvement Chronic GVHD : ~60% response rate; enables steroid tapering However, all current data come from case series or observational studies— no randomized controlled trials (RCTs)  have included patients under 17 years. While adult RCTs suggest efficacy, extrapolation to pediatrics requires caution. 4. Technical and Clinical Challenges A. Extracorporeal Volume (EV) High EV can cause hypotension and hemodynamic instability in low-weight children. Strategies to minimize risk: Use lower-EV devices (e.g., CELLEX, COM.TEC) Prime circuit with red blood cells (RBCs) or 5% albumin Administer saline or albumin boluses pre-procedure Device EV (mL) Min. Weight Recommendations UVAR XTS 480 >40 kg (with priming) CELLEX 216–266 >30 kg (without priming) COM.TEC 137 <30 kg (with priming preferred) B. Vascular Access Central venous catheters (single- or double-lumen) are commonly used Catheter-related infections and occlusions are the most frequent complications Reported Complication Rates: Infections: 3.7–7% Occlusion: ~4% Preventive measures: urokinase/tPA, aseptic technique, dedicated central lines C. Hematologic and Metabolic Considerations ECP can cause modest drops in hematologic parameters: Hemoglobin: median drop of 1.5 g/dL Platelets: median drop of 17% Typical Pre-Procedural Lab Cutoffs: Parameter Threshold Hematocrit >24–28% Platelet count >20,000–50,000/µL WBC count >1,000/µL There is no consensus on ideal target cell yields or on correlation between infused MNC counts and clinical efficacy. 5. Scheduling and Duration of Therapy Protocols vary widely: Initial Phase:  2–3 treatments/week Maintenance:  Decrease to every 2–4 weeks based on response GVHD Monitoring:  Weekly for aGVHD, every 1–2 months for cGVHD Study Initial Schedule Tapering Kanold 3x/week for 3 weeks Gradual taper Messina 2x/week for 1 month, biweekly for 2 months Then monthly for 3+ months Foss No difference found between 1x vs 2x/week Schedules individualized There is no evidence that more intensive schedules yield better outcomes. 6. Alternative Techniques: Mini Buffy Coat ECP For children who cannot tolerate leukapheresis: Mini buffy coat method  involves collecting 100–200 mL of whole blood Buffy coat is prepared and irradiated in a closed system Red cells, plasma, and platelets are returned to the patient Clinical Results: 84% response rate in pediatric aGVHD Strong correlation between higher WBC dose/kg and response This technique may be a valuable alternative in patients <20 kg. 7. Gaps in Knowledge and Recommendations Despite widespread clinical use, pediatric ECP suffers from a lack of standardization and rigorous evidence. Key areas needing further research include: Domain Current Gaps Recommendations Patient selection No consensus on minimum weight or lab cutoffs Develop evidence-based eligibility guidelines Product evaluation No QC benchmarks or ideal cell dose/kg Define and validate efficacy markers Anticoagulation protocols Heparin vs. citrate strategies vary by center Standardize anticoagulation practices based on risk Scheduling Highly variable schedules Conduct studies comparing intensive vs. tapered regimens Vascular access Complications common Guidelines for catheter type and maintenance Alternative collection methods Mini ECP underutilized Further evaluate in RCTs or multicenter trials 8. Conclusion ECP is a safe, well-tolerated, and potentially effective treatment for pediatric GVHD, particularly in steroid-refractory cases. However, practice varies widely, and most evidence is derived from observational data. To expand safe access and improve outcomes, standardized protocols and prospective studies—especially randomized trials in pediatric populations—are urgently needed. Until then, successful ECP in children will continue to rely on experienced multidisciplinary teams, careful patient selection, and vigilant monitoring. Have experience with pediatric ECP in your institution? Let us know what’s working—and what’s not. References DeSimone RA, Schwartz J, Schneiderman J. Extracorporeal photopheresis in pediatric patients: Practical and technical considerations. J Clin Apher. 2017; 32: 543–552. https://doi.org/10.1002/jca.21534 Sniecinski, I., & Seghatchian, J. (2017). Factual reflections and recommendations on extracorporeal photopheresis in pediatrics. Transfusion and Apheresis Science , 56 (2), 118-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transci.2017.03.013Get rights and content