Familial pseudohyperkalemia (FP) is a dominantly inherited condition caused by variants in the gene ABCB6 resulting in red blood cell (RBC) membrane protein defects. FP is generally asymptomatic. However, FP RBCs have an increased permeability to monovalent cations when stored below 37°C. Transfusion of RBC components donated by FP individuals can induce hyperkalemia and may be causally related to transfusion-associated hyperkalemic cardiac arrest, particularly in neonates and infants. Therefore it is necessary to accurately evaluate the frequency of FP occurrence in the Korean population and assess whether FP RBCs have significantly higher supernatant potassium levels. Efforts should be made to recognize the effects of blood products collected from FP donors on blood transfusion recipients to reduce the risk of hyperkalemia, especially in fetuses, infants, and patients at risk of this condition.

No abstract available.

Adolescent ; Appendicitis ; Emergencies ; Humans ; Intention ; Logistic Models ; Patient Selection ; Pragmatic Clinical Trial ; Prospective Studies ; Radiation Dosage ; Surgeons ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Young Adult

Leukoreduction is a process in which the white blood cells (WBCs) in cellular products are intentionally reduced to bring down the risk of adverse transfusion reactions, such as febrile nonhemolytic transfusion reactions or human leukocyte antigen alloimmunization. So far, Korea has not considered leukoreduction of plasma products. However there have been recommendations for leukoreduction to improve patient outcomes. The authors have experience in measuring WBCs and WBC fragment counts in plasma products and have shown that the WBC and their fragments could be efficiently removed using leukoreduction filters. Hence, it may be beneficial to begin discussions on the necessity of using leukoreduction of plasma products.

Background: According to the revision of the Blood Management Act in 2020, medical institutions that meet certain conditions are obliged to install a transfusion management division in Korea. Therefore, this study assessed the management status of the transfusion management division at major medical institutions. Methods: From August 7th to August 18th, 2021, a survey questionnaire was given to laboratory physicians of 10 major medical institutions in Korea, and the installation and operation of the transfusion management division were surveyed. Results: The medical institutions that participated in this survey completed a transfusion management division in the first half of the year. Doctors, nurses, and medical technologists were assigned as medical personnel, and all laboratory physicians were leading the work as the head of the transfusion management division. Regarding the tasks performed at the transfusion management division, all medical institutions conducted a transfusion appropriateness assessment, education related to transfusion, and adverse transfusion reactions. Most medical institutions had difficulties because there was an insufficient basis to calculate the workforce and budget in installing and operating the transfusion management division. Conclusion There are rarely reference materials for the practice and operation of the transfusion management division, which has no precedent in Korea, so it is often difficult for medical institutions to prepare it. This study will be a reference for medical institutions that need to install a transfusion management division in the future.Efforts should be made to legislate transfusion management fees focused on the academic community.

ABO-blood typing typically involves both front typing (cell typing) and back typing (serum typing) to ensure accurate determination of blood type. However, in neonates, back typing is frequently omitted due to their immature immune system. If an institution chooses red blood cells (RBCs) that match the neonate's blood type, omitting back typing could lead to unexplained cross-matching incompatibilities. Therefore, blood banks should be cautious with neonatal blood typing and transfusion practices to ensure transfusion safety.

ABO-blood typing typically involves both front typing (cell typing) and back typing (serum typing) to ensure accurate determination of blood type. However, in neonates, back typing is frequently omitted due to their immature immune system. If an institution chooses red blood cells (RBCs) that match the neonate's blood type, omitting back typing could lead to unexplained cross-matching incompatibilities. Therefore, blood banks should be cautious with neonatal blood typing and transfusion practices to ensure transfusion safety.

ABO-blood typing typically involves both front typing (cell typing) and back typing (serum typing) to ensure accurate determination of blood type. However, in neonates, back typing is frequently omitted due to their immature immune system. If an institution chooses red blood cells (RBCs) that match the neonate's blood type, omitting back typing could lead to unexplained cross-matching incompatibilities. Therefore, blood banks should be cautious with neonatal blood typing and transfusion practices to ensure transfusion safety.

ABO-blood typing typically involves both front typing (cell typing) and back typing (serum typing) to ensure accurate determination of blood type. However, in neonates, back typing is frequently omitted due to their immature immune system. If an institution chooses red blood cells (RBCs) that match the neonate's blood type, omitting back typing could lead to unexplained cross-matching incompatibilities. Therefore, blood banks should be cautious with neonatal blood typing and transfusion practices to ensure transfusion safety.

PURPOSE: This retrospective study was aimed to determine if appendiceal perforation identified pathologically but not surgically is clinically meaningful. METHODS: The study consists of 2 parts. First, we reviewed 74 studies addressing appendiceal perforation published in 2012 and 2013. Second, in a cross-sectional study, we classified 1,438 adolescents and adults (mean age, 29.3 ± 8.4 years; 785 men) with confirmed appendicitis as “nonperforation” (n = 1,083, group 1), “pathologically-identified perforation” (n = 55, group 2), “surgically-identified perforation” (n = 202, group 3), or “pathologically- and surgically-identified perforation” (n = 98, group 4). The 4 groups were compared for the frequency of laparoscopic appendectomy and the length of hospital stay using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The reference standard for appendiceal perforation was frequently missing or inconsistent in the previous studies. Laparoscopic appendectomies were less frequent in groups 3 (52.5%, P = 0.001) and 4 (65%, P = 0.040) than in group 1 (70.7%), while group 2 (73%, P = 0.125) did not significantly differ from group 1. Median hospital stays were 2.9, 3.0, 5.1, and 6.0 days for groups 1–4, respectively. Prolonged hospital stay (≥3.7 days) was more frequent in groups 3 (77.7%, P < 0.001) and 4 (89%, P < 0.001) than in group 1 (23.4%), while group 2 (35%, P = 0.070) did not significantly differ from group 1. CONCLUSION: We recommend using surgical rather than pathologic findings as the reference standard for the presence of appendiceal perforation in future investigations.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Appendectomy ; Appendicitis ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Humans ; Length of Stay ; Logistic Models ; Pathology* ; Retrospective Studies