Search

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review is to summarize the historical context and recent literature that contribute to the debate about preventive strategies for Rhesus (Rh)-alloimmunization in abortion are., Recent Findings: Recent studies repeatedly demonstrate that the risk of Rh-alloimmunization in first trimester abortion care is very low., Summary: Recent high-quality studies have demonstrated the physiologic presence of fetal red blood cells in maternal circulation even prior to abortion. Thus, establishing the low utility of Rh immunoglobulin prior to abortion before 12 weeks of gestation. There is yet to exist a consensus guideline that balances the desire to prevent a rare devastating outcome and the need to create practical guidelines based on evidence-based risk assessments., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

This Clinical Practice Update provides revised guidance on Rh testing and Rh D immune globulin administration for individuals undergoing abortion or experiencing pregnancy loss at less than 12 0/7 weeks of gestation. This document updates Practice Bulletin No. 225, Medication Abortion Up to 70 Days of Gestation (Obstet Gynecol 2020;136:e31-47); Practice Bulletin No. 200, Early Pregnancy Loss (Obstet Gynecol 2018;132:e197-207); and Practice Bulletin No. 181, Prevention of Rh D Alloimmunization (Obstet Gynecol 2017;130:e57-70)., (Copyright © 2024 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To train healthcare professionals involved in the care of Rh-D negative pregnant women, with the aim of standardizing the management of Rh isoimmunization prevention, timely antenatal diagnosis of Rh disease, fetal assessment, and treatment of fetuses with Rh disease, in order to prevent adverse perinatal outcomes., Materials and Methods: A group of 23 expert panelists participated in the development of the consensus through three rounds, answering a questionnaire consisting of 8 domains and 22 questions. A modified Delphi method was used until the consensus threshold among participants was reached, defined as 80% or greater agreement in responses. In the third round of the expert panel, a twenty-third question emerged, which was answered by one of the thematic leaders. The eight domains of antenatal management for Rh-D negative pregnant women were: 1) Rh-D determination, 2) initial prenatal care for Rh-D negative patients, 3) titration and periodicity of the indirect Coombs test, 4) sensitizing events, 5) administration of anti-D immunoglobulin (IgG), 6) Doppler velocimetry of the middle cerebral artery (MCA), 7) antenatal management of isoimmunized patients and anemic fetuses, and 8) timing for pregnancy termination based on different clinical scenarios. Based on these responses, and a review of international clinical practice guidelines, consensus statements were formulated, including recommendations, their justification, and adaptation to the local context., Results: The following recommendations were issued: It is suggested that Rh-D negative women of childbearing age attend a preconception consultation. It is recommended to determine maternal Rh-D status at the first contact with health services, either during the preconception consultation or at the first prenatal check-up. For Rh-D negative patients, it is recommended to determine the Rh-D status of the child's father during prenatal care as early as possible, preferably before the 28th week of gestation. For Rh-D negative primigravidas, where the father is Rh-D positive, it is suggested to: a) determine and quantify Rh-D antibodies (indirect Coombs test) during the first consultation and then quarterly, b) expand the obstetric history, with an emphasis on identifying sensitizing events, and c) provide parental counseling regarding potential risks, the need for additional tests, and the possibility of immunization during pregnancy. During prenatal care for Rh-D negative multiparous patients with previous Rh-D positive offspring, the initial approach should include: a) determining and titrating Rh-D antibodies (indirect Coombs test); b) expanding the obstetric history, focusing on sensitizing events; and c) providing parental counseling about potential risks and additional tests. After a sensitizing event, it is recommended to administer anti-D IgG within the first 72 hours at a dose of 1500 IU (300 μg). If not feasible, it can be administered up to 4 weeks after the event if it was not given initially. 7.1. For non-isoimmunized pregnant women (with a negative Coombs test and Rh-positive newborn), it is recommended to administer anti-D IgG between weeks 28 and 32, and within the first 72 hours postpartum if the newborn is Rh-positive. The dose is 300 μg IM or IV. 7.2. In the case of a cesarean section in an Rh-D negative patient with a Rh-D positive child, the consensus does not recommend doubling the dose of anti-D IgG. The dose remains the same as after a vaginal delivery: 300 μg IM or IV. 7.3. In a twin delivery involving an Rh-D negative patient with two or more Rh-D positive live-born infants, the consensus recommends not doubling the dose of anti-D IgG. The dose remains 300 μg IM or IV, the same as after a vaginal delivery. 7.4. For a non-isoimmunized Rh-D negative patient in the puerperium with immediate postpartum surgical tubal sterilization and an Rh-D positive neonate, anti-D IgG is recommended, assuming no prior sensitization, given the potential for reproductive decision changes or failure of the procedure. An Rh-D negative patient is considered isoimmunized if: a) the indirect Coombs test is positive at any titer, provided anti-D IgG was not received in the previous month, or b) there is a history of adverse perinatal outcomes associated with Rh disease in prior pregnancies, such as hydrops. 9.1. If Rh-D negative women are isoimmunized, it is necessary to determine the anti-D antibody titer, as this titer correlates with the severity of the disease and determines the need for fetal anemia studies with Doppler velocimetry of the MCA. 9.2. For isoimmunized Rh-D negative patients, it is recommended to follow up with monthly quantitative indirect Coombs tests until week 24, then bi-weekly, or until reaching a critical titer (≥ 1:16). 10.1. Doppler ultrasound of the MCA is suggested for Rh-D negative patients with a positive indirect Coombs test and titers ≥ 1:16. 10.2. In non-isoimmunized Rh-D negative patients, the consensus does not recommend MCA Doppler velocimetry. 10.3. Weekly MCA Doppler ultrasounds are recommended for isoimmunized patients with indirect Coombs titers ≥ 1:16. 10.4. The consensus suggests adopting a cut-off value of ≥ 1.5 multiples of the median (MoM) of the peak systolic velocity for gestational age on MCA Doppler, as this value best correlates with fetal anemia. The consensus suggests Cordocentesis when fetal anemia is suspected, and intrauterine fetal transfusion when cordocentesis shows severe fetal anemia. This procedure should be performed by trained personnel. It is recommended to prolong pregnancy until the fetus has achieved sufficient lung and tissue maturation to improve perinatal survival, according to the indirect Coombs test titer threshold., Conclusions: It is essential to address Rh-D negative pregnant women, isoimmunized women, and fetuses with Rh disease in an appropriate and standardized manner, according to the Colombian context, across all levels of prenatal care. The recommendations issued in this consensus are expected to improve clinical care, as well as enhance perinatal health and neonatal quality of life in cases of Rh disease.

Background and Objectives: To evaluate the severity of haemolytic disease of the foetus and newborn (HDFN) in subsequent pregnancies with RhD immunization and to identify predictive factors for severe disease., Materials and Methods: Nationwide prospective cohort study, including all pregnant women with RhD antibodies. All women with at least two pregnancies with RhD antibodies and RhD-positive foetuses were selected. The main outcome measure was the severity of HDFN in the first and subsequent pregnancy at risk. A subgroup analysis was performed for the group of women where RhD antibodies developed after giving birth to an RhD-positive child and thus after receiving anti-D at least twice (group A) or during the first pregnancy at risk for immunization (group B)., Results: Sixty-two RhD immunized women with a total of 150 RhD-positive children were included. The severity of HDFN increased for the whole group significantly in the subsequent pregnancy (p < 0.001), although it remained equal or even decreased in 44% of women. When antibodies were already detected at first trimester screening in the first immunized pregnancy, after giving birth to an RhD-positive child (group A), severe HDFN in the next pregnancy was uncommon (22%). Especially when no therapy or only non-intensive phototherapy was indicated during the first immunized pregnancy (6%) or if the antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity result remained <10%. Contrarily, women with a negative first trimester screening and RhD antibodies detected later during the first pregnancy of an RhD-positive child (group B), often before they had ever received anti-D prophylaxis, were most prone for severe disease in a subsequent pregnancy (48%)., Conclusion: RhD-mediated HDFN in a subsequent pregnancy is generally more severe than in the first pregnancy at risk and can be estimated using moment of antibody detection and severity in the first immunized pregnancy. Women developing antibodies in their first pregnancy of an RhD-positive child are at highest risk of severe disease in the next pregnancy., (© 2024 The Authors. Vox Sanguinis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Blood Transfusion.)

Objective: To estimate the cost of Rhesus (Rh) testing and prophylaxis for first-trimester vaginal bleeding in the ambulatory setting., Study Design: We used time-driven, activity-based costing to analyze tasks associated with Rh testing and prophylaxis of first-trimester vaginal bleeding at one hospital-based outpatient and two independent reproductive health clinics. At each site, we observed 10 patients undergoing Rh-typing and two patients undergoing Rh prophylaxis. We computed the costs of blood Rh-typing by both fingerstick and phlebotomy, cost of locating previous blood type in the electronic health record (available for 69.8% of hospital-based patients), and costs associated with Rh immune globulin prophylaxis. All costs are reported in 2021 US dollars., Results: The hospital-based clinic reviewed the electronic health record to confirm Rh-status (cost, $26.18 per patient) and performed a phlebotomy, at $47.11 per patient, if none was recorded. The independent clinics typed blood by fingerstick, at a per-patient cost of $4.07. Rh-immune globulin administration costs, including the medication, were similar across facilities, at a mean of $145.66 per patient. Projected yearly costs for testing and prophylaxis were $55,831 for the hospital-based clinic, which was the lowest-volume site, $47,941 for Clinic A, which saw 150 patients/month, and $185,654 for Clinic B, which saw 600 patients/month., Conclusions: Rh testing and prophylaxis for first-trimester vaginal bleeding generates considerable costs for outpatient facilities, even for Rh-positive patients with a prior blood type on record., Implications: Rh testing and prophylaxis for first-trimester bleeding generate considerable costs even for Rh-positive patients and those with a previously known blood type. These findings highlight the need to reconsider this practice, which is no longer supported by evidence and already safely waived in multiple medical settings in the United States and around the world., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To provide recommendations for the prevention of Rh D alloimmunization in the first trimester of pregnancy., Materials and Methods: The quality of evidence of the literature was assessed following the GRADE methodology with questions formulated in the PICO format (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) and outcomes defined a priori and classified according to their importance. An extensive bibliographic search was performed on Pubmed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases. The quality of evidence was assessed (high, moderate, low, very low) and a recommendation was formulated: (i) strong, (ii) weak, or (iii) no recommendation. The recommendations were reviewed in two rounds with reviewers from the scientific board of the French College of the OB/GYN (Delphi survey) to select the consensus recommendations., Results: The three recommendations from PICO questions reached agreement using the Delphi method. It is recommended not to administer Rh D immunoglobulin before 12 weeks of gestation to reduce the risk of alloimmunization in case of abortion or miscarriage, in RhD negative patients when the genitor is RhD positive or unknown (Weak recommendation. Very low-quality evidence). It is recommended not to administer Rh D immunoglobulin before 12 weeks of gestation to reduce the risk of alloimmunization in cases of bleeding in an ongoing intrauterine pregnancy (Weak recommendation. Very low-quality evidence). The literature data are insufficient in quality and quantity to determine if the injection of Rh D immunoglobulin reduces the risk of alloimmunization in the case of an ectopic pregnancy (No recommendation. Very low-quality evidence)., Conclusion: Even though the quality of evidence from the studies is very low, it is recommended not to administer Rh D immunoglobulin in case of abortion, miscarriage or bleeding before 12 weeks of amenorrhea. The quality of evidence was too low to issue a recommendation regarding ectopic pregnancy., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Rh hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn is a potential risk for D-negative mothers who produce anti-D during pregnancy, which can lead to morbidity and mortality in subsequent pregnancies. To prevent this hemolytic disease, Rho(D) immune globulin (RhIG) is generally administered to D-negative mothers without anti-D at 28 weeks of gestation and shortly after delivery. However, current guidelines suggest that pregnant mothers with molecularly defined weak D types 1, 2, 3, 4.0, and 4.1 do not need RhIG as they are unlikely to produce alloanti-D when exposed to fetuses with D-positive red cells. This issue and the necessity of RHD genotyping have been extensively discussed in Western countries, where these variants are relatively common. Recent evidence indicates that women with Asian-type DEL (c.1227G>A) also do not form alloanti-D when exposed to D-positive red cells. We report that mothers with molecularly defined Asian-type DEL, similar to those with weak D types 1, 2, 3, 4.0, and 4.1, do not require RhIG before and after delivery. Collectively, this review could pave the way for the revision of international guidelines to include the selective use of RhIG based on specific genotypes, particularly in women with the Asian-type DEL.

Background: Current Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB) standards require transfusion services to have a policy on Rh immune globulin (RhIG) immunoprophylaxis for when RhD-negative patients are exposed to RhD-positive red cells. This is a survey of AABB-accredited transfusion services in the United States (US) regarding institutional policies and practices on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD-negative patients receive RhD-positive (i.e., RhD-incompatible) packed red blood cell (pRBC) and platelet transfusions., Results: Approximately half of the respondents (50.4%, 116/230) have policies on RhIG administration after RhD-incompatible pRBC and platelet transfusions, while others had policies for only pRBC (13.5%, 31/230) or only platelet (17.8%, 41/230) transfusions, but not both. In contrast, 18.3% (42/230) report that their institution has no written policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD-incompatible transfusions. Most institutions (70.2%, 99/141) do not have policies addressing safety parameters to mitigate the risk of hemolysis associated with the high dose of RhIG required to prevent RhD alloimmunization after RhD-incompatible pRBC transfusions., Discussion: With approximately half of US AABB-accredited institutions report having policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after both RhD-incompatible pRBC and platelet transfusions, some institutions may not be in compliance with AABB standards. Further, most with policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD-incompatible pRBC transfusion do not have written safeguards to mitigate the risk of hemolysis associated with the high dose of RhIG required., Conclusion: This survey underscores the diverse and inadequate institutional policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD exposure in Rh-negative patients via transfusion. This observation identifies an opportunity to improve transfusion safety., (© 2024 AABB.)

The group and screen (G&S) are performed in early pregnancy to identify clinically significant antibodies (CSA) that may necessitate fetal monitoring for hemolysis/anemia or affect RhIg eligibility. Guidelines vary, including differences between RhD-positive and negative patients, but typically, the G&S is repeated at 28 weeks, and sometimes pre-delivery. We reviewed data showing a low risk (0.01%-0.43%) of detecting a new CSA in late gestation (late alloimmunization) and the risk of late alloimmunization causing severe hemolysis/anemia is even lower at <0.01%. Routinely repeating a G&S at 28 weeks and delivery may not be necessary for healthy, low-risk pregnancies., (Copyright © 2024 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This guideline provides recommendations for the prevention of Rh D alloimmunization (isoimmunization) in pregnancy, including parental testing, routine postpartum and antepartum prophylaxis, and other clinical indications for prophylaxis. Prevention of red cell alloimmunization in pregnancy with atypical antigens (other than the D antigen), for which immunoprophylaxis is not currently available, is not addressed in this guideline., Target Population: All Rh D-negative pregnant individuals at risk for Rh D alloimmunization due to potential exposure to a paternally derived fetal Rh D antigen., Outcomes: Routine postpartum and antepartum Rh D immunoprophylaxis reduces the risk of Rh D alloimmunization at 6 months postpartum and in a subsequent pregnancy., Benefits, Harms, and Costs: This guideline details the population of pregnant individuals who may benefit from Rho(D) immune globulin (RhIG) immunoprophylaxis. Thus, those for whom the intervention is not required may avoid adverse effects, while those who are at risk of alloimmunization may mitigate this risk for themselves and/or their fetus., Evidence: For recommendations regarding use of RhIG, Medline and Medline in Process via Ovid and Embase Classic + Embase via Ovid were searched using both the trials and observational studies search strategies with study design filters. For trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects via Ovid were also searched. All databases were searched from January 2000 to November 26, 2019. Studies published before 2000 were captured from the grey literature of national obstetrics and gynaecology specialty societies, luminary specialty journals, and bibliographic searching. A formal process for the systematic review was undertaken for this update, as described in the systematic review manuscript published separately., Validation Methods: The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the SOGC's modified GRADE approach. See Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations)., Intended Audience: The intended users of this guideline include prenatal care providers such as obstetricians, midwives, family physicians, emergency room physicians, and residents, as well as registered nurses and nurse practitioners., Tweetable Abstract: An updated Canadian guideline for prevention of Rh D alloimmunization addresses D variants, cffDNA for fetal Rh type, and updates recommendations on timing of RhIG administration., Summary Statements: RECOMMENDATIONS., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Anti-D alloimmunization in the first trimester of pregnancy has long been the subject of prevention with anti-D immunoglobulins during events at risk of fetomaternal hemorrhage. Although the efficacy of preventing anti-D alloimmunization by an injection of immunoglobulin at 28 weeks of gestation (WG) is obvious, the literature provides little evidence of the effectiveness before 12 +6 WG and several countries have modified their recommendations. In the presumed absence of a difference in alloimmunization risk between early and late prevention, our objective was to evaluate and compare the cost of treatment for 3 alloimmunization prevention strategies in France, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. This was a single-center retrospective study. Our target population included all women who received anti-D immunoglobulins (Rhophylac) in the first trimester of pregnancy before 12 +6 WG at Nantes University Hospital in 2018 (N = 356). Within the target population, 2 other populations were constituted based on British (N = 145) and Dutch (N = 142) clinical practice guidelines (CPG). These 3 populations were analyzed for the comparative cost of treatment for prevention from a health system perspective. The average cost of Rhophylac alloimmunization prevention for 1 episode was €117.8 from a health system perspective. The total cost attributed to prevention in 2018 at Nantes University Hospital (N = 356) was €41,931.4 according to this perspective. If the UK CPG or Dutch CPG had been applied to the Nantes target population, a saving of around 60% would have been achieved. At the national level, the cost according to the health system perspective specifically attributable to induced abortion (N estimated = 26,916) could represent a total cost of €3,170,704. This study highlighted the high cost of the French prevention strategy in the first trimester of pregnancy compared with British or Dutch strategies. The modification of our practices would allow substantial financial savings to the French health system but would also avoid the nonrecommended exposure to a blood product at this term, would allow a faster medical management and a relief of the care system., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To examine local patient safety events related to the administration of anti-Rh(D) immune globin (RhIG) during pregnancy, and to follow-up with targeted educational intervention to improve knowledge of this process., Background: Administration RhIG is established treatment for the prevention of haemolytic disease of the foetus and newborn (HDFN). However, patient safety events in relation to its correct use continue to occur., Methods: A retrospective audit of patient safety events related to RhIG administration during pregnancy was performed. Targeted educational intervention in the form of PowerPoint® presentation were given to nursing staff, laboratory staff and physicians and evaluated with pre- and post-tests using multiple-choice questions given immediately before and after the presentation., Results: An annual incidence of 0.24% of patient safety events related to the administration of RhIG during pregnancy was found. These events were mostly in the preanalytical phase, for example mislabelled samples or samples for D-rosette/Kleihauer-Betke testing drawn from the baby, not the mother. Using Bayesian analysis, the probability of positive effect for the targeted educational intervention was 100% with a median improved score of 29%. This was compared with a control group using standard curriculum education intervention based on the current curriculum for nursing, laboratory and medical students which showed a median improved score of only 4.4%., Conclusions: Administration of RhIG during pregnancy is a multistep process involving health care professionals of several disciplines providing opportunities to enhance the curriculum for nursing, laboratory and medical students and to ensure on-going education., (© 2023 The Authors. Transfusion Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Blood Transfusion Society.)

Introduction: Targeted routine antenatal prophylaxis with anti-D immunoglobulin (Ig) only to RhD-negative pregnant women who carry RhD-positive fetuses (determined by fetal RHD genotyping) has reduced D-alloimmunization significantly when administered in addition to postnatal prophylaxis. Achieving high analysis sensitivity and few false-negative fetal RHD results will make RhD typing of the newborn redundant. Postnatal prophylaxis can then be given based on the result of fetal RHD genotyping. Terminating routine RhD typing of the newborns in cord blood will streamline maternity care. Accordingly, we compared the results of fetal RHD genotyping with RhD typing of the newborns., Methods: Fetal RHD genotyping was performed, and antenatal anti-D Ig was administered at gestational week 24 and 28, respectively. Data for 2017-2020 are reported., Results: Ten laboratories reported 18,536 fetal RHD genotypings, and 16,378 RhD typing results of newborns. We found 46 false-positive (0.28%) and seven false-negative (0.04%) results. Sensitivity of the assays was 99.93%, while specificity was 99.24%., Conclusion: Few false-negative results support the good analysis quality of fetal RHD genotyping. Routine cord blood RhD typing will therefore be discontinued nationwide and postnatal anti-D Ig will now be given based on the result of fetal RHD genotyping., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Introduction: Despite the availability guidelines to prevent RhD alloimmunization, severe hemolytic disease of fetus and newborn still occurs in high-income countries. The aim of the study was (1) To assess variations in practices for the prevention of RhD alloimmunization, and (2) to understand midwives' acceptance and appropriation of fetal RhD genotyping., Methods: Descriptive cross-sectional survey of French midwives from September 2017 through January 2018. Participants were asked to complete an internet-based questionnaire that included three clinical vignettes. They were questioned about their practices concerning early pregnancy visit by RhD-negative women, prevention of RhD alloimmunization in women with second-trimester metrorrhagia, and RhD fetal genotyping., Results: A total of 827 midwives completed the questionnaire. Only 21.1% reported that they practice all the preventive measures recommended in early pregnancy. In a situation at high risk of RhD alloimmunization during pregnancy, 97.2% of midwives would perform immunoprophylaxis. Nearly, all midwives reported providing information about RhD alloimmunization (92.4%) at the beginning of pregnancy, although only 11.3% offered both written and verbal information; at the time of systematic anti-D immunoprophylaxis (28 weeks), 78% provided information, but only 2.7% both verbally and in writing. Finally, only 50.8% of midwives preferred to include RhD fetal genotyping in routine prenatal prophylaxis., Discussion: This study showed significant variations in French midwives' practices to prevent RhD alloimmunization. Better dissemination of guidelines is needed to improve both consistent use of these practices and the quality of information delivered to RhD-negative pregnant women.

Historical evidence that fetal red blood cell (RBC) exposure during early spontaneous or induced abortion can cause maternal Rh sensitization is limited. A close reading of these studies indicates that forgoing Rh immunoglobulin administration before 12weeks gestation is highly unlikely to increase risk of Rh (D) antibody development, and recent studies indicate that fetal RBC exposure during aspiration abortion <12 weeks gestation is below the calculated threshold to cause maternal Rh sensitization, and the amount of fetomaternal hemorrhage during dilation and evacuation procedures up to 18weeks gestation is adequately treated with 100mcg of Rh immunoglobulin. We provide updated recommendations for Rh immunoglobulin administration based on this new evidence., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate which risk factors for RhD immunisation remain, despite adequate routine antenatal and postnatal RhIg prophylaxis (1000 IU RhIg) and additional administration of RhIg. The second objective was assessment of the current prevalence of RhD immunisations., Design: Prospective cohort study., Setting: The Netherlands., Population: Two-year nationwide cohort of alloimmunised RhD-negative women., Methods: RhD-negative women in their first RhD immunised pregnancy were included for risk factor analysis. We compared risk factors for RhD immunisation, occurring either in the previous non-immunised pregnancy or in the index pregnancy, with national population data derived from the Dutch perinatal registration (Perined)., Results: In the 2-year cohort, data from 193 women were eligible for analysis. Significant risk factors in women previously experiencing a pregnancy of an RhD-positive child (n = 113) were: caesarean section (CS) (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6), perinatal death (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.1-10.9), gestational age >42 weeks (OR 6.1, 95% CI 2.2-16.6), postnatal bleeding (>1000 ml) (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1-3.6), manual removal of the placenta (MRP) (OR 4.3, 95% CI 2.0-9.3); these factors often occurred in combination. The miscarriage rate was significantly higher than in the Dutch population (35% versus 12.-5%, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Complicated deliveries, including cases of major bleeding and surgical interventions (CS, MRP), must be recognised as a risk factor, requiring estimation of fetomaternal haemorrhage volume and adjustment of RhIg dosing. The higher miscarriage rate suggests that existing RhIg protocols need adjustment or better compliance., Tweetable Abstract: Complicated delivery (caesarean section, manual removal placenta, major bleeding) is the most valid risk factor for RhD immunization despite antenatal and postnatal RhIg., (© 2022 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: The aim of this review was to systematically review the outcome of routine anti-D administration among unsensitised rhesus (RhD)-negative individuals who have an abortion. This review is registered with Prospero., Methods: A search for all published and ongoing studies, without restrictions on language or publication status, was performed using the following databases from their inception: EBM Reviews Ovid - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid (Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily), Embase.com, Popline and Google Scholar. Study types included: randomised controlled trials, controlled trials, cohort and case-control studies from 1971 onwards. The population included women who undergo an abortion (induced, incomplete, spontaneous or septic abortion), medical or surgical <12 weeks, and isoimmunisation in a subsequent pregnancy. The primary outcomes were: (1) development of a positive Kleihauer-Betke test and (2) development of Rh alloimmunisation in a subsequent pregnancy., Results: A total of 2652 studies were screened with 105 accessed for full-text review. Two studies have been included with high bias appreciated. Both studies found few women to be sensitised in forming antibodies after an abortion. The limited studies available and heterogeneity prevent the conduction of a meta-analysis., Conclusions: Rh immunoglobulin has well-documented safety. However, it is not without risks and costs, is a possible barrier to delivering efficient services, and may have limited availability in some countries. The evidence base and quality of studies are currently limited. There is unclear benefit from the recommendation for Rh testing and immunoglobulin administration in early pregnancy. More research is needed as clinical practice guidelines are varied, based on expert opinions and moving away from testing and administration at time of abortion., Implications: There is limited evidence surrounding medical benefit of Rh testing and immunoglobulin administration in early pregnancy. Further research is needed to define alloimmunisation and immunoglobulin benefit to update standards of care. Additionally, other factors should be considered in forming clinical policies and guidelines such as costs, feasibility and impact on access to care for patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: We sought to determine the cost-effectiveness of noninvasive fetal RhD blood group genotyping in nonalloimmunized and alloimmunized pregnancies in Canada., Study Design and Methods: We developed two probabilistic state-transition (Markov) microsimulation models to compare fetal genotyping followed by targeted management versus usual care (i.e., universal Rh immunoglobulin [RhIG] prophylaxis in nonalloimmunized RhD-negative pregnancies, or universal intensive monitoring in alloimmunized pregnancies). The reference case considered a healthcare payer perspective and a 10-year time horizon. Sensitivity analysis examined assumptions related to test cost, paternal screening, subsequent pregnancies, other alloantibodies (e.g., K, Rh c/C/E), societal perspective, and lifetime horizon., Results: Fetal genotyping in nonalloimmunized pregnancies (at per-sample test cost of C$247/US$311) was associated with a slightly higher probability of maternal alloimmunization (22 vs. 21 per 10,000) and a reduced number of RhIG injections (1.427 vs. 1.795) than usual care. It was more expensive (C$154/US$194, 95% Credible Interval [CrI]: C$139/US$175-C$169/US$213) and had little impact on QALYs (0.0007, 95%CrI: -0.01-0.01). These results were sensitive to the test cost (threshold achieved at C$88/US$111), and inclusion of paternal screening. Fetal genotyping in alloimmunized pregnancies (at test cost of C$328/US$413) was less expensive (-C$6280/US$7903, 95% CrI: -C$6325/US$7959 to -C$6229/US$7838) and more effective (0.19 QALYs, 95% CrI 0.17-0.20) than usual care. These cost savings remained robust in sensitivity analyses., Discussion: Noninvasive fetal RhD genotyping saves resources and represents good value for the management of alloimmunized pregnancies. If the cost of genotyping is substantially decreased, the targeted intervention can become a viable option for nonalloimmunized pregnancies., (© 2022 AABB.)

Introduction: In September 2016, a nationwide targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis program was implemented in Norway. The prophylaxis (anti-D immunoglobulin) aims to cover the whole third trimester and is administered in gestational week 28 to RhD-negative women who carry RhD-positive fetuses. However, in many women, antibody screening at delivery does not detect anti-D immunoglobulin. The goal of this study was to investigate the presumable role of dose and timing of antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin administration in non-detectable prophylaxis at the time of delivery., Material and Methods: In this retrospective observational study, RhD-negative pregnant women who gave birth at Oslo University Hospital and Akershus University Hospital between January 2017 and December 2019 were analyzed. Women who received antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin (1500 IU at Oslo University Hospital and 1250 IU at Akershus University Hospital) when fetal RHD genotyping at gestational week 24 predicted an RhD-positive fetus were included if an antibody screen at delivery was available. Data from the blood bank, maternity information systems, and electronic patient records were used., Results: Analysis of the 984 RhD-negative women at the two hospitals revealed that 45.4% had non-detectable anti-D at delivery. A significant difference between the two hospitals was observed: 40.5% at Oslo University Hospital (n = 509) and 50.7% at Akershus University Hospital (n = 475) (p = 0.001). The proportion with non-detectable anti-D increased to 56.0 and 75.3%, respectively (p = 0.008) in the group of women who gave birth 12 weeks after routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. Significantly fewer women had detectable anti-D at delivery when the lower anti-D immunoglobulin dose (1250 IU) was administered antenatally. Multiple logistic regression indicated that the time interval between routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis and delivery, in addition to anti-D dose, were significantly associated with detectable anti-D at delivery (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: We do not know which RhD-negative pregnant women, despite antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, are at risk of RhD alloimmunization, when antibody screening is negative at delivery. Administration of antenatal prophylaxis should probably be moved closer to delivery, since the risk of fetomaternal hemorrhage is higher during the last weeks of the third trimester., (© 2022 The Authors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG).)

Next to A and B antigens, agglutinogen D exhibits the highest immunogenicity. Following the transfusion of D-positive red blood cells (RBCs), almost 80% of D-negative recipients develop anti-D antibodies (Abs). Subsequently, anti-D immunization further promotes the synthesis of Abs towards other blood group antigens in or outside the Rh system. The D antigen is also involved in 95% of cases of hemolytic disease of the newborn. Transfusions, hemotherapy, grafts, and obstetric history (abortions, ectopic pregnancy, births) are all risk factors for Rh isoimmunization. In the case of ABO compatibility between mother and fetus, Rh-positive fetal RBCs that have reached the maternal bloodstream are not destroyed by group agglutinins, and Rh antigenic sites are not hidden by the maternal immune system. But a Rh-negative mother with a homozygous Rh-positive husband will certainly have a Rh-positive fetus. As it has an irreversible evolution, the Rh isoimmunization once installed cannot be influenced in the sense of decreasing the Ab titer, therefore, injectable globulin has no effect. A particular case was that of a newborn with Rh system incompatibility associated with hereditary spherocytosis The clinical balance at birth reflects the severe jaundice of the female newborn of 3140 g, gestational age 38∕39 weeks, extracted by lower-segment transverse Caesarean section, with a double loop nuchal cord, Apgar score 8. Because the jaundice was severe and atypical (face and upper chest), we considered the possibility of coexistence of hemolytic disease of the newborn by Rh blood group incompatibility associated with hereditary spherocytosis, as it turned out to be true and mentioned. Changes in genes encoding proteins in the structure of the RBC membrane have amplified hemolysis induced by maternal-fetal isoimmunization in the Rh system. Massive hemolysis accentuated by congenital spherocytosis, confirmed later, imposed blood transfusion and dynamic monitoring.

Objective: Noninvasive fetal rhesus D (RhD) blood group genotyping may prevent unnecessary use of anti-D immunoglobulin (RhIG) in non-alloimmunized RhD-negative pregnancies and can guide management of alloimmunized pregnancies. We conducted a systematic review of the economic literature to determine the cost-effectiveness of this intervention over usual care., Data Sources: Systematic literature searches of bibliographic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane) until February 26, 2019, and auto-alerts until October 30, 2020, and of grey literature sources were performed to retrieve all English-language studies., Study Selection: We included studies done in serologically confirmed non-alloimmunized or alloimmunized RhD-negative pregnancies, comparing costs and effectiveness of the intervention versus usual care., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers extracted data from the eligible studies and assessed their methodological quality (risk of bias) using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) and Drummond tools. We narratively synthesized findings. Our review included 8 economic studies that evaluated non-invasive fetal RhD genotyping followed by targeted RhIG prophylaxis in non-alloimmunized pregnancies. Five studies further considered a subsequent alloimmunized pregnancy. The cost-effectiveness of the intervention versus usual care (e.g., universal RhIG or prophylaxis conditional on results of paternal testing) for non-alloiummunized pregnancies was inconsistent. Two studies indicated greater benefits and lower costs for the intervention, and another 2 suggested a trade-off. In 4 studies, the intervention was less effective and costlier than alternatives. Three studies were determined to be of high quality by both tools. Two of these studies favoured the intervention, and one assessed benefits in quality-adjusted life-years. No study clearly examined the cost-effectiveness of repetitive use of fetal genotyping in multiple non-alloimmunized or alloimmunized pregnancies. The cost of genotyping was the most influential parameter., Conclusion: The cost-effectiveness of noninvasive fetal RhD genotyping for non-alloimmunized pregnancies varies between studies. Potential savings from targeted management of alloimmunized pregnancies requires further research., (Copyright © 2021 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis was introduced to the national prophylaxis program in Finland in late 2013. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, time-points, and risk factors for Rhesus D immunization after the implementation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, in all women in Finland with antenatal anti-D antibodies detected in 2014-2017., Material and Methods: In a nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study, the incidence, time-points, and risk factors of anti-D immunizations were analyzed. Information on antenatal screening was obtained from the Finnish Red Cross Blood Service database, and obstetric data from hospital records and the Finnish Medical Birth Register., Results: The study included a total of 228 women (197 with complete data for all pregnancies). After the implementation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, the prevalence of pregnancies with anti-D antibodies decreased from 1.52% in 2014 to 0.88% in 2017, and the corresponding incidence of new immunizations decreased from 0.33% to 0.10%. Time-points for detection of new anti-D antibodies before and after 2014 were the first screening sample at 8-12 weeks of gestation in 52% vs 19%, the second sample at 24-26 weeks in 20% vs 50%, and the third screening at 36 weeks in 28% vs 32%., Conclusions: The incidence of new anti-D immunizations decreased as expected after the implementation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. True failures are rare and they mainly occur when the prophylaxis is not given appropriately, suggesting a need for constant education of healthcare professionals on the subject., (© 2021 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.)

Objectives: To reduce the risk of RhD alloimmunization during the last trimester of pregnancy, a targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis (RAADP) programme was implemented in Norway in 2016. Here, we present and discuss our experience with the nationwide implementation of the programme, and report sample uptake and preliminary data of de novo anti-D in pregnancy., Background: The targeted RAADP was advised by the academic community and evaluated by the health authorities. A National Working Group has conducted the implementation in the transfusion services and contributed to organise the administration of the antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. Fetal RhD type is determined by non-invasive prenatal testing at gestational week 24, and anti-D prophylaxis is administrated at gestational week 28 only to women with RhD positive fetuses., Methods: We describe the implementation process of targeted RAADP in Norway. The sample uptake is calculated by comparing the number of fetal RHD screens with the expected number of samples., Results: The sample uptake shows regional variations: 88%-100% after 3 years. Promising decrease in de novo anti-D detected during pregnancy is observed., Conclusions: Nationwide targeted RAADP is implemented and included in the Norwegian maternity care programme. Compliance to sample uptake should further improve in some regions. A remaining issue to fulfil is the documentation of the accuracy of the fetal RHD-typing at all sites. Post-natal prophylaxis will then be guided by the fetal RHD result. Dedicated registries will ensure data to evaluate the expected reduction in pregnancy-related RhD immunisations, which is the final success criterion of the programme., (© 2021 British Blood Transfusion Society.)

Background: Low-titer group O whole blood (LTO-WB) has recently gained popularity in trauma centers for the acute resuscitation of hemorrhagic shock. However, limited supplies of Rh- product prevent implementation and strain sustainability at many trauma centers. We set out to identify whether Rh+ LTO-WB could be safely substituted for RH- product, regardless of patient's Rh status., Methods: Following Institutional Review Board approval, information on all trauma patients receiving prehospital or emergency department transfusion of uncrossed, emergency release LTO-WB (11/17-10/19) were evaluated. Patients were first divided into those who received Rh- versus Rh+ product, the assessed by Rh of the recipient. Serial hemolysis panels, transfusion reactions, and outcomes were compared., Results: Six hundred thirty-seven consecutive trauma patients received emergency release LTO-WB. Of these, 448 received Rh+ product, while 189 received Rh- LTO-WB. Patients receiving Rh+ product were more likely to be men (81 vs. 70%) and have lower field blood pressure (median 99 vs. 109) and GCS (median 7 vs. 12); all p < 0.05. There were no differences in blood product volume, hemolysis laboratories, transfusion reactions, complications, or survival. We then separated patients by Rh status (577 were Rh+, 70 were Rh-). Rh- patients were older (median age 54 vs. 39), more likely to be women (57 vs. 26%), and more likely to have sustained blunt trauma than their Rh+ counterparts (92 vs. 70%); all p < 0.05. There were no differences in hemolysis laboratories, transfusion reactions, complications, or survival between Rh+ and Rh- patients, regardless of Rh product received., Conclusion: When Rh- whole blood is unavailable or in short supply, Rh+ LTO-WB appears to be a safe alternative for the resuscitation of hemorrhagic shock in both Rh+ and Rh- patients. Use of Rh+ product may help trauma centers incorporate LTO-WB into their hospital and improve sustainability of such programs., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic, Level III., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

In spite of advances in medical science, Rh alloimmunisation remains one of the leading causes of preventable neuro-morbidities and significant neonatal hyperbilirubinemia in lower-middle income countries. Despite availability of effective antenatal preventive strategy (Anti-D), its uptake in antenatal period is low due to ignorance. Further, once diagnosed, there is lack of adequate antenatal follow up in health care facility. Some of these cases even remain undiagnosed in antenatal period only to present as a case of severe hyperbilirubinemia and kernicterus in late neonatal period. Thus, there is an urgent need for creating awareness and educating health care professionals for early detection and timely management in both antenatal and postnatal period. Following two doses of anti-D prophylaxis (one in antenatal period and one in immediate postnatal period) the incidence of Rh alloimmunisation can reduce to <1%. It is recommended to follow all Rh alloimmunised pregnancies antenatally with serial indirect Coombs test titre (till critical titre is reached) followed by serial Doppler velocimetry of middle cerebral artery in a perinatal centre where facility for intrauterine transfusion as well as advanced neonatal care is available. Postnatal management of these infants comprises of confirmation of diagnosis, aggressive phototherapy and in selective cases, double volume exchange transfusion. With appropriate antenatal and postnatal management, the prognosis of Rh alloimmunised pregnancy remains favourable and long term outcome of Rh alloimmunised infants remain comparable with their normal counterparts.

Background: The development of rh immune globulin (RhIG) for the prevention of Rhesus D (RhD) alloimmunization has significantly decreased the incidence of RhD alloimmunization. Despite long-standing prevention, the experiences of RhD negative women with pregnancy is absent in the literature., Aim: The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of RhD negative women with pregnancy., Methods: Utilizing an Interpretive Description approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with RhD negative women about their pregnancies. This study took place within the geographic context of northern British Columbia (BC). The analysis involved a two-cycle approach to identify themes within the data., Findings: Sixteen RhD negative women that live in northern BC participated in this study. The analysis identified that RhD negative women are uninformed and want to be involved in the decision-making process regarding the prevention of RhD alloimmunization. The themes that emerged from the interview data were communication, information-seeking behaviour, out of sight out of mind, choice and trust, and patient advocacy., Discussion: The participants in this study described lacking information regarding the prevention of RhD alloimmunization. They sought information to overcome the gaps in knowledge and a desire to be involved in the decision-making process., Conclusion: RhD negative women want information and to be involved in the decision-making process in the prevention of RhD alloimmunization. Working with RhD negative women to develop decision-aids and/or other educational tools to aid in the decision-making process are warranted., (Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Rhesus D (RhD) negative pregnant women carrying an RhD positive fetus are at risk of developing anti-D during or after pregnancy. Anti-d-immunoglobulin (RhIg), which is mainly produced from special plasma donated in a few countries for the whole world, is able to prevent an anti-D alloimmunization. Through the introduction of ante- and postnatal anti-d-prophylaxis into clinical routine, the frequency of hemolytic disease of fetus and newborn decreased considerably. Postnatal prophylaxis from the beginning in the 1960s has been applied only to women who delivered an RhD positive newborn. Because the fetal RhD status can be determined with high sensitivity and accuracy from the mother's peripheral blood, targeted antenatal anti-d-prophylaxis is becoming a new standard procedure in more and more countries. Phototherapy and exchange transfusion are still the main pillars for the treatment of RhD hemolytic disease of the newborn. The efficacy of IVIg in the management of these neonates is not conclusive and cannot be recommended until a larger randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study is performed., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Existing systematic reviews of Rh immunoprophylaxis include only data from randomized controlled trials, have dated searches, and some do not report on all domains of risk of bias or evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Our objective was to perform an updated review, by including new trials, any comparative observational studies, and assessing the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE framework., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library from 2000 to November 26, 2019. Relevant websites and bibliographies of systematic reviews and guidelines were searched for studies published before 2000. Outcomes of interest were sensitization and adverse events. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane tool and ROBINS-I. The certainty of the evidence was performed using the GRADE framework., Results: Thirteen randomized trials and eight comparative cohort studies were identified, evaluating 12 comparisons. Although there is some evidence of beneficial treatment effects (e.g., at 6-months postpartum, fewer women who received RhIg at delivery compared to no RhIg became sensitized [70 fewer sensitized women per 1,000 (95%CI: 67 to 71 fewer); I2 = 73%]), due to very low certainty of the evidence, the magnitude of the treatment effect may be overestimated. The certainty of the evidence was very low for most outcomes often due to high risk of bias (e.g., randomization method, allocation concealment, selective reporting) and imprecision (i.e., few events and small sample sizes). There is limited evidence on prophylaxis for invasive fetal procedures (e.g. amniocentesis) in the comparative literature, and few studies reported adverse events., Conclusion: Serious risk of bias and low to very low certainty of the evidence is found in existing RCTs and comparative observational studies addressing optimal effectiveness of Rh immunoprophylaxis. Guideline development committees should exercise caution when assessing the strength of the recommendations that inform and influence clinical practice in this area., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Administration of RhD immunoglobulin (Ig) is important for RhD negative women throughout pregnancy and postnatally to prevent alloimmunisation and haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn in subsequent pregnancies., Aims: The aim of this audit was to understand compliance with the Australian guidelines on RhD Ig prophylaxis in pregnancy., Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective audit of RhD negative pregnant women in Victoria, Northern Territory, Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania at maternity services of level 2 or higher care, between July 2017 and June 2018. Medical records were reviewed to identify how many RhD negative women received care compliant with the guidelines covering antibody testing, consent, administration of RhD Ig, and feto-maternal haemorrhage (FMH) quantification., Results and Conclusions: Analysis included 939 RhD negative women from 43 health services. Compliance with postnatal RhD Ig was high (98%); however, other practice was poor. Documented consent was obtained and recorded for 585 women (62%). Only 76% of eligible women received RhD Ig at the appropriate dose and time (28 and 34 weeks gestation). Similarly, management of potentially sensitising events was suboptimal with 78% receiving RhD Ig when recommended by guidelines. The results of our audit indicate a need for practice improvement across all aspects of care for women who need to receive RhD Ig. A major focus should be not just educating clinical staff, but also educating women to understand the importance of RhD Ig and the potential impact on subsequent pregnancies in order to improve guideline adherence and reduce risk., (© 2020 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.)

Background and Objectives: D-negative patients are at risk of developing an alloantibody to D (anti-D) if exposed to D during transfusion. The presence of anti-D can lead to haemolytic transfusion reactions and haemolytic disease of the newborn. Anti-D alloimmunization can also complicate allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) with haemolysis and increased transfusion requirements. The goal of this study was to determine whether cancer centres have transfusion practices intended to prevent anti-D alloimmunization with special attention in patients considered for HSCT., Methods and Materials: To understand transfusion practices regarding D-positive platelets in D-negative patients with large transfusion needs, we surveyed the 28 cancer centres that are members of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network ® (NCCN ® )., Results: Nineteen centres responded (68%). Most centres (79%) avoid transfusing D-positive platelets to RhD-negative patients when possible. Four centres (21%) avoid D-positive platelets only in D-negative women of childbearing age. If a D-negative patient receives a D-positive platelet transfusion, 53% of centres would consider treating with Rh immune globulin (RhIg) to prevent alloimmunization in women of childbearing age. Only one centre also gives RhIg to all D-negative patients who are HSCT candidates including adult men and women of no childbearing age., Conclusion: There is wide variation in platelet transfusion practices for supporting D-negative patients. The majority of centres do not have D-positive platelet transfusion policies focused on preventing anti-D alloimmunization specifically in patients undergoing HSCT. Multicentre, longitudinal studies are needed to understand the clinical implications of anti-D alloimmunization in HSCT patients., (© 2020 International Society of Blood Transfusion.)

Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) provide evidence-based recommendations for Healthcare Providers (HCPs) to utilize when making patient care decisions. Rural providers face challenges in the provision of evidence-based care, including the use of guidelines. The aim of this article is to explore the complexities of providing healthcare in rural areas. This article will focus on a specific aspect of rural maternity care with well-established CPGs, the prevention of Rhesus D factor alloimmunization. An applied health research approach, interpretive description, utilized semistructured interviews with HCPs across the vast geographic region of northern British Columbia. The study found that HCPs are aware of guidelines but face various barriers during implementation. In order to implement guidelines within practice, rural HCPs adapt processes to overcome local barriers. These process adaptations need to be identified and shared across a large health authority with a complex geography and healthcare system to ensure quality of care.

Background: All non-sensitized Rhesus D (RhD)-negative pregnant women in Germany receive antenatal anti-D prophylaxis without knowledge of fetal RhD status. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal plasma could avoid unnecessary anti-D administration. In this paper, we systematically reviewed the evidence on the benefit of NIPT for fetal RhD status in RhD-negative pregnant women., Methods: We systematically searched several bibliographic databases, trial registries, and other sources (up to October 2019) for controlled intervention studies investigating NIPT for fetal RhD versus conventional anti-D prophylaxis. The focus was on the impact on fetal and maternal morbidity. We primarily considered direct evidence (from randomized controlled trials) or if unavailable, linked evidence (from diagnostic accuracy studies and from controlled intervention studies investigating the administration or withholding of anti-D prophylaxis). The results of diagnostic accuracy studies were pooled in bivariate meta-analyses., Results: Neither direct evidence nor sufficient data for linked evidence were identified. Meta-analysis of data from about 60,000 participants showed high sensitivity (99.9%; 95% CI [99.5%; 100%] and specificity (99.2%; 95% CI [98.5%; 99.5%])., Conclusions: NIPT for fetal RhD status is equivalent to conventional serologic testing using the newborn's blood. Studies investigating patient-relevant outcomes are still lacking.

Background: Rhesus D (RhD) incompatibility is still the most important cause of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence, causes, and consequences of anti-D alloimmunizations in pregnancy in Iceland, prior to implementation of targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis (RAADP) in 2018., Study Design and Methods: This was a nation-wide cohort study of 130 pregnancies affected by RhD alloimmunization in Iceland in the period from 1996 through 2015. Data were collected from transfusion medicine databases, medical records, and the Icelandic Medical Birth Register., Results: Of 130 RhD alloimmunizations, 80 cases (61.5%) represented new RhD immunization in the current pregnancy. Sensitization was discovered in the third trimester in 41 (51.3%) and occurred in the first pregnancy in 14 cases (17.5%). The most likely causative immunization event was the index pregnancy for 45 (56.25%), a previous pregnancy/birth for 26 (32.5%), abortion for 3 (3.75%), and unknown for 6 women (7.5%). Higher anti-D titers were associated with shorter gestational length, cesarean sections, positive direct antiglobulin test (DAT), and severe HDFN. Intrauterine transfusion (IUT) was performed in five pregnancies (3.8%), and 35 of 132 (26.5%) live-born neonates received treatment for HDFN; 32 received phototherapy (24.2%), 13 exchange transfusion (9.8%), and seven simple blood transfusion (5.3%)., Conclusion: In about half of cases, RhD alloimmunization was caused by the index pregnancy and discovered in the third trimester. Thus, the newly implemented RAADP protocol should be effective in reducing the incidence of RhD immunization in Iceland in the future., (© 2019 AABB.)

Severe morbidity and death because of Rh disease have only been reduced by approximately 50% globally during the last 50 years, despite the advent of anti-Rh(D) immunoglobin prophylaxis, which has resulted in >160,000 perinatal deaths and 100,000 disabilities annually. This apparent failure to take appropriate preventive measures is of great concern. Thus, there is a great need to do much better. We wish to draw attention to the unnecessary continuing burden of Rh disease, to discuss some of the reasons for this failure, and to provide suggestions for a better way forward., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the correlation between fetal blood vessel Doppler measurements and fetal anemia among Rhesus isoimmunized pregnancies after two intrauterine transfusions as a potential guide to therapy., Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted among 30 women who attended a single hospital in India between April 2, 2015 and October 30, 2016. The participants underwent a third intrauterine transfusion based on a middle cerebral artery (MCA) peak systolic velocity (PSV) of greater than 1.50 multiples of the median (MoM). Cordocentesis was performed before the third intrauterine transfusion and hematocrit values correlated with the blood vessel Doppler measurements., Results: The MCA PSV MoM and fetal hematocrit MoM had a correlation coefficient of -0.43 (95% confidence interval -0.68 to 0.08; P=0.017). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 68%, 57%, 83%, and 33%, respectively. The descending aorta PSV δ and fetal hematocrit δ had a correlation coefficient of -0.54 (95% confidence interval -0.75 to -0.23; P=0.001). An area under the curve of 0.80 (standard error 0.085; P=0.017) had 87% sensitivity and 57% specificity for diagnosing fetal anemia., Conclusion: The descending aorta PSV could offer a useful diagnostic adjunct to MCA PSV after two intrauterine transfusions., (© 2019 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.)

Objective: To describe fetomaternal hemorrhage (FMH) during second-trimester dilation and evacuation (D&E) to evaluate if Rhesus-immune globulin (RhIG) 100 mcg (used in the United Kingdom) and 300 mcg (used in the United States) provide adequate prophylaxis., Study Design: We conducted an exploratory prospective descriptive study of women undergoing D&E between 15 weeks 0 days and 23 weeks 6 days of gestation. Enrolled participants had Kleihauer-Betke testing on specimens obtained before and after D&E. We assessed the main outcome measures of FMH in mL suggesting need for more than 100 mcg and 300 mcg RhIG (FMH of 10 mL and 30 mL fetal whole blood, respectively) and association of postprocedure FMH with demographic characteristics and procedure-related variables., Results: The 300 participants had a mean gestational age of 19 weeks 6 days±2 weeks 2 days. The median preprocedure FMH was 0 mL (range 0-50 mL) with 2 (0.67%) women exceeding 10 mL (19 mL and 50 mL). The median postprocedure FMH was 1 mL (range 0-60 mL). Almost all participants had postprocedure FMH <10 mL (n=295, 98.3%) and <30 mL (n=298, 99.3%). All participants under 18 weeks had FMH <10 mL. We found no demographic or procedure-related factors to be predictive of FMH quantity., Conclusions: FMH occurring with routine second-trimester D&E procedures is minimal. Adequate prophylaxis with RhIG 100 mcg and 300 mcg occurred in >98% of women and in all cases <18 weeks of gestation. This study is the first step to potentially reducing the dose and costs of RhIG administration with D&E., Implications: This study is a first step in quantifying fetomaternal hemorrhage with routine dilation and evacuation procedures; larger trials are needed, especially to understand why some women have recognizable hemorrhage preprocedure. If dosing requirements are too high with current guidelines, lower doses will result in resource and cost savings., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and Objectives: Fetal RHD genotyping of cell-free fetal DNA from RhD-negative pregnant women can be used to guide targeted antenatal and postnatal anti-D prophylaxis for the prevention of RhD immunization. To assure the quality of clinical testing, we conducted an external quality assessment workshop with the participation of 28 laboratories., Materials and Methods: Aliquots of pooled maternal plasma were sent to each laboratory. One sample was positive, and the second sample was negative for fetal RHD, verified by pre-workshop testing using quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) analysis of RHD exons 4, 5, 7 and 10. Plasma samples were shipped at room temperature. A reporting scheme was supplied for data collection, including questions regarding the methodological setup, results and clinical recommendations. Different methodological approaches were used, all employing qPCR with a total of eight different combinations of RHD exon targets. The samples were tested blindly., Results: Fetal RHD genotyping was performed with no false-negative and no false-positive results. One inconclusive result was reported for the RHD-positive sample, and four inconclusive results were reported for the RHD-negative sample. All clinical conclusions were satisfactory., Conclusion: This external quality assessment workshop demonstrates that despite the different approaches taken to perform the clinical assays, fetal RHD genotyping is a reliable laboratory assay to guide targeted use of Rh prophylaxis in a clinical setting., (© 2019 International Society of Blood Transfusion.)

Objective: To compare the efficacy and costs of three different strategies of antenatal rhesus immune globulin (RhIG) administration in a US population., Methods: A decision tree analysis was undertaken for universal antenatal RhIG administration based on RhD serologic paternity testing, universal administration without paternity, and selective antenatal RhIG administration using cell free fetal DNA (cfDNA) for RHD fetal typing. Rates of alloimmunization were calculated. Charges were determined for laboratory testing and obstetrical and neonatal treatments for the first pregnancy and cases of alloimmunization in the following pregnancy., Results: The largest number of new RhD alloimmunization cases resulted from a strategy of universal RhIG that included paternity. Fewer cases resulted from a selective strategy; the least number of cases were associated with a universal approach that discounted paternity. When the costs of first pregnancies and alloimmunized second pregnancies were combined, a universal strategy that excludes paternity had the least costs followed by a selective strategy followed by a universal strategy that included paternity., Conclusion: The use of cfDNA to determine the selective use of antenatal RhIG would not be cost-effective in the United States. Universal antenatal RhIG without paternity is more effective in preventing new cases of alloimmunization than the current ACOG guideline., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Chronic red blood cell transfusion is the first-line treatment for severe forms of thalassaemia. This therapy is, however, hampered by a number of adverse effects, including red blood cell alloimmunisation. The aim of this systematic review was to collect the current literature data on erythrocyte alloimmunisation., Materials and Methods: We performed a systematic search of the literature which identified 41 cohort studies involving 9,256 patients., Results: The prevalence of erythrocyte alloimmunisation was 11.4% (95% CI: 9.3-13.9%) with a higher rate of alloimmunisation against antigens of the Rh (52.4%) and Kell (25.6%) systems. Overall, alloantibodies against antigens belonging to the Rh and Kell systems accounted for 78% of the cases. A higher prevalence of red blood cell alloimmunisation was found in patients with thalassaemia intermedia compared to that among patients with thalassaemia major (15.5 vs 12.8%)., Discussion: Matching transfusion-dependent thalassaemia patients and red blood cell units for Rh and Kell antigens should be able to reduce the risk of red blood cell alloimmunisation by about 80%.

Background: The determination of foetal Rhesus D (RHD) status allows appropriate use of IgRh prophylaxis by restricting its use to cases of RHD feto-maternal incompatibilities. There is a degree of uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of foetal RHD determination, yet screening programs are being introduced into clinical practice in many countries. This paper evaluates the impact of non-invasive foetal Rhesus D (RHD) status determination on the costs of managing RHD-negative pregnant women and on the appropriate use of anti-D prophylaxis in a large sample of RHD-negative pregnant women using individual prospectively collected clinical and economic data., Methods: A prospective two-armed trial of RHD negative pregnant women was performed in 11 French Obstetric Departments. Non-invasive foetal RHD genotyping was performed before 26 weeks' gestation in the experimental arm whereas the control arm participants received usual care. The costs associated with patient management in relation to their RHD negative status (biological tests, anti-D prophylaxis and visits) were calculated from inclusion to the end of the postpartum period. The costs of hospital admissions during pregnancy and delivery were also determined., Results: A total of 949 patients were included by 11 centres between 2009 and 2012, and 850 completed follow-up, including medical and biological monitoring. Patients were separated into two groups: the genotyping group (n=515) and the control group (n=335). The cost of the genotyping was estimated at 140 euros per test. The total mean cost per patient was estimated at €3,259 (SD ± 1,120) and €3,004 (SD ± 1,004) in the genotyping and control groups respectively. The cost of delivery represented three quarters of the total cost in both groups. The performance of managing appropriately RHD negative anti-D prophylaxis was 88% in the genotyping group, versus 65% in the control group. Using the costs related to RHD status (biological tests, anti-D immunoglobulin injections and visits) the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated to be €578 for each percentage gain in women receiving appropriate management., Conclusion: Early knowledge of the RHD status of the foetus using non-invasive foetal RHD genotyping significantly improved the management of RHD negative pregnancies with a small increase in cost., Trial Registration: Clinical trials registry- NCT00832962 -13 January 2009 - retrospectively registered.

Early pregnancy loss, or loss of an intrauterine pregnancy within the first trimester, is encountered commonly in clinical practice. Obstetricians and gynecologists should understand the use of various diagnostic tools to differentiate between viable and nonviable pregnancies and offer the full range of therapeutic options to patients, including expectant, medical, and surgical management. The purpose of this Practice Bulletin is to review diagnostic approaches and describe options for the management of early pregnancy loss.

Early pregnancy loss, or loss of an intrauterine pregnancy within the first trimester, is encountered commonly in clinical practice. Obstetricians and gynecologists should understand the use of various diagnostic tools to differentiate between viable and nonviable pregnancies and offer the full range of therapeutic options to patients, including expectant, medical, and surgical management. The purpose of this Practice Bulletin is to review diagnostic approaches and describe options for the management of early pregnancy loss.