True Blood?

LimaOscarSierraTango

Infantry
Verified Military
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
1,231
http://www.northfieldlabs.com/polyheme.html

Wiki states:
PolyHeme is a temporary oxygen-carrying blood substitute made from human hemoglobin that is currently in development for emergency treatment of trauma situations where large volumes of blood are lost, with emphasis on situations where fresh blood for transfusion is not readily available. It originally began as a military project following the Vietnam war and is currently being developed by Northfield Laboratories, Inc.

Apparently Phase III trials are complete. With a 12-month shelf life and no refrigeration needed, it seems like a great product. I wonder what the maximum recommended temperature is on this though...

Anyone in this group have any further info on this?
 

Muppet

Paratrooper
Verified Military
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
11,374
Location
Wrong side of heaven, righteous side of hell
Yea, we (EMS) tested this during trauma situations. It proved to be useless / apparentlly it causes allergic reactions and edema resulting in brain swelling. It seams like a good idea but it was abandoned in our county.

F.M.
 

LimaOscarSierraTango

Infantry
Verified Military
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
1,231
That's good to know!

If I remember correctly, the only issues I had read about were people going into cardiac arrest. Thanks for the info. It will be nice if they get something like this squared away!
 
8

8'Duece

Guest
Yea, we (EMS) tested this during trauma situations. It proved to be useless / apparentlly it causes allergic reactions and edema resulting in brain swelling. It seams like a good idea but it was abandoned in our county.

F.M.

Based on this comment then I would say that there is a Homeostatic positive or negative imbalance with the use of this PolyHeme.

Just a guess with enuf knowledge to get me into trouble. :D
 

DoctorDoom

Size: Extra Asian
Verified Military
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Messages
421
Increased rates of myocardial infarction and increased rate of MORTALITY in the first Phase III trial; been in development for eleven years.

Don't hold your breath fellas.
 

x SF med

the Troll
Verified SOF
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,841
Location
Not far from the south of Canada, 'Murica!
SSMP
SOF Mentor
Increased rates of myocardial infarction and increased rate of MORTALITY in the first Phase III trial; been in development for eleven years.

Don't hold your breath fellas.

Isn't there a problem with lysing the platelets and the thrombocytic reaction causing essentially a sytemic 'clot'? or was that an earlier version of a similar product.
 

DoctorDoom

Size: Extra Asian
Verified Military
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Messages
421
I don't think that was the problem. It did not cause platelet destruction or DIC, but rather specifically myocardial infarction, based on ECG changes and troponin elevation. And renal damage was comparable and not statistically significant. It's not clear that MSOF due to DIC was an issue at all. My memory may be faulty, but I do have the original Journal of the American College of Surgeons article somewhere, and I think the platelet lysis and DIC may have been the problem with Hemopure, another product.
 

Muppet

Paratrooper
Verified Military
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
11,374
Location
Wrong side of heaven, righteous side of hell
I don't think that was the problem. It did not cause platelet destruction or DIC, but rather specifically myocardial infarction, based on ECG changes and troponin elevation. And renal damage was comparable and not statistically significant. It's not clear that MSOF due to DIC was an issue at all. My memory may be faulty, but I do have the original Journal of the American College of Surgeons article somewhere, and I think the platelet lysis and DIC may have been the problem with Hemopure, another product.

Thats right, Hemopure. I think that what caused the clotting issues. I was mixed up. Thanks for the info doc!

F.M.
 

LimaOscarSierraTango

Infantry
Verified Military
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
1,231
Lets see how this one pans out.

More troops than ever are surviving their battlefield injuries, often overloading the military’s health care system. Massive blood shortages continue to plague military trauma care, and the problem is complicated by the remote, inaccessible locations of today’s war zones.

In 2008, Darpa, the Pentagon’s blue-sky research arm, launched the Blood Pharming program, with the goal of manufacturing mega doses of universal-donor red blood units (O-negative) using a compact, self-contained system. “Pharming” is the process of genetically engineering animals or plants to generate mass quantities of medically useful substances, like hormones or antibodies. In this case, Darpa wants a synthetic platform that’s engineered to cultivate blood cells.

Now Arteriocyte, the biotech firm that got $1.95 million for the project, has sent off an initial shipment of their pharmed blood product to the Food and Drug Administration. It hopes to pass muster with agency’s safety regulators.

The blood was produced using hematopoietic cells, derived from embryonic cord-blood units. Currently, it takes Arteriocyte scientists three days to turn a single umbilical cord unit into 20 units of RBC-packed blood. The average soldier needs six units during trauma treatment.

“We’re basically mimicking bone marrow in a lab environment,” company CEO Don Brown tells Danger Room. “Our model works, but we need to extrapolate our production abilities to make scale.”

And while Darpa’s largely after an endless stream of war-zone blood, Brown, whose company uses technology created at Johns Hopkins, thinks pharmed blood would have several advantages over relying on the real stuff.

Because most blood used in military operations is donated on U.S ground, it’s usually three weeks old by the time it hits the front lines. The shelf-life of donated blood is still disputed. The Red Cross tosses RBC units after 42 days, but some medical experts think that fresh blood “expires” after 28 days, and cite increased risk of infection and organ failure once blood is older than two weeks.

“Until now, the military’s strategy has mainly been contained to basically using stale blood,” Brown said. “And they’ll set up mobile blood banks in a war zone, but even every troop rolling up their sleeve might not be enough when you’ve got a crisis with dozens or more injuries.”

And because the method can get so much blood from a single cord unit, it’d also minimize risks associated with multiple-donation transfusions, which are common when a patient needs several units.

But while Arteriocyte think they’ve mastered the formula for pharmed blood, the company’s got a ways to go to make it financially viable. A single unit of pharmed blood currently runs them $5,000.

Still, given the price tag of transporting and storing donated blood, Darpa’s betting that a unit of pharmed blood will make financial sense once it costs less than $1,000.

Human trials aren’t likely until 2013, but the Pentagon could invoke “emergency protocol” to snag the blood sooner — Brown predicts military use within five years.

SOURCE
 
Top