Abstract: Objective Through comparative analysis of the domestic and international Haemovigilance (HV) report data, to describe the characteristics of each HV system and the current basic status of blood safety, and to explore the development direction of domestic HV work. Methods The international HV data were obtained from the 2020 annual reports of HV systems in the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands, Germany, Japan, Australia and the United States, and the domestic HV reports were obtained from the 2020 HV report issued by the HV Committee of the Chinese Society of Blood Transfusion (CSBT). Several indicator data of the HV reports were analyzed, including adverse donation reactions, adverse transfusion reactions, transfusion-transmitted infections (TTI), transfusion-related fatalities, and transfusion-related pulmonary complications. Results That the incidences of adverse donation reactions ranged from a low of 0.002 2% (UK) to a high of 3.255 0% (Australia); the incidences of adverse transfusion reactions ranged from a low of 0.014 1% (Germany) to a high of 0.358 0% (France); the incidences of transfusion-transmitted infection from a low of 0.72 ppm (UK) to a high of 14.33 ppm (Australia ); the incidences of transfusion-related fatality range from a low of 0.77 per million (Australia) to a high of 11.47 per million (United Kingdom). Conclusion Blood transfusion is highly safe in countries or regions with well-established and effective HV systems. The differences in the monitoring scope and determination criteria of each HV system make the relevant data show great differences. Compared with international HV systems, domestic HV data are not yet comprehensive, and more complex transfusion adverse reactions such as pulmonary complications are underreported.

Key words: Haemovigilance, Adverse donation reactions, Adverse transfusion reactions, Transfusion transmitted infections