4.2 Article

Cold storage of platelets in platelet additive solution: an in vitro comparison of two Food and Drug Administration-approved collection and storage systems

Journal

TRANSFUSION
Volume 58, Issue 7, Pages 1682-1688

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/trf.14603

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. DHP [D6.7_16_C2_I_16_J9_1548]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUNDRefrigeration of platelets (PLTs) in a PLT additive solution (PAS) reduces PLT activation compared to storage in plasma and preserves function for at least 15 days. Currently only two PASs are licensed by the Food and Drug Administration, each for use with only one apheresis platform. In this study, we compared the metabolic, functional, and activation status of PLTs collected on a Trima apheresis collection system and stored refrigerated in Isoplate (ISO) PAS to PLTs collected on an Amicus collection system and stored refrigerated in Intersol (INT) PAS. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODSApheresis PLTs (n=4-7 donors) were collected on a Trima in ISO PAS or on an Amicus in INT PAS. PLTs were stored in a walk-in refrigerator (1-6 degrees C) without agitation for long-term storage. Bags were assayed at Days 1, 5, 10, and 15 of storage. Measurements included PLT counts, pH, aggregation response, rotational thromboelastometry, and activation markers. RESULTSCold-stored Trima-collected PLTs in ISO were slightly more hemostatic than Amicus-collected PLTs in INT and displayed better adhesion to collagen under flow conditions. Amicus-collected PLTs in INT showed increased microaggregate formation on Days 5 and 10 and a significant decrease in PLT count over storage. Trima-collected PLTs in ISO displayed better clot strength than Amicus-collected PLTs in INT. CONCLUSIONCompared to cold-stored Amicus PLTs in INT, Trima PLTs in ISO display superior in vitro function and may be better suited for treatment of bleeding patients. Clinical studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available