4.2 Article

Characterization of plasma protein activity in riboflavin and UV light-treated fresh frozen plasma during 2 years of storage at-30°C

期刊

VOX SANGUINIS
卷 98, 期 2, 页码 108-115

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1423-0410.2009.01238.x

关键词

fresh frozen plasma; Mirasol; pathogen reduction; protein quality; riboflavin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The Mirasol Pathogen Reduction Technology System (PRT) for Plasma (CaridianBCT) is based on a riboflavin and UV light treatment process resulting in pathogen inactivation due to irreversible, photochemically induced damage of nucleic acids. This study evaluated the in vitro protein quality of plasma products treated with riboflavin and UV light following treatment and subsequent storage for up to 104 weeks at -30 degrees C. Materials and Methods Apheresis and whole blood-derived plasma products were combined with riboflavin solution and exposed to ultraviolet light. Treated plasma was then flash frozen, within 8 h of collection, stored at -30 degrees C for up to 104 weeks and analysed at different stages of storage using standard coagulation assays. Results were compared with paired, untreated units stored for the same intervals. Results The average percent protein retention for all time-points in PRT-treated plasma samples after 36, 69, 87 and 104 weeks of storage at -30 degrees C in comparison with controls held under similar conditions were: Total Protein, 101%, Factor VIII, 79%, Fibrinogen, 78%, Factor II, 87%, Factor XII, 86%, Factor X, 84% and Factor IX, 81%. Anticoagulant and inhibitor proteins showed between 90% and 100% retention after 1 year (52 weeks) and 69 weeks of storage. No clinically relevant complement activation was observed in treated and stored samples. Conclusion Riboflavin and UV light-treated plasma demonstrates reductions in several plasma coagulation factors following treatment. This reduction in activity levels is noted immediately after treatment and remains relatively constant during 2 years of storage at -30 degrees C.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据