4.2 Article

Trends in platelet distributions from 2008 to 2017: a survey of twelve national and regional blood collectors

期刊

VOX SANGUINIS
卷 115, 期 8, 页码 703-711

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/vox.12917

关键词

apheresis; blood collector; buffy coat; distributions; platelets; whole blood-derived platelet

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background This multi-national study evaluated changes in platelet (PLT) unit distributions at 12 national or regional blood collectors over a 10-year period. Methods Data on the total number of PLT distributions, the collection method, that is apheresis vs whole blood-derived (WBD), the PLT unit characteristics and post-collection modifications were obtained from 12 national or regional blood collectors from 2008 through 2017. Individual WBD PLT units were converted to apheresis equivalent units (i.e. a dose of PLTs) by dividing by 4, the typical pool size; WBD units that were pooled before distribution were counted as a single dose. Results Overall at these 12 blood collectors, the total number of PLTs distributed in 2008 was 1 373 200, which rose by 10 center dot 2% to 1 513 803 in 2017. The Japanese Red Cross, which distributes only apheresis PLTs, had a 13 center dot 4% increase in the number of distributions between the years 2008 and 2017, while the other 11 blood collectors combined demonstrated a 6 center dot 8% increase in distributions between these two years. Between the years 2008 and 2017, the changes in the proportion of apheresis, platelet-rich plasma and buffy coat PLT distributions were -29 center dot 9%, -70 center dot 7% and 80 center dot 0%, respectively. Conclusion The number of PLT distributions increased during the 10-year study period despite prophylactic PLT transfusion thresholds having remained fairly consistent over the last decade. Perhaps this increase is in part driven by increased administration of platelets to patients with massive haemorrhage or an increase in stem cell transplantation. The use of buffy coat PLTs is increasing at these collectors.

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