Search

Refractoriness to platelet transfusions is a common clinical problem. The present study was conducted to look into patient characteristics affecting the corrected count increment in a tertiary care referral hospital. A total of 161 aphaeresis platelet units were transfused to 40 patients with varied clinical diagnoses. The mean platelet increment was 17,789/mm(3). Median corrected count increment was 7344 and percentage platelet recovery was 22.82%. Logistic regression analysis revealed significant influence of splenomegaly and anti-platelet drugs on refractoriness. Fever, bleeding, sepsis, disseminated intravascular coagulation and cyclosporine use, though more common in the patients with refractoriness they were not statistically significant., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although automated cell separators have undergone a lot of technical refinements, attention has been focused more on the quality of platelet concentrates than on donor safety. We planned this prospective study to observe the effects of automated plateletpheresis on normal haematological values of healthy donors and to determine whether the haematological alterations had any clinical consequences., Study Design and Methods: The study was conducted on 457 healthy, first-time plateletpheresis donors over a period of 26 months. The plateletpheresis procedures were performed using five different cell separators and various pre- and post-donation haematological values such as haemoglobin concentration (Hb), haematocrit (Hct), platelet and white blood cell (WBC) counts, mean platelet volume and platelet distribution width were measured in all donors., Results: We observed that the Hb, Hct, platelet and WBC counts decreased significantly in the donors (p<0.01) after each procedure, without there being significant changes in mean platelet volume or platelet distribution width. The decreases in Hb and Hct were significantly greater with the CS 3000 and Amicus machines, while the decreases in platelet and WBC counts were significantly greater with the CS 3000 and Fresenius separators., Conclusion: Although a significant drop in complete blood count was observed in all donors, none manifested features of thrombocytopenia or anaemia. Nevertheless, more prospective studies on this aspect are required in order to establish guidelines for donor safety in apheresis and also to help in assessing donor suitability, especially given the present trend of double product apheresis collections.

Different types of cell separators are available nowadays based on either continuous or intermittent flow technology to meet the growing demands for single donor apheresis platelets. This prospective study compares the five machines used in our center with regard to procedure parameters, product quality and adverse effects on the donor. A total of 477 plateletpheresis on various machines were performed on eligible donors over a period of 28 months after taking informed consent. All procedures were performed following the departmental standard operating procedure (SOP) and manufacturer's instructions. All donor and procedure related details were obtained from the procedure register. Statistical analysis was done using the SPSS statistical package (version 12, USA). The median age, BSA and BMI of our plateletpheresis donors were calculated to be 29 years, 1.69 m(2) and 23.1 kg/m(2), respectively. Analyzing the parameters related to donor comfort such as donation time (DT), needle time (NT) and processing time (PT), the MCS machines were not "donor friendly" compared to Amicus and Fresenius. Platelet yield by Amicus was significantly higher as compared to other cell separators (p < 0.05). Plateletpheresis associated citrate toxicity was higher with the Amicus and MCS 3p and vasovagal side-effects was observed least with the CS 3000 machine. Though, quality of apheresis product in terms of yield is comparable with all the machines, there are differences in the systems with regard to donor safety, procedure time and donor retention.

The quality of single donor platelets (SDPs) in terms of yield influences platelet recovery in the recipient. Various donor factors such as pre-donation platelet count and hemoglobin (Hb) concentration affect the platelet yield. We studied the influence of pre-donation donor clinical and laboratory factors such as gender, age, weight of the donor, platelet count and Hb on the platelet yield. A total of 94 plateletpheresis procedures performed on continuous flow cell separator (CS3000, Baxter Healthcare, Round Lake, IL, USA) were evaluated for platelet yield. A relationship between pre-donation donor variables and yield of platelets was studied using the Pearson correlation. The mean platelet yield was 2.8+/-0.73x10(11). While a direct relationship was observed between pre-donation platelet count and yield (r=0.50, p<0.001), no such correlation was noticed with donor Hb concentration (r=-0.10, p>0.005). Similarly, no correlation was observed between gender (r=0.05), age (r=0.11) and weight (r=0.18) of the donor with yield. Optimization of platelet yield, which is influenced by pre-donation platelet count, is an emerging issue in blood transfusion services. Identification of such factors may help in selecting donors to obtain higher platelet yields and consequently better clinical outcome.

The issues of providing quality blood products and maintaining donor safety are primary aims of blood transfusion services. A comprehensive quality system should be in place to fulfill these aims, which can be attained through strict adherence to the established standard operating procedures (SOPs). The Drugs and Cosmetics Act of India, which controls the licensing of blood transfusion services, does not provide clear guidelines regarding plateletpheresis procedure. We, therefore, established our own SOP and operational flow chart for plateletpheresis that can be easily followed by other centers in India. A total of 100 plateletpheresis procedures performed using two cell separators (CS3000 Baxter Healthcare, Round Lake, IL; MCS3p, Haemonetics Corporation, Braintree, MA) were evaluated following our established SOP. The mean platelet yield in CS3000 was 2.9 +/- 0.84 x 10(11) and in MCS3p it was 2.88 +/- 0.75 x 10(11)per unit. However, only 4-7% of SDPs showed WBC levels <5 x 10(6) due to lack of appropriate methods to quantitate residual WBC counts. Six of 100 donors complained of hypocalcemic symptoms. The operational flow chart designed in this study was found to be simple and easy to adapt by blood transfusion services in this country., ((c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

BACKGROUND: The new cell separators make it simple to collect single donor platelets (SDP), although the platelet yield may vary depending on the cell separator used and donor-related clinical and laboratory variables. AIMS: This study aims to study the factors affecting SDP yield and corrected count increment (CCI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was carried out at a tertiary care facility in northern India, over 4 years (May 2017-April 2020), data were retrieved and analyzed. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Categorical variables were presented as proportions, while continuous variables were presented as mean with standard deviation, P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: We found a positive correlation between predonation platelet count and yield (r = 0.243, P = 0.000). No such significant correlation was found with Hb concentration (r = 0.025, P = 0.720), age (r = 0.016, P = 0.820), sex (r = -0.038, P = 0.584), and weight (r = -0.025, P = 0.714). Maximum platelet yield and minimum time were seen with Trima. Only 39.3% (33/84) meet the 24 h CCI. The majority of patients did not meet the desired CCI could be due to the patients' clinical condition. On logistic regression, we found a significant association of 24 h CCI with product yield (odds ratio [OR] = 0.168, P = 0.015) and posttransfusion platelet count (OR = 0.454, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The only donor-related factor that influences yield is predonation platelet count, whereas 24 h CCI may depend on the clinical status of the patient and yield. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Increasing demand of single donor platelet requires blood banks to expand the donor pool. A reassessment of donor deferral criteria for plateletpheresis is required to ensure that this increasing demand is met without compromising on product quality and donor safety. AIMS: (1) To list the various causes of SDP donor deferral. (2) To discuss various approaches to minimize it. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of plateletpheresis donor deferral were collected from records retrospectively over a period of 4 years from January 2017 to December 2020. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All statistical tests were performed using IBM SPSS software for Windows version 20. Categorical variables were presented as proportions, while continuous variables were presented as mean with standard deviation, mean calculated P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Out of the 7478 donors screened for plateletpheresis procedure, 3232 (43.2%) were deferred among which 3089 (42.5%) were male and 142 (63.1%) were female donors. Majority (96.5%) of deferral were temporary. These included low platelet count (47.4%) followed by poor venous access (22.4%) and low hemoglobin (Hb) (7.2%). Among the donors deferred for low Hb, 24.7% (58 out of 234) had Hb between 12 and 12.4 g%. Similarly, among donor deferred for low platelet count, 12% (184 out of 1532) had platelet count between 140 and 149 × 103/μl. CONCLUSION: There is potential for increasing the number of eligible plateletpheresis donors if the present donor selection criteria were relaxed to a minimum Hb of 12 g/dl and minimum platelet count of 140 × 103/μl. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The practice of high-yield or double-dose platelet (DDP) collection through automated apheresis is gradually increasing. Very few studies have examined donor safety issues in DDP collection. The present study highlights the process of DDP donor selection as well as the product quality and donor safety issues on 67 donors. All procedures were performed following the departmental standard operating procedure. We observed a significantly higher mean platelet yield with the Amicus separator than the Fresenius separator (5.4 × 1011 vs. 5.1 × 1011, P = 0.03). The Fresenius separator processed a mean blood volume of 3974 mL and collected a mean platelet amount of 444.9 mL, and these were significantly higher when compared with Amicus ( P < 0.0001). Mean values of procedure-related parameters, such as acid-citrate-phosphate volume, donation time, needle time, processing time and whole blood processed, and donor-related parameters, like citrate toxicity and vasovagal reactions, were significantly higher during DDP than single-dose platelet collection ( P < 0.05). We conclude that obtaining eligible donors for DDP from a shrinking donor population with low normal platelet values is a difficult task. Therefore, each transfusion service should set their own guidelines for DDP collection with the objectives of donor safety and optimal product quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]