Improvement of plateletpheresis via technical modification on the MCS+

BACKGROUND

With the advantage of easy operation and high reliability, Haemonetics multicomponent collection system (MCS+) is widely used as a blood cell separator in clinical application.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of technical parameter modification as utilised on the MCS+ to improve the quality of platelet yielded as well as donor comfort.

METHODS

After informed consent, a total of 118 donors, well matched for baseline parameters, were included in the study from December 2012 to April 2013. Sixty-one donors underwent single-dose plateletpheresis (SDP), and the other 57 donors underwent double-dose plateletpheresis (DDP) before and after technical modification on the MCS+, respectively, according to the manufacturer's instructions. The procedures were evaluated, focusing on whole blood processed (WBP), processing time (PT) and number of cycles were measured, as well as the quality of products.

RESULTS

No severe adverse reaction was found during donation. WBP, PT and number of cycles after modification were all reduced significantly in both SDP and DDP groups (P < 0·01). In addition, 80·51 % (95 in 118) of the total post-modification products were qualified, presenting with high quality. Besides, the comfort of donors was also improved probably because of the reduced PT.

CONCLUSION

Adjustment of the relevant technical parameters on MCS+ could produce a beneficial effect on the procedure measures and ensure a high-quality platelet production.

Prospective evaluation of double RBC collection using three different apheresis systems

BACKGROUND

Automated component collection systems offer the possibility of increasing blood supply and improving transfusion safety.

DESIGN

30 blood donors were randomly assigned to double RBC collection with either the Baxter Alyx (AX), the Haemonetics MCS Plus (MCS+), or the Gambro Trima Accel (TA). Procedures were prospectively evaluated focussing on yield, time, efficiency, citrate donor load, and in vitro quality.

RESULTS

All units showed sufficient in vitro quality throughout 42 days of storage and complied with international requirements. Donor reactions were limited to mild citrate reactions. AX was the fastest and most efficient system* * (* *p approximately 0.001) attaining the highest yield* * from similar amounts of whole blood. The drawbacks were a higher RBC loss* (*p < 0.05) and accelerated citrate infusion* *. Due to lower collection rates* * * (* * *p < 0.001), MCS+ was slower than TA* * * but compensated with lower citrate load * * *.

CONCLUSION

Double RBC apheresis was performed safely and efficiently with all three instruments. AX had advantages for most parameters evaluated.

Prospective comparison of high-dose plateletpheresis with the latest apheresis systems on the same donors

BACKGROUND

To improve productivity of automated platelet (PLT) collection, the industry has introduced new instruments or modifications to existing equipment.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

With the same 8 donors for double (DDC) and triple-dose PLT collection (TDC), the Baxter Amicus (AM), the Haemonetics MCS Plus (MCS+), and the Gambro Trima Accel (TA) were evaluated focusing on yield, duration, and citrate donor load. Target endpoints were set at 5.5 x 10(11) to 6.0 x 10(11) PLTs (DDC) and 7.5 x 10(11) to 8.0 x 10(11) PLTs (TDC) in up to 100 and 120 minutes' donation time, respectively.

RESULTS

TA was the most efficient system (74.5 +/- 3.9%) with significant differences from AM (71.1 +/- 3.9%; p = 0.028) and MCS+ (64.0 +/- 7.7%; p = 0.002). TA had advantages over AM for collection rate (10.9 x 10(9) +/- 2.2 x 10(9) vs. 10.1 x 10(9) +/- 1.5 x 10(9) PLTs/min; p = 0.382), whole blood processed (3928 +/- 611 mL vs. 4219 +/- 727 mL; p = 0.382), and time to obtain an established standard dose (TSD 2.5(EU), 30.2 +/- 5.6 vs. 37.7 +/- 5.5 min; TSD 3.5(US), 42.2 +/- 7.8 min vs. 52.7 +/- 7.7 min; p = 0.015), whereas AM was slightly superior in PLT yield (2.81 x 10(11) +/- 0.21 x 10(11) vs. 2.76 x 10(11) +/- 0.31 x 10(11)/unit; p = 0.645). Owing to the lowest draw (42.3 +/- 3.2 mL/min; p < 0.001) and collection rates (6.0 x 10(11) +/- 1.5 x 10(11)/min; p = 0.021), MCS+ was the slowest significantly (p < 0.001) but compensated with fewer citrate reactions owing to lower citrate infusion rates (0.78 +/- 0.11 mL/min/L; p = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

High-dose plateletpheresis was performed efficiently and safely with all three instruments. AM had advantages in PLT yield, and MCS+, in donor comfort. TA was the fastest in obtaining an established standard dose and, because of this advantage, the machine with the highest practical impact in routine use.

Evaluation of concurrent collection of in-line filtered platelets and packed red blood cells by multicomponent apheresis with three last-generation apparatuses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Multicomponent apheresis enables the collection and procession of different blood products in a single donation. Different apparatuses vary in terms of principle and efficiency. Knowledge of them is essential to analyse cost effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 30 donors, well matched for baseline parameters, were randomly assigned to the concurrent collection of red blood cells (RBCs) and platelets (PLTs) with the Baxter Amicus (AM), the Haemonetics MCS plus (MCS+), and the Gambro Trima Accel (TA). The procedures were prospectively evaluated, focusing on yield, time, efficiency, citrate donor load and in vitro quality.

RESULTS

PLT yield (x 10(11)/unit; mean +/- standard deviation) was 3.09 +/- 0.34 (AM), 2.53 +/- 0.35 (MCS+), 2.51 +/- 0.32 (TA). Absolute RBC mass (ml/unit; mean +/- standard deviation) was 177.4 +/- 2.7 (AM), 161.5 +/- 0.7 (MCS+), and 163.7 +/- 5.4 (TA). The programmed RBC collection target of 160-180 ml was reached by all instruments, whereas the programmed PLT yield of 3.0 x 10(11) was met satisfactorily by AM only. All units contained < 1 x 10(6) WBCs. In vitro RBC quality was equivalent among the systems. No significant differences were noted with collection efficiency, processed whole blood or citrate donor load. Owing to high collection and draw rates, the TA was the fastest of all the systems. The MCS+ had the longest donation/needle time and the highest PLT activation, but compensated with significantly lower draw and citrate infusion rates. The overall processing time was longest with the AM, as a result of manual procedures from donor disconnection to the final products.

CONCLUSIONS

Multicomponent apheresis was performed safely and efficiently with all three instruments. There was no 'magic apparatus' as each system combined advantages and pitfalls for the diverse parameters evaluated.

Hyperconcentrated platelets stored in additive solution: aspects on productivity and in vitro quality

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

New platelet (PLT) additive solutions (PASs) allow a plasma carryover of < 30% in PLT concentrates. This implicates the need to collect apheresis PLT concentrates at very high PLT concentrations: so-called dry PLTs (DPs). We used the TRIMA, with software version 4 (TRIMA V4), to collect such DPs and investigated the in vitro quality of these PLTs when stored in the new modified PAS-III (PAS-IIIM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

TRIMA V4 was programmed to collect 6.0 x 10(11) PLTs at a concentration of 5000 x 10(3) PLTs/microl. Two DPs were pooled, split into four equal parts and diluted to obtain secondary pools (SPs) consisting of 70% PAS-III/30% plasma, 70% PAS-IIIM/30% plasma, 80% PAS-IIIM/20% plasma or 100% plasma. In vitro testing was performed on days 0, 1, 5 and 7. Collection efficiency (CE), collection rate (CR) and PLT yield were calculated for each donation.

RESULTS

Thirty-two runs with TRIMA V4 were performed, collecting 6.58 +/- 0.74 x 10(11) PLTs at a concentration of 4255 +/- 914 x 10(3)/microl in 99 +/- 19.9 min, resulting in a CE of 65.3 +/- 8.2% and a CR of 6.92 +/- 1.6 x 10(9) PLTs/min. On day 0, 34-37% of the PLTs in the units prepared for storage were already activated. PLTs stored in 70% or 80% PAS-IIIM showed superior in vitro quality compared to PLTs stored in PAS-III.

CONCLUSIONS

TRIMA V4 is a suitable device for the collection of DPs. Nevertheless, improvements are desirable to further increase the ability to concentrate PLTs at very high levels. The storage of apheresis-derived PLTs in PAS III-M is a very promising approach, even at a plasma carryover of < 30%.

First comparison of productivity and citrate donor load between the Trima version 4 (dual-stage filler) and the Trima Accel (single-stage filler) in the same donors

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Aside from new software the blood cell separator TRIMA (GambroBCT) also received a newly designed separation chamber offering a novel single stage separation technology, called Trima Accel. We evaluated this new system focusing on productivity and donor comfort by comparing it to the previous version (Trima version 4) in collecting single-donor platelet concentrates (SD-PCs) and plasma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Each of 20 donors underwent platelet apheresis using both devices. We compared the collection efficiency (CE), the collections rate (CR), the volume of the collected plasma and the residual leukocytes. Furthermore we compared donor comfort in terms of duration of the donation, flow of citrate back to the donor and platelet and white blood cell (WBC) loss.

RESULTS

While the number of collected platelets and the platelet concentration did not differ significantly between both techniques the time of the procedure was reduced by 15.6% with Trima Accel. This results in an increase of the CR and CE of 25% and 15% respectively when using Trima Accel. Log normal probability plotting of WBC counts showed that both techniques complied with the European and the US leukoreduction guidelines. The mean flow of ACDA to the donor per minute and per litre blood volume was also reduced by 20%.

CONCLUSION

These data show that the Trima Accel represents a further improvement in apheresis platelet production with a better productivity and donor comfort, especially regarding the mean flow of ACDA to the donor.

A comparison of PLT collections from two apheresis devices

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare two apheresis devices (COBE Trima and COBE Spectra, Gambro BCT).

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The study compares 103 Trima procedures with 61 Spectra procedures. The comparison of single-donor PLTs (SDPs) separation parameters and anticoagulant infusion to the donors were the primary targets. Yield and residual amounts of WBCs of SDPs were secondary targets. Residual amounts of WBCs were measured with the Nageotte method.

RESULTS

Trima and Spectra groups were comparable before apheresis. Two procedures were terminated before completion in the Trima group owing to vein damage. Trima infused more anticoagulant--352 +/- 104 mL versus 297 +/- 75 mL (p < 0.01)--and was quicker than Spectra. The time to obtain 3.5 x 10(11) was (median) 55.8 minutes for the Trima machine and 80.3 minutes for Spectra machine (p < 0.001). Regarding leukoreduction, all the SDPs had fewer than 1 x 10(6) WBCs per unit except for one in product obtained by the Trima machine.

CONCLUSIONS

The Trima machine is faster and more efficient than the Spectra machine, and both machines allow standard leukoreduced SDPs to be obtained. Although donors receive a higher anticoagulant infusion with the Trima machine, their tolerance is acceptable.

Automated collection of blood components: their storage and transfusion

The performance of an automated device, the Gambro TRIMA, was evaluated for component production, and an in vivo assessment of the platelets was carried out. Red cell concentrates (RCCs), platelets and plasma were collected and stored according to standard blood bank procedures and evaluated for quality by in vitro measurements. Additionally, single-donor platelets (n=10) were transfused to thrombocytopenic patients after 5 days of storage. Platelet counts were measured after 1 h and the corrected count increment (CCI) was calculated. No significant changes were seen before or after procedure in donor haemoglobin, haematocrit, coagulation factors or platelet count. Return-line samples showed no increase in the level of plasma haemoglobin. Plasma haemoglobin and potassium increased following RBC storage, but there was no change in the red cell number. Platelet aggregation decreased from 52 to 11% (adenosine diphosphate) and the Kunicki morphology score dropped from 379 to 174. Little change was seen in the hypotonic shock response (69-63%) or in the percentage of CD62 expression (4.8-19.8) over time. The CCI averaged 28+/-26 x 10(3) microL(-1) in 10 patients 1 h after transfusion. The TRIMA machine collects RCCs, platelets and plasma in a variety of combinations in one session. For autologous collection, two units of RCC plus platelets can be collected at one time, reducing administrative and testing costs. The platelets have good in vivo recovery, as shown by the CCI values. An added advantage is that the TRIMA machine can be used in hospitals to generate components in times of shortage without the need for a component's laboratory.