Background and Objectives Microparticles (MPs) are small phospholipid vesicles of less than 1 μ m, shed in blood flow by various cell types. These MPs are involved in several biological processes and diseases. MPs have also been detected in blood products; however, their role in transfused patients is unknown. The purpose of this study was to characterize those MPs in blood bank conditions. Materials and MethodsQualitative and quantitative experiments using flow cytometry or proteomic techniques were performed on MPs derived from erythrocytes concentrates. In order to count MPs, they were either isolated by various centrifugation procedures or counted directly in erythrocyte concentrates.Results A 20-fold increase after 50 days of storage at 4 ° C was observed (from 3370 ± 1180 MPs/ μ l at day 5 to 64 850 ± 37 800 MPs/ μ l at day 50). Proteomic analysis revealed changes of protein expression comparing MPs to erythrocyte membranes. Finally, the expression of Rh blood group antigens was shown on MPs generated during erythrocyte storage.Conclusions Our work provides evidence that storage of red blood cell is associated with the generation of MPs characterized by particular proteomic profiles. These results contribute to fundamental knowledge of transfused blood products.

Since 1990, several techniques have been developed to photochemically inactivate pathogens in platelet concentrates, potentially leading to safer transfusion therapy. The three most common methods are amotosalen/UVA (INTERCEPT Blood System), riboflavin/UVA-UVB (MIRASOL PRT), and UVC (Theraflex-UV). We review the biology of pathogen inactivation methods, present their efficacy in reducing pathogens, discuss their impact on the functional aspects of treated platelets, and review clinical studies showing the clinical efficiency of the pathogen inactivation methods and their possible toxicity.

AimThe aim of this study was to determine the seroprevalence of Hepatitis E virus (HEV) among blood donors in southwest Switzerland.BackgroundHEV is recognized as a food-borne disease in industrialized countries, transmitted mainly through pork meat. Cases of transmission through blood transfusion have also been reported. Recent studies have revealed seroprevalence rates of 13.5%, 16.6% and 20.6% among blood donors in England, France and Denmark, respectively.MethodsWe analyzed 550 consecutive blood donor samples collected in the region of Lausanne, canton of Vaud, Switzerland, for the presence of anti-HEV IgG, using the MP Diagnostics HEV ELISA kit. For each donor, we documented age, sex and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) value.ResultsThe study panel was composed of 332 men (60.4%) and 218 women (39.6%). Overall, anti-HEV IgG was found in 27 of 550 samples (4.9%). The seroprevalence was 5.4% (18/332) in men and 4.1% (9/218) in women. The presence of anti-HEV IgG was not correlated with age, gender or ALT values. However, we observed a peak in seroprevalence of 5.3% in individuals aged 51 to 70 years old.ConclusionsCompared with other European countries, HEV seroprevalence among blood donors in southwest Switzerland is low. The low seroprevalence may be explained by the sensitivity of commercial tests used and/or the strict regulation of animal and meat imports. Data regarding HEV prevalence in Swiss livestock are lacking and merit exploration.

BackgroundThe benefit of using serological assays based on HEV genotype 3 in industrialised settings is unclear. We compared the performance of serological kits based on antigens from different HEV genotypes.MethodsTaking 20 serum samples from patients in southwest France with acute HEV infection (positive PCR for HEV genotype 3) and 550 anonymised samples from blood donors in southwest Switzerland, we tested for anti-HEV IgG using three enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (MP Diagnostics, Dia.Pro and Fortress) based on genotype 1 and 2 antigens, and one immunodot assay (Mikrogen Diagnostik recomLine HEV IgG/IgM) based on genotype 1 and 3 antigens.ResultsAll acute HEV samples and 124/550 blood donor samples were positive with ≥1 assay. Of PCR-confirmed patient samples, 45%, 65%, 95% and 55% were positive with MP Diagnostics, Dia.Pro, Fortress and recomLine, respectively. Of blood donor samples positive with ≥1 assay, 120/124 (97%), were positive with Fortress, 19/124 (15%) were positive with all EIAs and 51/124 (41%) were positive with recomLine. Of 11/20 patient samples positive with recomLine, stronger reactivity for HEV genotype 3 was observed in 1/11(9%), and equal reactivity for both genotypes in 5/11 (45.5%).ConclusionsAlthough recomLine contains HEV genotype 3, it has lower sensitivity than Fortress in acute HEV infection and fails to identify infection as being due to this genotype in approximately 45% of patients. In our single blood donor population, we observe wide variations in measured seroprevalence, from 4.2% to 21.8%, depending on the assay used.

No abstract