A randomized crossover trial comparing three plateletpheresis machines

Abstract

The Accel is the fastest and, because of this advantage, the machine preferred by donors. The Amicus was the most efficient and the MCS Plus was the only one not to underestimate the processing time.

A Prospective Crossover Trial Comparing Performance and in vitro Platelet Quality of Three New Apheresis Devices with Current Equipment

“…This was attained by performing all collections using the same staff and donors as well as similar definitions and target endpoints on each instrument. Confirming previous reports [16,21,25], PLT loss was lowest with TA and highest with AM. The latter, however, returned additional saline solution that could have caused higher dilution of the donors' peripheral blood, thus mimicking an increased PLT loss.…”

“…Because CE depends markedly on preprocedure donor characteristics irrespective of procedure time, CR probably appears to be a more practical way of comparing PLT apheresis systems because it addresses both, PLT yield and time, considered today as important as yield when evaluating equipment. In a recent report, a short NT was the most highly valued measure for donors when choosing a cell separator, and, as a result, crucially important for donor recruitment and retention [25]. Therefore, the higher CRs of AM and TA in particular leading to shorter NTs compared to our current equipment must be considered as real improvement, whereas the lower CRs and longer NTs of MCS+ procedures were a real drawback as also described previously [37].…”

“…As shown recently in a national audit of citrate toxicity in PLT apheresis donors [7], the BAXTER and GAMBRO systems showed significantly more citrate incidents as compared to MCS+. Additionally, Bueno et al [25] reported that donors who attached importance to comfort, preferred the MCS+ machine. From the experience of Zingsem et al [10,16,26,27] citrate reactions very rarely occur at CIRs of up to 1.1 ml ACD-A/min/l.…”

Platelet Recruitment during Multiple Donor Platelet Apheresis Differs between Cell Separators

“…In our previously reported study [4], the donations were individually tailored in order to obtain the highest number of standard units containing 2 × 10 11 PLT within 100 min. This acceptable duration of donations up to 100 min results in a reduction of the ratio between the initial period (adjustment of interface) and the consecutive stable collection phase and therefore in a higher CR [3,4,7]. However, the donationinduced decrease of the donor's circulating PLT count may represent a safety limit for the production of multiple PLT concentrates.…”

Prospective, paired crossover comparison of multiple, single‐needle plateletpheresis procedures with the Amicus and Trima Accel cell separators

“…Simultaneously, the Amicus cell separator was developed (A, Fenwal Division, Baxter, Deerfield, IL), which uses plasma recirculation to collect WBC‐reduced PLT concentrates and plasma within shorter collection times than with the previous instrument (CS‐3000 Plus, Fenwal Division, Baxter). Two recent comparisons of both new cell separators have been published: Burgstaler and coworkers 6 have primarily addressed the PLT yields, collection efficiencies, residual numbers of WBCs, and processing times, whereas Bueno and coworkers 7 looked for the processing times required to obtain a 3.5 × 10 11 PLT concentrate and the acceptance by donors. Both devices showed high levels of safety and efficacy as preconditions for the production of multiple PLT concentrates from a single donation.…”