Comparison of plateletpheresis concentrates produced with Spectra LRS version 5.1 and LRS Turbo version 7.0 cell separators

Perseghin, Paolo; Mascaretti, L; Riva, Mariarosa; Sciorelli, G

doi:10.1046/j.1537-2995.2000.40070789.x

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Group B plateletpheresis were performed with the standard collection program, which at our center consists of a 90‐minute double‐needle procedure, with up to 1.4 × 10 6 per µL PLT concentration in the product, without the collection of an additional plasma unit. Both devices allow the collection of leukoreduced plateletpheresis units, using the leukoreduction system 5,9 . All plateletpheresis procedure data were recorded.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1][2][3] Latest-generation cell separators allow the collection of leukoreduced PLT concentrates, with substantial advantages in terms of product standardization, increased transfusion safety, and reduced workload for personnel. [4][5][6] Multicomponent collection, which is the contemporary yield of RBCs and plasma, or plasma and PLTs, or RBCs and PLTs, has been recently introduced into blood collection center practices. This new donor apheresis technique, mostly performed through single-vein access, allows the production of a leukoreduced plateletpheresis containing more than 3 ¥ 10 11 PLTs in a consistent proportion of units ( > 75%) and the contemporary collection of a subsidiary 200-to 400-mL plasma unit in 45 to 60 minutes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Platelet activation during plasma‐reduced multicomponent PLT collection: a comparison between COBE Trima and Spectra LRS turbo cell separators

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The wide diffusion of multicomponent collection in donor apheresis has led to the yielding of different components, such as plasma‐reduced platelet‐pheresis at high PLT concentration. We investigated whether this collection modality could induce more PLT activation compared to standard plateletpheresis. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Forty‐one plateletpheresis collections (20 Trima and 21 Spectra LRS Turbo v.7.0, COBE) were evaluated. Donor, procedure, and product data were recorded. ADP, collagen, and U46619 (a thromboxane‐A2 analog)‐induced PLT aggregation was investigated in basal (donor) and final (plateletpheresis unit) samples. The expression of PLT activation marker P‐selectin (CD62P) was studied using flow cytometry in basal and final samples. In all cases, P‐selectin was investigated in final samples after stimulation with ADP to assess for a possible further release of the antigen. Four additional plateletpheresis procedures were performed in donors from Group A, using the traditional, nonplasma‐reduced program. RESULTS: Plateletpheresis obtained by means of the Trima device showed a lower response to in‐vitro induced PLT aggregation and a higher percentage of P‐selectin‐expressing PLT when compared to products obtained using the Spectra device. Moreover, P‐selectin release after ADP stimulation was reduced in plateletpheresis units obtained using the Trima device. These differences disappeared when a nonplasma‐reduced collection program was used. In‐vivo evaluation did not detect any difference between platelepheresis obtained by means of the two cell separators. CONCLUSIONS: Plateletpheresis units obtained by means of multicomponent collection show a higher degree of PLT activation compared to traditional plateletpheresis procedures when high‐concentration plasma‐reduced products are collected. Randomized clinical studies are needed to assess the real impact of these findings in terms of in‐vivo efficacy of plasma‐reduced plateletpheresis units.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Platelet activation during plasma‐reduced multicomponent PLT collection: a comparison between COBE Trima and Spectra LRS turbo cell separators

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When the proper amount of plasma has been pumped, the machine automatically resumes the collection process. If leuko-reduced platelets are to be collected, the interface setting would be low (6)(7)(8)(9)(10), triggering a ''spill over'' with a low concentration of cells in the component-rich line. If granulocytes are to be collected, the interface setting would be high (33) to trigger a spill over, allowing more cells to pass into the collection chamber.…”

Section: Granulocytes Fenwal Cs3000 and Fenwal Cs3000+mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Version 4 software will produce leukoreduced platelets 85% of the time, Version 5 and Version 7 will produce leuko-reduced platelets >98% of the time [6,7]. Version 7 is more efficient in platelet collection than Version 5 [7,8]. All versions use a dual-stage channel.…”

Section: Cobe Spectramentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two forces work to keep RBC and WBC at the entrance: (1) a higher g-force in the outer portion (entrance) of the chamber, and (2) the greater sedimentation velocity of the RBC and WBC as compared to the platelets. The system can consistently collect platelet products with fewer than 1 · 10 6 white blood cells [7][8][9][10][11]. If conditions that may affect leuko-reduction are detected by the machine, a message to confirm leuko-reduction is displayed at the end of the procedure.…”

Section: Cobe Spectramentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Blood component collection by apheresis

Burgstaler

2006

J. Clin. Apheresis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Apheresis component collection is a rapidly growing area in the blood collection field. Several instruments with varying capabilities are available. This is a brief review of the equipment available for granulocyte and apheresis component collection and indications for their use. In the United States, granulocytes are collected with the Fenwal CS3000, Fenwal CS3000 Plus, COBE (Gambro) Spectra, Haemonetics LN9000, and Fresenius AS 104. The use of hetastarch for sedimenting agent and stimulation with G-CSF and G-CSF plus dexamethasone have substantially increased granulocyte yields. Plateletapheresis is performed in the United States on the Fenwal CS3000, Fenwal CS3000 Plus, Fenwal Amicus, COBE (Gambro) Spectra, Gambro Trima Version 4, Gambro Trima Accel (Version 5), and Haemonetics LN9000. Automated red blood cell (RBC) collections are performed with the Haemonetics MCS+LN8150, Gambro Trima Version 4, Gambro Trima Accel (Version 5), Amicus, and Baxter Alyx. The RBC can be collected concurrently (with other components) in some instruments or separately in others. Plasma is collected concurrently on several instruments. Plasmapheresis for plasma only is performed on the Fenwal Autopheresis C and Haemonetics PCS2. Granulocyte yields range from 0.46 x 10(10) to 1.0 x 10(10) for unstimulated donors and 2.1 x 10(10) to 2.6 x 10(10) for donors stimulated with dexamethasone or prednisone. The use of G-CSF and G-CSF with dexamethasone has substantially increased granulocyte yields with yields of 4.1 x 10(10) to 10.8 x 10(10) reported. Platelet collection rates of 0.045-0.115 x 10(11) plt/min have been reported. Collection efficiencies of 46-85.7% have been reported. Automated (apheresis) component collection has the advantages of controlled volumes or doses of component, efficient use of the donor, multiple components from the same donor, better inventory control, and better quality control due to less manipulation of the individual components. Disadvantages of automated component collection include the use of expensive equipment and disposables, the need for specially trained machine operators, and lower capacity to collect large volumes of blood compared to whole blood donation. The use of apheresis component collection is rapidly growing to provide the best blood components in the most efficient manner.

show abstract

Mononuclear cell collection in patients undergoing extra‐corporeal photo‐chemotherapy for acute and chronic graft‐vs.‐host‐disease (GvHD): Comparison between COBE Spectra version 4.7 and 6.0 (AutoPBSC)

Perseghin

Dassi

Balduzzi

et al. 2002

J of Clinical Apheresis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A constant improvement in the performance of blood cell separators has been observed in recent years, allowing better yields in peripheral blood stem cell collection (PBSC) either from healthy donors or for autologous purposes. Nevertheless, to our knowledge, no reports on the efficiency of mononuclear cell (MNC) collection in patients undergoing extra-corporeal photochemotherapy (ECP) for graft-vs.-host-disease (GvHD) have been published. We retrospectively investigated the efficiency of 167 MNC collections performed consecutively in 12 patients between January 1999 and June 2001 by means of the COBE Spectra version 4.7 (V 4.7) or version 6.0 (V 6.0), for 109 and 58 procedures, respectively. MNC fractional extraction (FE) was higher in the V 6.0 group compared to the V 4.7 group : 0.59 +/- 0.21 vs. 0.51 +/- 0.22 (P < 0.05). However, platelet contamination was lower in the products obtained with V.6.0 compared to those obtained with V.4.7: 740 ( 630 x 10(3)/(L vs. 2,073 ( 1,429 x 10(3)/(L (P < 0.05). Only two patients with acute GvHD, both from V 4.7 group, required post-ECP platelet transfusion. The recently released version 6.0 allowed a satisfactory MNC yield with minimal platelet contamination in patients scheduled to undergo ECP for acute or chronic GvHD.

show abstract

Comparison of plateletpheresis concentrates produced with Spectra LRS version 5.1 and LRS Turbo version 7.0 cell separators

Abstract: The Spectra LRS Turbo version 7.0 release showed a better CE and resulted in a higher platelet harvest than did the LRS version 5.1. High predonation platelet counts allow a higher platelet yield.

Cited by 14 publications

References 26 publications

Platelet activation during plasma‐reduced multicomponent PLT collection: a comparison between COBE Trima and Spectra LRS turbo cell separators

Platelet activation during plasma‐reduced multicomponent PLT collection: a comparison between COBE Trima and Spectra LRS turbo cell separators

Blood component collection by apheresis

Mononuclear cell collection in patients undergoing extra‐corporeal photo‐chemotherapy for acute and chronic graft‐vs.‐host‐disease (GvHD): Comparison between COBE Spectra version 4.7 and 6.0 (AutoPBSC)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About