Abstract:Background and Objectives Modern apheresis devices offer the possibility to collect blood components that are well standardized, as compared with those available with manual whole blood donations. Recent technologic advances in multicomponent donation have made possible the development of systems that can collect different blood components from the same donor during one apheresis session. Red blood cells (RBCs) can be concurrently collected with plasma or platelets (PLTs).Materials and Methods A PLT yield of ‡… Show more
“…The first developed in the 1970s for therapeutic use, and RBC apheresis for autologous and allogeneic transfusions were approved by the FDA between 1995 and 1997, and by Europe in 2000 6 . Two‐unit RBC apheresis is considered to be safe and has some advantages over traditional whole‐blood donation 8–16 . For both allogeneic and autologous donors, two‐unit RBC apheresis can obtain an equivalent number of RBC units with less times of collection compared with traditional whole‐blood donation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 Two-unit RBC apheresis is considered to be safe and has some advantages over traditional whole-blood donation. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] For both allogeneic and autologous donors, two-unit RBC apheresis can obtain an equivalent number of RBC units with less times of collection compared with traditional whole-blood donation. In terms of donor safety, owing to the return of plasma, slow collection rate, saline replacement, and small extracorporeal volume, two-unit RBC apheresis has a lower incidence of hypovolemia than whole-blood donation.…”
Background: Preoperative autologous blood donation (PAD) is used for elective surgical procedures with a predictable blood loss. But a downward trend in PAD is due to the fact that patients with preoperative whole blood donation or two-unit red cell apheresis cannot avoid receiving allogenic blood during intensive surgery. To improve the clinical application of PAD, this study explores the feasibility of large-volume autologous red blood cells (RBCs) donation by a pilot trial in a small cohort of Chinese.Methods: This was a single-center, prospective study and 16 male volunteers were enrolled from May to October in 2020. Each volunteer donated 627.25 ± 109.74 mL (mean ± SD) RBC with apheresis machine or manually, and received 800 mg of intravenous iron in four divided doses. Blood pressure, oxygen saturation (SpO 2 ), respiratory rate and heart rate were monitored throughout the procedure. The RBC count, hemoglobin (Hb) concentration, hematocrit (Hct), reticulocyte count, erythropoietin (Epo), serum iron, total iron binding capacity (TIBC), transferrin saturation, transferrin, and ferritin were dynamically detected and analyzed before and 8 weeks after blood donation.Results: There was no differences in SpO 2 , systolic and diastolic blood pressure before and after blood collection (P ≥ .05). The heart rate and respiratory rate after donation were slightly lower than those before (P < .05). The level of RBC, Hb concentration and Hct fell to a nadir on Day 3 (pre-donation vs post-
“…The first developed in the 1970s for therapeutic use, and RBC apheresis for autologous and allogeneic transfusions were approved by the FDA between 1995 and 1997, and by Europe in 2000 6 . Two‐unit RBC apheresis is considered to be safe and has some advantages over traditional whole‐blood donation 8–16 . For both allogeneic and autologous donors, two‐unit RBC apheresis can obtain an equivalent number of RBC units with less times of collection compared with traditional whole‐blood donation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 Two-unit RBC apheresis is considered to be safe and has some advantages over traditional whole-blood donation. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] For both allogeneic and autologous donors, two-unit RBC apheresis can obtain an equivalent number of RBC units with less times of collection compared with traditional whole-blood donation. In terms of donor safety, owing to the return of plasma, slow collection rate, saline replacement, and small extracorporeal volume, two-unit RBC apheresis has a lower incidence of hypovolemia than whole-blood donation.…”
Background: Preoperative autologous blood donation (PAD) is used for elective surgical procedures with a predictable blood loss. But a downward trend in PAD is due to the fact that patients with preoperative whole blood donation or two-unit red cell apheresis cannot avoid receiving allogenic blood during intensive surgery. To improve the clinical application of PAD, this study explores the feasibility of large-volume autologous red blood cells (RBCs) donation by a pilot trial in a small cohort of Chinese.Methods: This was a single-center, prospective study and 16 male volunteers were enrolled from May to October in 2020. Each volunteer donated 627.25 ± 109.74 mL (mean ± SD) RBC with apheresis machine or manually, and received 800 mg of intravenous iron in four divided doses. Blood pressure, oxygen saturation (SpO 2 ), respiratory rate and heart rate were monitored throughout the procedure. The RBC count, hemoglobin (Hb) concentration, hematocrit (Hct), reticulocyte count, erythropoietin (Epo), serum iron, total iron binding capacity (TIBC), transferrin saturation, transferrin, and ferritin were dynamically detected and analyzed before and 8 weeks after blood donation.Results: There was no differences in SpO 2 , systolic and diastolic blood pressure before and after blood collection (P ≥ .05). The heart rate and respiratory rate after donation were slightly lower than those before (P < .05). The level of RBC, Hb concentration and Hct fell to a nadir on Day 3 (pre-donation vs post-
“…Technical advances facilitated the collection of various blood components during one apheresis session [1–3]. The practice of multicomponent collection (MCC) provides standardized products at high quality but with lower costs [4], and reducing the donor exposure for patients may decrease the risk for transfusion‐related side effects [5]. So far, reliable data about regeneration of donor blood parameters after apheresis, in particular after MCC, have been limited.…”
Background and Objectives Multicomponent collection (MCC) enables production and processing of various blood components during one apheresis session. In this prospective crossover study, the effects of donating platelets (PLTs) and packed red blood cells (PRBCs) on donor’s blood cell count, coagulation, PLT function and iron state were analysed.
Materials and Methods Forty‐eight MCCs were performed using two different cell separators (Fenwal Amicus®, CaridianBCT Trima Accel®). Two units of platelet concentrates and one unit of PRBCs were collected during each session. Full blood cell count and iron status were obtained on day 0 before and after apheresis, day 2, day 14 and day 42. PLT function was analysed by aggregometry and rotation thromboelastometry in parallel with coagulation tests before and after MCC and at day 2.
Results Multicomponent collection was well tolerated without adverse side effects. Blood cell count and iron parameters declined and most of them (haemoglobin, haematocrit, transferrin, transferrin saturation and ferritin) were significantly below baseline values until at least day 42 after donation. Absent iron stores were seen in 31·3% of the donors. In contrast, PLTs significantly exceeded pre‐donation values after 14 days and remained significantly increased for 42 days. After 2 days, coagulation parameters were only slightly (P > 0·05) altered, whereas PLT function was significantly reduced.
Conclusion Multicomponent collection is an obviously safe procedure; however, the significant long‐term impact on the donor’s blood count and iron store, as well as impaired PLT function, has to be considered in regard to donor safety.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.