Balancing Donor Health and Plasma Collection: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Plasmapheresis Frequency.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY Transfusion Medicine Reviews Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1016/j.tmrv.2024.150851
Tine D'aes, Katja van den Hurk, Natalie Schroyens, Susan Mikkelsen, Pieter Severijns, Emmy De Buck, Peter O'Leary, Pierre Tiberghien, Veerle Compernolle, Christian Erikstrup, Hans Van Remoortel
{"title":"Balancing Donor Health and Plasma Collection: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Plasmapheresis Frequency.","authors":"Tine D'aes, Katja van den Hurk, Natalie Schroyens, Susan Mikkelsen, Pieter Severijns, Emmy De Buck, Peter O'Leary, Pierre Tiberghien, Veerle Compernolle, Christian Erikstrup, Hans Van Remoortel","doi":"10.1016/j.tmrv.2024.150851","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Most plasma used for manufacturing plasma-derived medicinal products (PDMPs) such as albumin, immunoglobulin (Ig), and clotting factors is obtained from source plasma collected via plasmapheresis, the majority of which is contributed by the United States (US). While the demand for PDMPs continues to rise, it remains unclear whether high-frequency plasmapheresis, such as the twice-weekly plasma donation allowed in the US, may have any (long-term) adverse health effects on the donor. To investigate the frequency at which plasma can be donated without harm to the donor, the current systematic review explores the impact of plasma donation frequency on cardiovascular health, protein depletion, and adverse events in healthy plasma donors. We asked the following research question: What is the impact of plasmapheresis frequency (Intervention) on the safety or health (Outcome) of healthy donors (Population)? Six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and Transfusion Evidence Library), 2 clinical trial registries (ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov), and the PROSPERO database were searched. Four observational and 2 experimental studies were included. The results showed that very high-frequency donation (twice per week) may result in a clinically relevant decrease in ferritin and bring IgG levels below the lower threshold of 6 g/l. However, the evidence is of low to very low certainty, and solid conclusions are hindered by the healthy donor effect and methodological limitations of the included studies. To determine a safe threshold donation frequency that minimizes any possible harmful effect on the donor, more high-quality prospective cohort studies and experimental studies are needed. We should expedite such studies to support recommendations, as conclusive evidence confirming or refuting the safety of maximum allowed donation frequencies is lacking. Donor protection is essential, given that healthy donors receive no direct medical benefit from donating plasma.</p>","PeriodicalId":56081,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"150851"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmrv.2024.150851","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most plasma used for manufacturing plasma-derived medicinal products (PDMPs) such as albumin, immunoglobulin (Ig), and clotting factors is obtained from source plasma collected via plasmapheresis, the majority of which is contributed by the United States (US). While the demand for PDMPs continues to rise, it remains unclear whether high-frequency plasmapheresis, such as the twice-weekly plasma donation allowed in the US, may have any (long-term) adverse health effects on the donor. To investigate the frequency at which plasma can be donated without harm to the donor, the current systematic review explores the impact of plasma donation frequency on cardiovascular health, protein depletion, and adverse events in healthy plasma donors. We asked the following research question: What is the impact of plasmapheresis frequency (Intervention) on the safety or health (Outcome) of healthy donors (Population)? Six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and Transfusion Evidence Library), 2 clinical trial registries (ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov), and the PROSPERO database were searched. Four observational and 2 experimental studies were included. The results showed that very high-frequency donation (twice per week) may result in a clinically relevant decrease in ferritin and bring IgG levels below the lower threshold of 6 g/l. However, the evidence is of low to very low certainty, and solid conclusions are hindered by the healthy donor effect and methodological limitations of the included studies. To determine a safe threshold donation frequency that minimizes any possible harmful effect on the donor, more high-quality prospective cohort studies and experimental studies are needed. We should expedite such studies to support recommendations, as conclusive evidence confirming or refuting the safety of maximum allowed donation frequencies is lacking. Donor protection is essential, given that healthy donors receive no direct medical benefit from donating plasma.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
平衡捐献者健康与血浆采集:血浆置换频率影响的系统回顾。
用于生产白蛋白、免疫球蛋白 (Ig) 和凝血因子等血浆衍生医药产品 (PDMP) 的血浆大多来自通过血浆置换术收集的源血浆,其中大部分来自美国。虽然对 PDMP 的需求持续上升,但高频率的血浆置换(如美国允许的每周两次血浆捐献)是否会对捐献者的健康产生任何(长期)不利影响仍不清楚。为了研究捐献血浆不会对捐献者造成伤害的频率,本系统综述探讨了血浆捐献频率对健康血浆捐献者的心血管健康、蛋白质消耗和不良事件的影响。我们提出了以下研究问题:血浆捐献频率(干预)对健康捐献者(人群)的安全或健康(结果)有什么影响?我们检索了六个数据库(PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、CINAHL、Cochrane Library 和 Transfusion Evidence Library)、两个临床试验登记处(ICTRP 和 clinicaltrials.gov)以及 PROSPERO 数据库。其中包括 4 项观察性研究和 2 项实验性研究。结果显示,非常高频率的捐献(每周两次)可能会导致铁蛋白的临床相关性下降,并使 IgG 水平低于 6 克/升的较低阈值。然而,这些证据的确定性较低或很低,而且由于健康捐献者效应和所纳入研究的方法局限性,无法得出可靠的结论。为了确定一个安全的捐献频率阈值,最大限度地减少可能对捐献者造成的有害影响,需要进行更多高质量的前瞻性队列研究和实验研究。我们应加快此类研究,以支持相关建议,因为目前尚缺乏确凿证据证实或反驳最高允许捐献频率的安全性。鉴于健康的捐献者不会从捐献血浆中获得直接的医疗益处,对捐献者的保护至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Transfusion Medicine Reviews
Transfusion Medicine Reviews 医学-血液学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
21 days
期刊介绍: Transfusion Medicine Reviews provides an international forum in English for the publication of scholarly work devoted to the various sub-disciplines that comprise Transfusion Medicine including hemostasis and thrombosis and cellular therapies. The scope of the journal encompasses basic science, practical aspects, laboratory developments, clinical indications, and adverse effects.
期刊最新文献
Single vs Double-Unit Transfusion in Patients With Hematological Disorders Undergoing Chemotherapy or Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis. Whole Blood Donor Iron Management Across Europe: Experiences and Challenges in Four Blood Establishments Single-Unit Transfusion Policy in Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Less is Not Worse Ultra-Massive Transfusion: Predictors of Occurrence and In-Hospital mortality From the Australian and New Zealand Massive Transfusion Registry (ANZ-MTR) Beta-Amyloid Related Neurodegenerative and Neurovascular Diseases: Potential Implications for Transfusion Medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1