不同血小板采集系统的比较。

V Kretschmer
{"title":"不同血小板采集系统的比较。","authors":"V Kretschmer","doi":"10.1159/000222725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Important criteria for assessing a cell separator are thrombocyte yield, separation efficiency, and purity of the thrombocyte concentrates. Based on a Multicentric Counting Study, in which 12 centers participated, we conclude that it is very difficult to compare the results of the various centers in regard to the separation efficiency. This is especially true for the comparison of different separation procedures. In Marburg we compared three different cell separators of the newest generation: COBE Spectra (n = 71), Fresenius AS-104 (n greater than 1100) and Fenwal CS-3000 TNX (n = 79). The COBE Spectra exhibited the best separation efficiency with the lowest leukocyte contamination (thrombocytes 4.3 x 10(11) (72.2%), leukocytes 0.5 x 10(7)) on the condition that the ACD-blood ratio did not differ more than -15% from the required algorithm. In order to reduce the risk to the donor, the system correspondingly reduces the donor's blood flow, resulting in a longer donation time (on the average 89-100 min). When the ACD ratio was reduced further, a considerable number of spontaneous and sometimes irreversible platelet aggregation occurred, increasing the risk of shortened survival through reduced platelet function. The AS-104 and the modified CS-3000 (TNX) had similar separation efficiencies (approx. 60%). While the platelet concentrates (PC) of the AS-104 almost reached the purity of that from the COBE Spectra, the leukocyte contamination of the CS-3000 PC's was still about four times as high. Other results published show that morphology, in-vitro function and in-vivo survival of thrombocytes collected with the AS-104 are significantly better than those from the CS-3000.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)</p>","PeriodicalId":77545,"journal":{"name":"Infusionstherapie (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":"18 4","pages":"188-90, 193-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000222725","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of different plateletpheresis systems.\",\"authors\":\"V Kretschmer\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000222725\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Important criteria for assessing a cell separator are thrombocyte yield, separation efficiency, and purity of the thrombocyte concentrates. Based on a Multicentric Counting Study, in which 12 centers participated, we conclude that it is very difficult to compare the results of the various centers in regard to the separation efficiency. This is especially true for the comparison of different separation procedures. In Marburg we compared three different cell separators of the newest generation: COBE Spectra (n = 71), Fresenius AS-104 (n greater than 1100) and Fenwal CS-3000 TNX (n = 79). The COBE Spectra exhibited the best separation efficiency with the lowest leukocyte contamination (thrombocytes 4.3 x 10(11) (72.2%), leukocytes 0.5 x 10(7)) on the condition that the ACD-blood ratio did not differ more than -15% from the required algorithm. In order to reduce the risk to the donor, the system correspondingly reduces the donor's blood flow, resulting in a longer donation time (on the average 89-100 min). When the ACD ratio was reduced further, a considerable number of spontaneous and sometimes irreversible platelet aggregation occurred, increasing the risk of shortened survival through reduced platelet function. The AS-104 and the modified CS-3000 (TNX) had similar separation efficiencies (approx. 60%). While the platelet concentrates (PC) of the AS-104 almost reached the purity of that from the COBE Spectra, the leukocyte contamination of the CS-3000 PC's was still about four times as high. Other results published show that morphology, in-vitro function and in-vivo survival of thrombocytes collected with the AS-104 are significantly better than those from the CS-3000.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77545,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infusionstherapie (Basel, Switzerland)\",\"volume\":\"18 4\",\"pages\":\"188-90, 193-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1991-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000222725\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infusionstherapie (Basel, Switzerland)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000222725\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infusionstherapie (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000222725","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

评估细胞分离器的重要标准是血小板产量、分离效率和血小板浓缩物的纯度。基于一项有12个中心参与的多中心计数研究,我们得出结论,在分离效率方面,很难比较不同中心的结果。对于不同分离程序的比较尤其如此。在马尔堡,我们比较了三种不同的最新一代细胞分离器:COBE Spectra (n = 71), Fresenius AS-104 (n大于1100)和Fenwal CS-3000 TNX (n = 79)。COBE光谱在ACD-blood ratio与所需算法差异不超过-15%的条件下,表现出最佳的分离效率,白细胞污染最低(血小板4.3 × 10(11)(72.2%),白细胞0.5 × 10(7))。为了降低献血者的风险,该系统相应减少了献血者的血流量,从而延长了献血者的献血时间(平均89-100分钟)。当ACD比例进一步降低时,会发生大量自发的、有时是不可逆的血小板聚集,通过血小板功能降低而缩短生存期的风险增加。AS-104和改良的CS-3000 (TNX)具有相似的分离效率(约为。60%)。虽然as -104的血小板浓缩物(PC)的纯度几乎达到COBE光谱的纯度,但CS-3000 PC的白细胞污染仍高达4倍左右。其他已发表的研究结果显示,AS-104收集的血小板形态、体外功能和体内存活均明显优于CS-3000。(摘要删节250字)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of different plateletpheresis systems.

Important criteria for assessing a cell separator are thrombocyte yield, separation efficiency, and purity of the thrombocyte concentrates. Based on a Multicentric Counting Study, in which 12 centers participated, we conclude that it is very difficult to compare the results of the various centers in regard to the separation efficiency. This is especially true for the comparison of different separation procedures. In Marburg we compared three different cell separators of the newest generation: COBE Spectra (n = 71), Fresenius AS-104 (n greater than 1100) and Fenwal CS-3000 TNX (n = 79). The COBE Spectra exhibited the best separation efficiency with the lowest leukocyte contamination (thrombocytes 4.3 x 10(11) (72.2%), leukocytes 0.5 x 10(7)) on the condition that the ACD-blood ratio did not differ more than -15% from the required algorithm. In order to reduce the risk to the donor, the system correspondingly reduces the donor's blood flow, resulting in a longer donation time (on the average 89-100 min). When the ACD ratio was reduced further, a considerable number of spontaneous and sometimes irreversible platelet aggregation occurred, increasing the risk of shortened survival through reduced platelet function. The AS-104 and the modified CS-3000 (TNX) had similar separation efficiencies (approx. 60%). While the platelet concentrates (PC) of the AS-104 almost reached the purity of that from the COBE Spectra, the leukocyte contamination of the CS-3000 PC's was still about four times as high. Other results published show that morphology, in-vitro function and in-vivo survival of thrombocytes collected with the AS-104 are significantly better than those from the CS-3000.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[Effects of a defined infusion of 10% HAES 200/0.5 in the early phase of a septic syndrome on hemodynamic parameters]. [Tolerance of Haemofusin in hemodilution and volume substitution]. Posttraumatic hypocaloric parenteral nutrition--development and clinical application. [Are omega-3-fatty acids essential for newborn infants?]. [PEDINFUS computer program for total parenteral nutrition of children].
×
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