0
selected
-
1.
Efficacy and Safety of Pathogen-Reduced Platelets Compared with Standard Apheresis Platelets: A Systematic Review of RCTs
Pati I, Masiello F, Pupella S, Cruciani M, De Angelis V
Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland). 2022;11(6)
Abstract
In this systematic review, we evaluate the efficacy and safety of blood components treated with pathogen reduction technologies (PRTs). We searched the Medline, Embase, Scopus, Ovid, and Cochrane Library to identify RCTs evaluating PRTs. Risk of bias assessment and the Mantel-Haenszel method for data synthesis were used. We included in this review 19 RCTs evaluating 4332 patients (mostly oncohematological patients) receiving blood components treated with three different PRTs. Compared with standard platelets (St-PLTs), the treatment with pathogen-reduced platelets (PR-PLTs) does not increase the occurrence of bleeding events, although a slight increase in the occurrence of severe bleeding events was observed in the overall comparison. No between-groups difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events was observed. PR-PLT recipients had a lower 1 and 24 h CI and CCI. The number of patients with platelet refractoriness and alloimmunization was significantly higher in PR-PLT recipients compared with St-PLT recipients. PR-PLT recipients had a higher number of platelet and RBC transfusions compared with St-PLT recipients, with a shorter transfusion time interval. The quality of evidence for these outcomes was from moderate to high. Blood components treated with PRTs are not implicated in serious adverse events, and PR-PLTs do not have a major effect on the increase in bleeding events. However, treatment with PRTs may require a greater number of transfusions in shorter time intervals and may be implicated in an increase in platelet refractoriness and alloimmunization.
-
2.
Bacterial contamination rate of platelet components by primary culture: a systematic review and meta-analysis
White SK, Schmidt RL, Walker BS, Metcalf RA
Transfusion. 2020;60(5):986-996
Abstract
BACKGROUND Platelets have the highest bacterial contamination risk of all blood components, and septic transfusion reactions remain a problem. A good estimate of contamination rates could provide information about residual risk and inform optimal testing strategies. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of platelet contamination rates by primary culture. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A literature search in December 2019 identified articles on platelet contamination rates using primary culture. We used meta-analysis to estimate the overall rate of contamination and meta-regression to identify heterogeneity. We studied the following sources of heterogeneity: collection method, sample volume, positivity criteria, and study date. Contamination rate estimates were obtained for apheresis (AP), platelet rich plasma (PRP), and buffy coat (BC) collection methods. RESULTS The search identified 6102 studies, and 22 were included for meta-analysis. Among these 22 studies, there were 21 AP cohorts (4,072,022 components), 4 PRP cohorts (138,869 components), and 15 BC cohorts (1,474,679 components). The overall mean contamination rate per 1000 components was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.38-0.67) including AP (0.23, 95% CI: 0.18-0.28), PRP, (0.38, 95% CI: 0.15-0.70), and BC (1.12, 95% CI: 0.51-1.96). There was considerable variability within each collection method. Sample volume, positivity criteria, and publication year were significant sources of heterogeneity. CONCLUSION The bacterial contamination rate of platelets by primary culture is 1 in 1961. AP and PRP components showed a lower contamination rate than BC components. There is clinically significant between-study variability for each method. Larger sample volumes increased sensitivity, and bacterial contamination rates have decreased over time.
-
3.
Platelet storage duration and its clinical and transfusion outcomes: a systematic review
Aubron C, Flint AWJ, Ozier Y, McQuilten Z
Critical Care (London, England). 2018;22((1)):185.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Platelets (PLTs) are usually stored for up to 5 days prior to transfusion, although in some blood services the storage period is extended to 7 days. During storage, changes occur in both PLT and storage medium, which may lead to PLT activation and dysfunction. The clinical significance of these changes remains uncertain. METHODS We performed a systematic review to assess the association between PLT storage time and clinical or transfusion outcomes in patients receiving allogeneic PLT transfusion. We searched studies published in English between January 2000 and July 2017 identified from MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Libraries. RESULTS Of the 18 studies identified, five included 4719 critically ill patients (trauma, post-cardiac surgery and a heterogeneous population of critically ill patients) and 13 included 8569 haematology patients. The five studies in critically ill patients were retrospective and did not find any association between PLT storage time when PLTs were stored for up to 5 days and mortality. There was also no association between older PLTs and sepsis in the two largest studies (n = 4008 patients). Of the 13 studies in haematology patients, seven analysed prolonged storage time up to 6.5 or 7 days. Administration of fresh PLTs (less than 2 or 3 days) was associated with a significant increase in corrected count increment (CCI) compared to older PLTs in seven of the eight studies analysing this outcome. One single centre retrospective study found an increase in bleeding events in patients receiving older PLTs. CONCLUSIONS PLT storage time does not appear to be associated with clinical outcomes, including bleeding, sepsis or mortality, in critically ill patients or haematology patients. The freshest PLTs (less than 3 days) were associated with a better CCI, although there was no impact on bleeding events, questioning the clinical significance of this association. However, there is an absence of evidence to draw definitive conclusions, especially in critically ill patients.
-
4.
Effect of storage time of platelet products on clinical outcomes after transfusion: a systematic review and meta-analyses
Kreuger AL, Caram-Deelder C, Jacobse J, Kerkhoffs JL, van der Bom JG, Middelburg RA
Vox Sanguinis. 2017;112((4):):291-300
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prolonged storage improves availability of platelet products but could also influence safety and efficacy. This systematic review and meta-analyses summarize and quantify the evidence of the effect of storage time of transfused platelets on clinical outcomes. METHODS A systematic search in seven databases was performed up to February 2016. All studies reporting storage time of platelet products and clinical outcomes were included. To quantify heterogeneity, I(2) was calculated, and to assess publication bias, funnel plots were constructed. RESULTS Twenty-three studies reported safety outcomes and fifteen efficacy outcomes. The relative risk of a transfusion reaction after old platelets compared to fresh platelets was 1.53 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.25) (12 studies). This was 2.05 (CI:1.47-2.85) before and 1.05 (CI: 0.60-1.84) after implementation of universal leucoreduction. The relative risk of bleeding was 1.13 (CI: 0.97-1.32) for old platelets compared to fresh (five studies). The transfusion interval was 0.25 days (CI: 0.13; 0.38) shorter after transfusion of old platelets (four studies). Three studies reported use of platelet products: two for haematological patients and one for trauma patients. Selecting only studies in haematological patients, the difference was 4.51 units (CI: 1.92; 7.11). CONCLUSION Old platelets increase the risk of transfusion reactions in the setting of non-leucoreduction, shorten platelet transfusion intervals, thereby increase the numbers of platelet transfusions in haematological patients, and may increase the risk of bleeding.
-
5.
Comparing the efficacy and safety of apheresis and whole blood-derived platelet transfusions: a systematic review
Heddle NM, Arnold DM, Boye D, Webert KE, Resz I, Dumont LJ
Transfusion. 2008;48((7):):1447-58.
Abstract
BACKGROUND A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine if there were differences between apheresis platelet concentrates (APCs) or platelets (PLTs) derived from whole blood (WBD) for the outcomes acute reactions, alloimmunization, refractoriness, corrected count increment (CCI), radiolabeled recovery and survival, time to next transfusion, and bleeding. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials, PapersFirst, ProceedingsFirst, and AABB and ASH abstracts for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing APCs and WBD PLTs for clinical outcomes. Study selection, data extraction, and methodologic quality assessments were performed in duplicate. Results were pooled using meta-analytic methods. RESULTS Ten RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Acute reactions per patient were lower for APCs (relative risk [RR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44-0.98); however, when controlling for leukoreduction, there was no significant difference (leukoreduced [LR]-APCs vs. LR-WBDs; odds ratio, 1.78; 95% CI, 0.87-3.62). There was no difference between products when reaction frequencies were assessed per transfusion (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.33-1.28). APCs were associated with significantly higher CCIs than WBD PLTs at both 1 hour (weighted mean difference [WMD], 2.49; 95% CI, 2.21-2.77) and 18 to 24 hours (WMD, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.60-2.67). No conclusions could be made for the outcomes of alloimmunization and refractoriness. No studies addressed outcomes of time to next transfusion or bleeding. CONCLUSIONS Owing to the small number of trials and lack of comparability of PLT products for leukoreduction, we were unable to draw definitive conclusions about the clinical benefits of APCs compared with WBD PLTs. Rigorous RCTs using clinically important end points are needed to settle this issue.