title: Improvement of the separation of blood by modification of separators Optipress and Biotrans Separator.
abstract: By use of the new top-and-bottom bag system and automatic separators the quality of red cell concentrates (RCC) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) could be markedly improved. Simultaneous preparation of storable single-donor platelet concentrates (PC) resulted, however, in too high losses of red cells and plasma. Through modification of the pressure plate of the separators and variation of the residual buffy coat (BC) volumes we tried to optimize the separation in this respect. In a second study we tried to establish the preparation of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) using top-and-bottom bag systems and automatic separators.
  
  
  METHODS
  1st study: 149 whole-blood units (Biopack U, quadruple systems) were separated into components either with Optipress (Opt, n = 58) or with Biotrans Separator (Bio, n = 91). To Optipress additional plates, 3-6 mm thick, were attached and the residual BC volume was varied by different adjustments of the distance screw. The Biotrans Separator was used with a plane pressure plate as well as with a modified plate having a transverse groove; the residual BC volume was adjusted to 50-120 ml. 2nd study: 15 whole-blood units were separated into PRP and RCC either using the Optipress (standard version, n = 5) or the Biotrans Separator (alternating opening of clamps, standard plate, n = 10).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  1st study: Both separations could be improved. The loss of red cells was significantly lower in case of the Biotrans Separator: Bio 15.6%, Opt 25.9%, p < 0.001. Other separation parameters showed no relevant difference between both separators. 2nd study: By use of the Biotrans Separator significantly less platelets could be separated (Bio 75.1 x 10(9), Opt 87.0 x 10(9), p < 0.05), but the PRP clearly was contaminated with less leukocytes (Bio 51.0 x 10(6), Opt 458.9 x 10(6), p < 0.01). The contamination of the RCC with leukocytes (about 20%) was markedly improved in both methods when compared with conventional preparations. The mean loss of red cells was 12.8% in both methods.
authors.affiliation: Department of Transfusion Medicine and Coagulation Physiology, University Clinics, Marburg, FRG.
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Kretschmer
authors.forename: U
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Tesche
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Richter
mesh_terms: D001781:Blood Component Removal / Q000295:instrumentation*; D016913:Blood Component Transfusion / Q000295:instrumentation; D001793:Blood Preservation / Q000295:instrumentation*; D004906:Erythrocyte Count; D017707:Erythrocyte Transfusion; D006801:Humans; D007958:Leukocyte Count; D010949:Plasma; D010976:Platelet Count; D010983:Plateletpheresis / Q000295:instrumentation*