A prospective comparison of the platelet sequestration ability of three autotransfusion devices.
Although current autotransfusion devices have platelet sequestration capabilities, each has a unique technology to achieve the final platelet product. The purpose of this study was to assess the quality and quantity of platelets sequestered by three different autotransfusion devices. The three commercially available autotransfusion devices evaluated were Fresenius C.A.T.S (closed spiral chamber), Cobe BRAT 2 (Baylor bowl), and Haemonetic Cell Saver 5 (Latham bowl). Platelet sequestration was preformed in the automatic mode following the manufacturer's recommended sequestration protocols. The total number of platelets sequestered, percent recovery, and percent platelet function were assessed. Each device behaved similarly. There was a 2- to 3-fold increase in platelet count compared with baseline with only approximately 50-60% recovery, whereas there was approximately a 10% decrease in platelet function after processing compared with baseline. No statistical difference was noted in platelet function between the respective machines. However, there was a significant loss of platelet function observed with the actual process regardless of autotransfusion device used.
Scholz
Mary
M
Trillium Health Centre, Perfusion Dept., Mississauga Site 100, Queensway West Mississauga, ON L5B 1B8 Canada. perfusion@thc.on.ca
Serrick
Cyril
C
Noel
Dionne
D
Singh
Onkar
O
Melo
Arthur
A
D000328:Adult; D001792:Blood Platelets; D001804:Blood Transfusion, Autologous / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D006400:Hematocrit; D006801:Humans; D010976:Platelet Count; D017713:Platelet Transfusion / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013903:Thoracic Surgery / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D016896:Treatment Outcome