Suppr超能文献

含或不含病原体减少技术的去白细胞、混合供者血小板浓缩物在血浆或添加剂溶液中保存的临床效果。

Clinical effectiveness of leucoreduced, pooled donor platelet concentrates, stored in plasma or additive solution with and without pathogen reduction.

机构信息

Sanquin Blood Bank, Southwest Region, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Br J Haematol. 2010 Jul;150(2):209-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2010.08227.x. Epub 2010 May 9.

Abstract

Pathogen reduction (PR) of platelet products increases costs and available clinical studies are equivocal with respect to clinical and haemostatic effectiveness. We conducted a multicentre, open-label, randomized, non-inferiority trial comparing the clinical effectiveness of buffy-coat derived leukoreduced platelet concentrates (PC) stored for up to 7 d in plasma with platelets stored in platelet additive solution III (PASIII) without and with treatment with amotosalen-HCl/ultraviolet-A (UVA) photochemical pathogen reduction (PR-PASIII). Primary endpoint of the study was 1-h corrected count increment (CCI). Secondary endpoints were 24-h CCI, bleeding, transfusion requirement of red cells and PC, platelet transfusion interval and adverse transfusion reactions. Compared to plasma-PC, in the intention to treat analysis of 278 evaluable patients the mean difference for the 1-h CCI of PR-PASIII-PC and PASIII-PC was -31% (P < 0.0001) and -9% (P = n.s.), respectively. Twenty-seven patients (32%) had bleeding events in the PR-PASIII arm, as compared to 19 (19%) in the plasma arm and 14 (15%) in the PASIII arm (P = 0.034). Despite the potential advantages of pathogen (and leucocyte) inactivation of amotosalen-HCl/UVA-treated platelet products, their clinical efficacy is inferior to platelets stored in plasma, warranting a critical reappraisal of employing this technique for clinical use.

摘要

血小板制品的病原体减少(PR)会增加成本,而且关于临床和止血效果,可用的临床研究结果存在争议。我们进行了一项多中心、开放标签、随机、非劣效性试验,比较了储存长达 7 天的在血浆中储存的白细胞减少的浓缩血小板(PC)与在血小板添加剂溶液 III(PASIII)中储存的血小板的临床效果,且后者未经和经氨甲酰磷盐酸盐/紫外线-A(UVA)光化学病原体减少(PR-PASIII)处理。研究的主要终点是 1 小时校正计数增加(CCI)。次要终点是 24 小时 CCI、出血、红细胞和 PC 的输血需求、血小板输注间隔和不良反应。与血浆-PC 相比,在 278 名可评估患者的意向治疗分析中,PR-PASIII-PC 和 PASIII-PC 的 1 小时 CCI 的平均差异分别为-31%(P < 0.0001)和-9%(P = n.s.)。在 PR-PASIII 组中有 27 名患者(32%)发生出血事件,而在血浆组中有 19 名(19%)和 PASIII 组中有 14 名(15%)(P = 0.034)。尽管氨甲酰磷盐酸盐/UVA 处理的血小板产品具有病原体(和白细胞)灭活的潜在优势,但它们的临床疗效不如在血浆中储存的血小板,需要对采用这种技术进行临床应用进行批判性重新评估。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验