Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York.
Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York.
Transfusion. 2019 Jul;59(7):2264-2275. doi: 10.1111/trf.15310. Epub 2019 Apr 19.
The chromium-51-labeled posttransfusion recovery (PTR) study has been the gold-standard test for assessing red blood cell (RBC) quality. Despite guiding RBC storage development for decades, it has several potential sources for error.
Four healthy adult volunteers each donated an autologous, leukoreduced RBC unit, aliquots were radiolabeled with technetium-99m after 1 and 6 weeks of storage, and then infused. Subjects were imaged by single-photon-emission computed tomography immediately and 4 hours after infusion. Additionally, from subjects described in a previously published study, adenosine triphosphate levels in transfusates infused into 52 healthy volunteers randomized to a single autologous, leukoreduced, RBC transfusion after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 weeks of storage were correlated with PTR and laboratory parameters of hemolysis.
Evidence from one subject imaged after infusion of technetium-99m-labeled RBCs suggests that, in some individuals, RBCs may be temporarily sequestered in the liver and spleen immediately following transfusion and then subsequently released back into circulation; this could be one source of error leading to PTR results that may not accurately predict the true quantity of RBCs cleared by intra- and/or extravascular hemolysis. Indeed, adenosine triphosphate levels in the transfusates correlated more robustly with measures of extravascular hemolysis in vivo (e.g., serum iron, indirect bilirubin, non-transferrin-bound iron) than with PTR results or measures of intravascular hemolysis (e.g., plasma free hemoglobin).
Sources of measurement error are inherent in the chromium-51 PTR method. Transfusion of an entire unlabeled RBC unit, followed by quantifying extravascular hemolysis markers, may more accurately measure true posttransfusion RBC recovery.
铬 51 标记的输血后恢复(PTR)研究一直是评估红细胞(RBC)质量的金标准测试。尽管它指导了红细胞储存的发展数十年,但它有几个潜在的误差源。
四名健康成年志愿者每人捐献了一份自身的、白细胞减少的 RBC 单位,在储存 1 周和 6 周后用锝 99m 进行放射性标记,然后输注。在输注后立即和 4 小时,通过单光子发射计算机断层扫描对受试者进行成像。此外,从之前发表的一项研究中描述的受试者中,在输注到 52 名健康志愿者的血液中测量的三磷酸腺苷水平与 PTR 和溶血的实验室参数相关联,这些志愿者随机接受单份自身的、白细胞减少的、在储存 1、2、3、4、5 或 6 周后输注的 RBC 输血。
一名在输注锝 99m 标记 RBC 后进行成像的受试者的证据表明,在某些个体中,RBC 可能会在输血后立即暂时滞留在肝脏和脾脏中,然后再释放回循环中;这可能是导致 PTR 结果可能无法准确预测 RBC 真正清除量的误差源之一,这种清除量来自于血管内和/或血管外溶血。事实上,在输注物中的三磷酸腺苷水平与体内血管外溶血的测量值(例如血清铁、间接胆红素、非转铁蛋白结合铁)比 PTR 结果或血管内溶血的测量值(例如血浆游离血红蛋白)更紧密相关。
铬 51 PTR 方法存在测量误差的来源。输注整个未标记的 RBC 单位,然后定量测量血管外溶血标志物,可能更准确地测量真正的输血后 RBC 恢复。