Babaahmadi Niloufar Kazemi, Kheirandish Maryam, Teimourpour Amir, Mohammadi Saeed, Nazemi Amir Masoud
Department of Immunology, Blood Transfusion Research Center, High Institute for Research and Education in Transfusion Medicine, Iranian Blood Transfusion Organization (IBTO), Tehran, Iran.
Department of Immunology, Blood Transfusion Research Center, High Institute for Research and Education in Transfusion Medicine, Iranian Blood Transfusion Organization (IBTO), Tehran, Iran.
Transfus Clin Biol. 2025 Feb;32(1):28-38. doi: 10.1016/j.tracli.2024.11.002. Epub 2024 Nov 13.
Plateletpheresis (PP) has become increasingly prevalent due to its cost-effectiveness and fewer immunological and infectious complications for recipients. This study compares hematological indices of platelet donors and instrument-related parameters in high-yield PP donors using Haemonetics MCS+ and Trima Accel.
Eligible and healthy PP donors meeting the platelet donation criteria were randomly selected.19 single-dose platelet (SDP), and 26 double-dose platelet (DDP) donors underwent PP using the Haemonetics MCS+, while 21 SDP and 21 DDP donors were processed using the Trima Accel system. Complete Blood Count (CBC) and hematological indices of donors between groups with both devices were measured with the cell counter. Platelet yield, collection efficiency (CE), and collection rate (CR) were evaluated for both devices. Results were reported using R-4.3.2 software and a p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
The Trima Accel processed significantly more blood volume and had shorter procedure times than MCS+. Platelet yield in the SDP group with Trima Accel was significantly higher than the Haemonetics MCS+. The Trima Accel demonstrated a significantly higher CR and CE than the MCS+ in both SDP and DDP groups. Post-PP lymphocyte counts significantly decreased with the Trima compared to the MCS+ in the SDP group. However, post-PP hematocrit (HCT), mean corpuscular volume (MCV), and mean platelet volume (MPV) in the DDP group with the MCS+ were significantly lower than Trima.
Double-dose plateletpheresis (DDP) offers advantages in cost-effectiveness and platelet production, and although it reduces some hematological indices, these remain within normal limits. The Trima Accel may offer superior efficiency and processing times compared to the MCS+. However, careful monitoring of DDP donors following AABB standards remains essential.
由于血小板单采术（PP）具有成本效益且受血者的免疫和感染并发症较少，其应用日益普遍。本研究比较了使用Haemonetics MCS+和Trima Accel的高产血小板单采术献血者的血液学指标和仪器相关参数。
随机选取符合血小板捐献标准的合格健康血小板单采术献血者。19名单剂量血小板（SDP）和26名双剂量血小板（DDP）献血者使用Haemonetics MCS+进行血小板单采术，而21名SDP和21名DDP献血者使用Trima Accel系统进行处理。使用血细胞计数器测量两组使用这两种设备的献血者的全血细胞计数（CBC）和血液学指标。评估两种设备的血小板产量、采集效率（CE）和采集率（CR）。使用R-4.3.2软件报告结果，p值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
与MCS+相比，Trima Accel处理的血量明显更多，操作时间更短。Trima Accel的SDP组血小板产量明显高于Haemonetics MCS+。在SDP和DDP组中，Trima Accel的CR和CE均明显高于MCS+。与MCS+相比，SDP组中使用Trima进行血小板单采术后淋巴细胞计数明显下降。然而，MCS+的DDP组血小板单采术后的血细胞比容（HCT）、平均红细胞体积（MCV）和平均血小板体积（MPV）明显低于Trima。
双剂量血小板单采术（DDP）在成本效益和血小板生成方面具有优势，虽然它会降低一些血液学指标，但这些指标仍在正常范围内。与MCS+相比，Trima Accel可能具有更高的效率和更短的处理时间。然而，按照美国血库协会（AABB）标准对DDP献血者进行仔细监测仍然至关重要。
