BACKGROUND: Gambro BCT recently introduced the Trima Accel Version 5 (TR) plateletpheresis machine. Platelet (PLT) yields, collection efficiencies (CEs), numbers of white blood cells (WBCs), and processing times of the TR versus the Amicus (Version 2.51) single-needle (AM) procedures were evaluated by use of a prospective paired comparison. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Target yields of 3.0 x 10(11) to 6.8 x 10(11) PLTs in up to 100 minutes of processing time were used. To detect a difference of 1.0 x 10(11) PLTs with a power of 80 percent, 26 paired comparisons were needed. RESULTS: The mean amount of whole blood processed was significantly higher for TR than for AM (3795 vs. 3520 mL). The TR and AM were equivalent in regard to mean preprocedure PLT count (259 x 10(9) vs. 251 x 10(9)/L), PLT yields (6.7 x 10(11) vs. 6.5 x 10(11)), split rate (65% vs. 65%), processing time (73 vs. 78 min), and collection rate (0.090 x 10(11) vs. 0.084 x 10(11) PLTs/min). The TR had a significantly lower CE than the AM (76% vs. 86%). All of the products (after splitting) had fewer than 5 x 10(6) WBCs. CONCLUSIONS: The Trima Accel machine processed significantly more whole blood with equivalent PLT yields, processing time, and number of PLTs per minute compared to the Amicus single-needle procedure, but had a significantly lower CE.
BACKGROUND: Gambro BCT recently introduced the Trima Accel Version 5 (TR) plateletpheresis machine. Platelet (PLT) yields, collection efficiencies (CEs), numbers of white blood cells (WBCs), and processing times of the TR versus the Amicus (Version 2.51) single-needle (AM) procedures were evaluated by use of a prospective paired comparison. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Target yields of 3.0 x 10(11) to 6.8 x 10(11) PLTs in up to 100 minutes of processing time were used. To detect a difference of 1.0 x 10(11) PLTs with a power of 80 percent, 26 paired comparisons were needed. RESULTS: The mean amount of whole blood processed was significantly higher for TR than for AM (3795 vs. 3520 mL). The TR and AM were equivalent in regard to mean preprocedure PLT count (259 x 10(9) vs. 251 x 10(9)/L), PLT yields (6.7 x 10(11) vs. 6.5 x 10(11)), split rate (65% vs. 65%), processing time (73 vs. 78 min), and collection rate (0.090 x 10(11) vs. 0.084 x 10(11) PLTs/min). The TR had a significantly lower CE than the AM (76% vs. 86%). All of the products (after splitting) had fewer than 5 x 10(6) WBCs. CONCLUSIONS: The Trima Accel machine processed significantly more whole blood with equivalent PLT yields, processing time, and number of PLTs per minute compared to the Amicus single-needle procedure, but had a significantly lower CE.
Authors: Kim Anh Nguyen; Hind Hamzeh-Cognasse; Marc Sebban; Elisa Fromont; Patricia Chavarin; Lena Absi; Bruno Pozzetto; Fabrice Cognasse; Olivier Garraud Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 3.240