BACKGROUND: A quality monitoring program (QMP) for platelet concentrates (PCs) was implemented at Canadian Blood Services (CBS) to improve standards and to better understand platelet (PLT) products by supplementing routine quality control (QC). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Annual surveys of PCs from CBS production sites were conducted, with four completed to date (QMP Cycles 1-4) spanning two different PC production methods: PLT-rich plasma (PRP) and buffy coat (BC). Randomly selected PCs were sent to a central laboratory and tested 1 day after expiry. An expanded panel of tests including CD62P expression by flow cytometry, mean PLT volume, PLT count and morphology, extent of shape change, and PLT metabolic parameters, were applied. RESULTS: QMP data on the implementation of the BC production method across CBS indicated that BC PCs have less variable in vitro quality measures than PRP PCs. For the QC parameters pH and PLT count per unit, the range of mean values from each site for QMP 3 and 4 fell well within the range defined by regulatory standards, a first step in defining quality benchmarks for PCs. Of the extended panel of quality parameters, CD62P expression was the most sensitive indicator of change and identified an issue with the implementation of the BC PC production method at one site, which was subsequently remedied. CONCLUSION: A QMP was found to be useful to monitor production processes across sites and highlights best practice approaches while deepening understanding of the quality of PLT products at CBS.
BACKGROUND: A quality monitoring program (QMP) for platelet concentrates (PCs) was implemented at Canadian Blood Services (CBS) to improve standards and to better understand platelet (PLT) products by supplementing routine quality control (QC). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Annual surveys of PCs from CBS production sites were conducted, with four completed to date (QMP Cycles 1-4) spanning two different PC production methods: PLT-rich plasma (PRP) and buffy coat (BC). Randomly selected PCs were sent to a central laboratory and tested 1 day after expiry. An expanded panel of tests including CD62P expression by flow cytometry, mean PLT volume, PLT count and morphology, extent of shape change, and PLT metabolic parameters, were applied. RESULTS:QMP data on the implementation of the BC production method across CBS indicated that BC PCs have less variable in vitro quality measures than PRP PCs. For the QC parameters pH and PLT count per unit, the range of mean values from each site for QMP 3 and 4 fell well within the range defined by regulatory standards, a first step in defining quality benchmarks for PCs. Of the extended panel of quality parameters, CD62P expression was the most sensitive indicator of change and identified an issue with the implementation of the BC PC production method at one site, which was subsequently remedied. CONCLUSION: A QMP was found to be useful to monitor production processes across sites and highlights best practice approaches while deepening understanding of the quality of PLT products at CBS.