BACKGROUND: Aggregates often appear during apheresis. Sometimes, these persist throughout storage, causing product wastage. This study assessed product quality of apheresis concentrates containing persistent aggregates (PA) and aimed to identify the factors that contribute to their formation. METHODS: Donation (n = 180) and platelet indices (n ≥ 10) from apheresis concentrates with PA were compared with aggregate-free products. RESULTS: The proportion of donors with at least one previous PA donation was twofold higher in the PA group (P < 0·0001) indicating a donor dependence. Significantly higher donor whole blood platelet counts (286 ± 50 vs. 266 ± 49 × 10(3) /μl, P < 0·0001) and higher apheresis yields (6·0 ± 1·6 vs. 5·4 ± 1·5 × 10(11) , P < 0·0001) were noted in the PA group. Haematocrit was also slightly higher, but age, gender and body mass were similar. The pH of PA products on day six postdonation was significantly lower (P < 0·001), in line with higher lactic acid concentrations. Flow cytometry showed no differences in GPIbα levels or phosphatidylserine exposure. However, there was slightly more integrin activation as well as increased degranulation measured by P-selectin expression. Cytokine concentrations were also significantly higher in PA concentrates. Aggregation was normal in response to SFLLRN peptide and collagen stimulation, but agglutination at low-dose ristocetin was significantly higher (P = 0.01) in PA products. Finally, PA were disintegrated by plasmin-mediated thrombolysis but not by integrin αIIb β3 inhibition. CONCLUSION: Products with PA have acceptable quality parameters, but additional functional studies are warranted. Furthermore, PA are more likely to recur in certain donors who have higher platelet counts.
BACKGROUND: Aggregates often appear during apheresis. Sometimes, these persist throughout storage, causing product wastage. This study assessed product quality of apheresis concentrates containing persistent aggregates (PA) and aimed to identify the factors that contribute to their formation. METHODS: Donation (n = 180) and platelet indices (n ≥ 10) from apheresis concentrates with PA were compared with aggregate-free products. RESULTS: The proportion of donors with at least one previous PA donation was twofold higher in the PA group (P < 0·0001) indicating a donor dependence. Significantly higher donor whole blood platelet counts (286 ± 50 vs. 266 ± 49 × 10(3) /μl, P < 0·0001) and higher apheresis yields (6·0 ± 1·6 vs. 5·4 ± 1·5 × 10(11) , P < 0·0001) were noted in the PA group. Haematocrit was also slightly higher, but age, gender and body mass were similar. The pH of PA products on day six postdonation was significantly lower (P < 0·001), in line with higher lactic acid concentrations. Flow cytometry showed no differences in GPIbα levels or phosphatidylserine exposure. However, there was slightly more integrin activation as well as increased degranulation measured by P-selectin expression. Cytokine concentrations were also significantly higher in PA concentrates. Aggregation was normal in response to SFLLRN peptide and collagen stimulation, but agglutination at low-dose ristocetin was significantly higher (P = 0.01) in PA products. Finally, PA were disintegrated by plasmin-mediated thrombolysis but not by integrin αIIb β3 inhibition. CONCLUSION: Products with PA have acceptable quality parameters, but additional functional studies are warranted. Furthermore, PA are more likely to recur in certain donors who have higher platelet counts.