Literature DB >> 31002399

Reexamination of the chromium-51-labeled posttransfusion red blood cell recovery method.

Richard O Francis1, Sonia Mahajan2, Francesca Rapido1,3, Francesca La Carpia1, Mark Soffing2, Chaitanya Divgi2, Randy Yeh2, Akiva Mintz2, Lenhurst Leslie2, Irina Agrest2, Matthew S Karafin4, Yelena Ginzburg5, Beth H Shaz6, Steven L Spitalnik1, Joseph Schwartz1, Tiffany Thomas1, Xiaoyun Fu7, Pascal Amireault8,9, Pierre Buffet8,10, James C Zimring7, Angelo D'Alessandro11, Eldad A Hod1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: 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.
METHODS: 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.
RESULTS: 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).
CONCLUSIONS: 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.
© 2019 AABB.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31002399     DOI: 10.1111/trf.15310

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transfusion        ISSN: 0041-1132            Impact factor:   3.157


  13 in total

1.  In vivo clearance of stored red blood cells.

Authors:  Angelo D'Alessandro
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 22.113

2.  Personalised Transfusion Medicine.

Authors:  Angelo D'Alessandro; Giancarlo Liumbruno
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 3.443

3.  Effect of donor, component, and recipient characteristics on hemoglobin increments following red blood cell transfusion.

Authors:  Nareg H Roubinian; Colleen Plimier; Jennifer P Woo; Catherine Lee; Roberta Bruhn; Vincent X Liu; Gabriel J Escobar; Steven H Kleinman; Darrell J Triulzi; Edward L Murphy; Michael P Busch
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 22.113

4.  Stored RBC metabolism as a function of caffeine levels.

Authors:  Angelo D'Alessandro; Xiaoyun Fu; Julie A Reisz; Tamir Kanias; Grier P Page; Mars Stone; Steve Kleinman; James C Zimring; Michael Busch
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 3.157

5.  Donor glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency decreases blood quality for transfusion.

Authors:  Richard O Francis; Angelo D'Alessandro; Andrew Eisenberger; Mark Soffing; Randy Yeh; Esther Coronel; Arif Sheikh; Francesca Rapido; Francesca La Carpia; Julie A Reisz; Sarah Gehrke; Travis Nemkov; Tiffany Thomas; Joseph Schwartz; Chaitanya Divgi; Debra Kessler; Beth H Shaz; Yelena Ginzburg; James C Zimring; Steven L Spitalnik; Eldad A Hod
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 14.808

6.  Donor Iron Deficiency Study (DIDS): protocol of a study to test whether iron deficiency in blood donors affects red blood cell recovery after transfusion.

Authors:  Zachary C Bitan; Alice Zhou; Donald J McMahon; Debra Kessler; Beth H Shaz; Elise Caccappolo; Joseph Schwartz; Richard O Francis; Gary M Brittenham; Steven L Spitalnik; Eldad A Hod
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 3.443

7.  Impact of taurine on red blood cell metabolism and implications for blood storage.

Authors:  Lorenzo Bertolone; Micaela Kalani Roy; Ariel M Hay; Evan J Morrison; Davide Stefanoni; Xiaoyun Fu; Tamir Kanias; Steve Kleinman; Larry J Dumont; Mars Stone; Travis Nemkov; Michael P Busch; James C Zimring; Angelo D'Alessandro
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 3.157

8.  Hypoxic storage of red blood cells improves metabolism and post-transfusion recovery.

Authors:  Angelo DʼAlessandro; Tatsuro Yoshida; Shawnagay Nestheide; Travis Nemkov; Sarah Stocker; Davide Stefanoni; Fatima Mohmoud; Neeta Rugg; Andrew Dunham; Jose A Cancelas
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 3.157

9.  A rose is a rose is a rose, or not.

Authors:  Steven L Spitalnik
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2019-09-26       Impact factor: 22.113

10.  Rapid clearance of storage-induced microerythrocytes alters transfusion recovery.

Authors:  Camille Roussel; Alexandre Morel; Michaël Dussiot; Mickaël Marin; Martin Colard; Aurélie Fricot-Monsinjon; Anaïs Martinez; Charlotte Chambrion; Benoît Henry; Madeleine Casimir; Geoffroy Volle; Mallorie Dépond; Safi Dokmak; François Paye; Alain Sauvanet; Caroline Le Van Kim; Yves Colin; Sonia Georgeault; Philippe Roingeard; Steven L Spitalnik; Papa Alioune Ndour; Olivier Hermine; Eldad A Hod; Pierre A Buffet; Pascal Amireault
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 22.113

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.