Transfusion effect of random donor platelet and single donor platelet in thrombocytopenic patients at tertiary care hospital of South Gujarat
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20172983Keywords:
Corrected count increment, Percentage recovery, Platelet apheresis, Random donor platelet, Single donor plateletAbstract
Background: Platelet transfusion plays a key role in therapy for the patients with thrombocytopenia. Superiority of Single donor platelet (SDP) over Random donor platelet (RDP) transfusions is largely assumed, but unproven. Platelet Rich Plasma-Platelet concentrate (PRP-PC) and Apheresis-PC were prepared and their therapeutic efficacy were assessed in thrombocytopenic patients.
Methods: This study included 60 transfusion episodes consisting of 30 SDP and 30 RDP (147units of RDP). The post transfusion efficacy of transfused platelets was assessed at 1 hour and 24 hours by corrected count increment (CCI) and percentage recovery (PR). Paired ‘t’-test was used for statistical analysis and a probability of p<0.05 was used to reject null hypothesis.
Results: The mean platelet dose of SDP (n=30) and RDP (n=30) was 2.86±1.05 x 1011 and 2.36±0.54 x 1011 respectively. The mean platelet increments of SDP at 1 hour and 24 hours were 38±18.1 x 103/μl and 37.3±20.7x 103/μl. The mean platelet increments of RDP at 1 hour and 24 hours were 28.5±11.4 x 103/μl and 26 ±11.6 x 103/μl. The mean CCI of SDP at 1hour and 24 hours were 21.4 ±7.3 x 103/μl and 20.8±7.4 x 103/μl respectively. The mean CCI of RDP at 1hour and 24 hours were 18.5±6.3x 103/μl and 17.4±7.6 x 103/μl respectively.
Conclusions: Post-transfusion increments were significantly higher in patients who received SDP as compared to RDP, but the CCI and PR were comparable in both groups of patients.
Metrics
References
Michelsen AD. Flowcytometry, A clinical test of platelet function. Blood. 1996;87:4925-36.
Slichter SJ. Platelet transfusion therapy. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 1990;4:291-311.
Wallace EL, Churchill WH, Surgenor DM. Collection and transfusion of blood and blood components in the United States, 1992. Transfus. 1995;35:802-12.
Rinder HM, Smith BR. In vitro evaluation of stored platelets: Is there hope for predicting post-transfusion platelet survival and function. Transfus. 2003;43:2-6.
Hogman CF, Eriksson L, Wallvik J, Payrat JM. Clinical and laboratory experience with erythrocyte and platelet preparations from a 0.5 CPD Erythro-sol Opti-system. Vox Sang. 1997;73:212-9.
O’Connell B, Lee EJ, Schiffer CA. The value of 10 minutes post transfusion platelet counts. Transfus. 1998;28:66-7.
Anderson NA, Gray S, Copplestone JA, Chan DC, Hamon M, Prentice AG, et al. A prospective randomized study of three types of platelet concentrates in patients with hematological malignancy, corrected platelet count increments and frequency of non-haemolytic febrile transfusion reactions. Transfus Med. 1997;7:9-33.
Singh RP, Marwaha N, Malhotra P, Dash S. Therapeutic efficacy of different types of platelet concentrates in thrombocytopenic patients. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus. 2008;24(1):16-22.
Norol F, Bierling P, Roudot-Thoraval F, Lecoeur F, Rieux C, Lavaux A, et al. Platelet transfusion, A dose-responsestudy. Blood. 1998;92:1448-53.
Gurkan E, Patah PA, Saliba RM, Ramos CA, Anderson BS, Champlin R, et al. Efficacy of prophylactic transfusions using single donor apheresis platelets versus pooled platelet concentrates in AML/MDS patients receiving allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplantation. 2007;40(5):461-4.
Ness P, Campbell L, Sally A. Single donor versus pooled random donor platelet concentrates. Current Opinion Haematol. 2001;8(6):392-6.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
