Premium
White cell subsets in apheresis and filtered platelet concentrates
Author(s) -
SowemimoCoker S.O.,
Kim A.,
Tribble E.,
Brandwein H.J.,
Wenz B.
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
transfusion
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.045
H-Index - 132
eISSN - 1537-2995
pISSN - 0041-1132
DOI - 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1998.38798346633.x
Subject(s) - apheresis , platelet , flow cytometry , plateletpheresis , platelet transfusion , white blood cell , medicine , immunology
BACKGROUND: White cell (WBC)‐reduced platelet concentrates (PCs) are defined by their absolute WBC count, a criterion which provides no information regarding the various WBC subsets contained in the PC. These heterogeneous cells are known to mediate different physiologic and pathophysiologic functions and account for distinct adverse transfusion responses. This study describes a method which allows the detection and quantification of these subsets and characterizes their presence in a variety of platelet components. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Random‐donor pooled PCs (RD PCs) and single‐donor apheresis PCs (SD PCs) were studied. RD PCs consisting of 6 units of 2‐ to 3‐day old PCs were randomly assigned to be filtered with one of four WBC‐reduction filters from three different manufacturers (n=34). The residual WBCs were pelleted by centrifugation and isolated on a density gradient. The various WBC subsets were quantified by flow cytometry in unfiltered and filtered PCs using fluorescence and two‐angle light scatter. SD PCs obtained with two manufacturer's systems and three processing protocols (n=30) were studied in like manner. RESULTS: WBC counts for non‐WBC‐ reduced PCs averaged 3 × 10(8) in RD PCs and ranged from 8.6 to 9.6 × 10(6) per SD PC. Residual WBC counts in filtered PCs ranged from 2.3 × 10(4) to 2.2 × 10(5) and those in WBC‐reduced SD PCs averaged 2.2 × 10(5) per unit. The data demonstrate significant phenotypic differences among PCs produced with various procedures. All SD PCs and two of four filtered RD PCs contained five WBC populations including granulocytes and monocytes, while RD PCs filtered with the remaining manufacturer's devices contained only lymphocytes. CONCLUSION: The data confirm that distinct phenotypic differences exist among PCs prepared with different devices and/or procedures. It is suggested that as for non‐generic pharmaceuticals, the clinical benefits of these various PCs should be individually proved.