The impact of refrigerated storage of UVC pathogen inactivated platelet concentrates on in vitro platelet quality parameters

Publication Type:
Journal Article
Vox Sanguinis, 2019, 114 (1), pp. 47 - 56
Issue Date:
Filename Description Size
Johnson_et_al-2019-Vox_Sanguinis.pdfSubmitted Version866.3 kB
Adobe PDF
Full metadata record
© 2018 International Society of Blood Transfusion Background and Objectives: Refrigeration (cold-storage) of pathogen inactivated (PI) platelet components may increase the shelf-life and safety profile of platelet components, compared to conventional room-temperature (RT) storage. Whilst there is substantial knowledge regarding the impact of these individual treatments on platelets, the combined effect has not been assessed. Materials and methods: Using a pool-and-split study design, paired buffy-coat derived platelets in 70% platelet additive solution (SSP+; MacoPharma) were left untreated or PI-treated using the THERAFLEX UV-Platelets System (UVC; MacoPharma). Units from each pair were split and stored at room temperature (20–24°C) or cold-stored (2–6°C) to yield RT, cold, RT-UVC and cold-UVC study groups (n = 8 in each group). In vitro quality and function was tested over 9 days. Results: Cold-storage of UVC-treated platelets reduced glycolytic metabolism (glucose consumption and lactate production) compared to RT-UVC units. Cold-UVC platelets demonstrated complete abrogation of HSR by day 5, increased externalisation of phosphatidylserine (annexin-V binding) and activation of the GPIIb/IIIa receptor (PAC-1 binding) above the levels observed with the individual treatments. Aggregation responses (ADP and collagen) were enhanced in the cold-UVC platelets compared to both RT groups, but this was primarily mediated by cold-storage. Haemostatic function, as measured using TEG, was similar between the groups. Conclusion: Cold-storage of UVC-treated platelets reduced PI-induced acceleration of glycolytic metabolism. However, combining cold-storage and UVC-treatment resulted in additional phenotypic changes compared to each treatment individually. Further work is required to understand the impact of these changes in clinical efficacy.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: