Quality and safety of red blood cells stored in two additive solutions subjected to multiple room temperature exposures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Many international standards state that red blood cell (RBC) products should be discarded if left out of controlled temperature storage for longer than 30 min to reduce the risk of bacterial growth and RBC loss of viability. This study aimed to verify whether repeated short-time exposures to room temperature (RT) influence RBCs quality and bacterial proliferation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Saline-adenine-glucose-mannitol (SAGM) and AS-3 RBC units were split and exposed to RT for 30 or 60 min on day 2, 7, 14, 21, and 42 of storage while reference units remained stored at 1-6°C. Red blood cell in vitro quality parameters were evaluated after each exposure. In a second experiment, SAGM and AS-3 RBC units were split and inoculated with Staphylococcus epidermidis (5 CFU/ml), Serratia marcescens (1 CFU/ml), and Serratia liquefaciens (1 CFU/ml). Reference units remained in storage while test units were exposed as described previously. Bacterial concentrations were investigated after each exposure. RESULTS: No differences were noticed between reference and test units in any of the in vitro parameters investigated. S. epidermidis did not grow in either reference or exposed RBCs. While S. marcescens did not grow in AS-3, bacterial growth was observed in RT-exposed SAGM RBCs on day 42. Similar growth was obtained for S. liquefaciens in the two additive solutions for both reference and test units. CONCLUSION: Short-time exposures to RT do not affect RBC quality and do not significantly influence bacterial growth. An expansion of the '30-minute' rule to 60 min should be considered by regulatory agencies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".