An investigation of red blood cell concentrate quality during storage in paediatric‐sized polyvinylchloride bags plasticized with alternatives to di‐2‐ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) is a blood bag plasticizer. It is also a toxin, raising concerns for vulnerable populations, for example, neonates and infants. Here, the in vitro quality of red cell concentrates (RCC) stored in paediatric bags formulated with alternative plasticizers to DEHP was compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: RCC were pooled and split into polyvinylchloride (PVC)/DEHP, PVC/1,2-cyclohexanedicarboxylic acid diisononyl ester (DINCH) or PVC/butyryl trihexyl citrate (BTHC) bags. Quality was assessed on storage days 5, 21, 35 and 43. RESULTS: Metabolism differed among the bags: pCO2 levels were lowest and pO2 were highest in BTHC bags. Glucose consumption and lactate production suggested higher metabolic rates in BTHC bags. ATP levels were best maintained in DINCH bags (day 43 mean level: 2·86 ± 0·29 μmol/g Hb). RCC in BTHC bags had the greatest potassium release (54·6 ± 3·0 mm on day 43). From day 21, haemolysis was higher in BTHC bags (P < 0·01) and by day 43 had exceeded 0·8% (0·85 ± 0·10%). RCC in BTHC bags showed more microparticle formation than RCC in DEHP or DINCH bags. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the BTHC formulation used was detrimental to RBC quality. DINCH bags could be a viable alternative to DEHP: they outperformed DEHP bags energetically, with better maintenance of ATP levels.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".