Comparing two extracellular additives to facilitate extended storage of red blood cells in a supercooled state
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) levels guide many aspects of the red blood cell (RBC) hypothermic storage lesions. As a result, efforts to improve the quality of hypothermic-stored red cell concentrates (RCCs) have largely centered around designing storage solutions to promote ATP retention. Considering reduced temperatures alone would diminish metabolism, and thereby enhance ATP retention, we evaluated: (a) whether the quality of stored blood is improved at −4°C relative to conventional 4°C storage, and (b) whether the addition of trehalose and PEG400 can enhance these improvements. Study Design and Methods Ten CPD/SAGM leukoreduced RCCs were pooled, split, and resuspended in a next-generation storage solution (i.e., PAG3M) supplemented with 0–165 mM of trehalose or 0–165 mM of PEG400. In a separate subset of samples, mannitol was removed at equimolar concentrations to achieve a fixed osmolarity between the additive and non-additive groups. All samples were stored at both 4°C and −4°C under a layer of paraffin oil to prevent ice formation. Results PEG400 reduced hemolysis and increased deformability in −4°C-stored samples when used at a concentration of 110 mM. Reduced temperatures did indeed enhance ATP retention; however, in the absence of an additive, the characteristic storage-dependent decline in deformability and increase in hemolysis was exacerbated. The addition of trehalose enhanced this decline in deformability and hemolysis at −4°C; although, this was marginally alleviated by the osmolarity-adjustments. In contrast, outcomes with PEG400 were worsened by these osmolarity adjustments, but at no concentration, in the absence of these adjustments, was damage greater than the control. Discussion Supercooled temperatures can allow for improved ATP retention; however, this does not translate into improved storage success. Additional work is necessary to further elucidate the mechanism of injury that progresses at these temperatures such that storage solutions can be designed which allow RBCs to benefit from this diminished rate of metabolic deterioration. The present study suggests that PEG400 could be an ideal component in these solutions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".