Optimizing Platelet Transfusion for Clinical Practice. Do Platelets's Age Matter for Therapeutic Platelets Transfusion?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Platelet concentrates (PCs) with the imple-mentation of bacterial testing have a storage period of 7 days. It was reported that platelet function decreased gradually in vitro until the 5th or 7th day of storage. Pooled PCs (PPCs) are main-ly used in Europe and Canada and there is the possibility to use many PPCs with 7 days storage for transfusion in case of bleeding or massive transfusion. Aim of Study: The aim of this study is to test in vitro both storage conditions and function of platelet-rich plasma (PRP-PCs) during storage for 7 days to assess the function of the PCs for the possibility to extend the use of stored PCs up to 7 days and its use for therapeutic and massive platelets transfusion. Patients and Methods: In this study 18 PRP-PCs, were evaluated for chemical analysis by measuring pH, LDH pro-duction, and glucose consumption levels and platelet aggre-gation testing using adenosine diphosphate (ADP), collagen (COLL), and ristocetin (RIST) and epinephrine (EPI) on days 1,3,5, and 7 of storage of PCs. Results: The platelets yield was >5.58 x 1010 which indi-cates accurate platelet separation and storage. The metabolic parameters indicated stable storage conditions throughout the 7-day period. The chemical analysis showed that there is stable pH during all days of storage above 6.4. Aggregation respons-es of the PCs decreased gradually and significantly (p<0.001) starting from 1st day when compared with 3rd, 5th and 7th day. On the 7th day the platelets lost their response to EPI and ADP, while still maintaining a normal response to RIST and weak to COLL. Conclusion: There is a loss of some function on the 6-7th day of platelet storage which may indicate that it is suitable for prophylactic more than therapeutic transfusion. In order to pro-vide more clinical benefit to the patients with thrombocytopen-ic bleeding, the platelets should be less than 7 days of storage.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".