How do I implement pathogen-reduced platelets?

Implementation strategy for complete pathogen reduction technology treated apheresis platelet inventory

BACKGROUND

Bacterial contamination in platelets remain a major public health concern, which prompted the US Food and Drug Administration guidance for bacterial contamination mitigation. Pathogen reduction technology (PRT) is one mitigation strategy that has shown success in Europe over the last decade. Therefore, our center sought to transition from a dual system of bacterial culturing (BacT) and PRT to full PRT.

METHODS

A 1 month pilot study was conducted to simulate 100% PRT conditions. Our center also collected baseline data on key platelet production metrics in the 4 months prior to 100% PRT and compared it to the 4 months post-implementation.

RESULTS

The pilot study showed no statistical differences in split rate, proportion of low-yield products, or proportion of single, double, and triple collections. The only observed difference was an 11 min increase in the average duration of double collections. Our baseline versus post-implementation monitoring showed no difference in split rate, discard rate, percentage of low-yield units, and average yield of low yield units. Statistical differences were detected in the proportion of single, double, and triple collections, as well as the average yield of full dose products. Roughly 20% of our inventory consisted of low-yield products.

DISCUSSION

With suitable mitigation strategies, transitioning to a full PRT inventory may result in higher net margins while not adversely affecting overall platelet production. A pilot study is a good way to project potential effects of switching from a dual BacT and PRT inventory to full PRT, and can be adopted by other centers aiming to make the transition.

Transfusion outcomes between regular and low yield pathogen reduced platelets across different patient populations in a single institution

BACKGROUND

Pathogen reduction technology (PRT) effectively mitigates bacterial contamination in platelets but is more likely to produce low yield units. Although low dose transfusion using conventional platelets has not been associated with increased bleeding, these findings have not been reproduced with PRT-treated platelets.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Platelet transfusions in a tertiary adult hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Comparisons were made between PRT-treated regular (PRT-PR) and low (PRT-PL) yield platelets. Outcomes examined included the number of platelets and RBCs transfused, transfusion-free interval, and corrected count increment (CCI). Subgroup analyses were also performed on hematology-oncology inpatients and outpatients, as well as non-hematology-oncology patients.

RESULTS

Platelet utilization per patient remained mostly unchanged (mean 2.9-4.3 units per patient per month) even when the frequency of PRT-PL transfusion increased. Among 1402 patients examined, the number of platelets and RBCs transfused was not significantly different between patients first transfused with PRT-PR versus PRT-PL (mean number of platelet units = 2.8 vs. 3.1, p = 0.38; mean number of RBC units = 4.8 vs. 4.3, p = 0.93). Among 10,257 platelet transfusions examined, the transfusion-free interval (hazard ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.10) and CCI (10.2 vs. 11.0, p = 0.70) were comparable between PRT-PR and PRT-PL units. Similar findings were observed in all subgroups, except for shortened transfusion-free intervals among hematology-oncology inpatients.

CONCLUSION

PRT-PR and PRT-PL units may be used in an equivalent manner to maintain an adequate platelet inventory, since there was only a minor difference in time between transfusions.

Pathogen Reduction for Platelets—A Review of Recent Implementation Strategies

The development of pathogen reduction technologies (PRT) for labile blood components is a long-pursued goal in transfusion medicine. While PRT for red blood cells and whole blood are still in an early phase of development, different PRT platforms for plasma and platelets are commercially available and routinely used in several countries. This review describes complementary strategies recommended by the US FDA to mitigate the risk of septic reactions in platelet recipients, including PRT and large-volume delayed sampling, and summarizes the main findings of recent reports discussing economical and organizational issues of platelet PRT implementation. Sophisticated mathematical analytical models are available to determine the impact of PRT on platelet costs, shortages and outdates in different settings. PRT implementation requires careful planning to ensure the availability of sufficient economical, technological and human resources. A phased approach was used in most PRT implementation programs, starting with adult and pediatric immunocompromised patients at higher risk of developing septic platelet transfusion reactions. Overall, the reviewed studies show that significant progress has been made in this area, although additional efforts will be necessary to reduce the storage lesion of PRT platelets and to expand the sustainable applicability of PRT to all labile blood components.