• Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: Comparison of hematopoietic progenitor cell collection using different inlet flow rates with the Fenwal Amicus
  • Beteiligte: Burgstaler, Edwin A.; Bryant, Sandra C.; Winters, Jeffrey L.
  • Erschienen: Wiley, 2022
  • Erschienen in: Journal of Clinical Apheresis, 37 (2022) 3, Seite 206-216
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • DOI: 10.1002/jca.21959
  • ISSN: 0733-2459; 1098-1101
  • Schlagwörter: Hematology ; General Medicine
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: AbstractPurposeWe have used a hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) algorithm (standard [STD]) that restricted the inlet flow rate to 65 mL/min for peripheral white blood cell count (PWBC) >35 × 109/L (STD). In this study, we evaluated a technique that allows 85 mL/min, regardless of the PWBC count (high). For patients with PWBC >35 × 109/L, a prospective, randomized comparison of the high flow rate vs the STD PWBC‐based flow rate (65 mL/min) was performed, comparing CD34+ and lymphocyte yields, collection efficiencies (CE1), mononuclear cells (MNC), and granulocytes, red blood cell (RBC), and platelet content.MethodsThe Fenwal Amicus version 4.5 with a heparinized ACD‐A anticoagulant (AC) delivered at a 26:1 AC ratio was used. Paired comparisons between high and STD techniques were assessed with Wilcoxon signed rank tests, with P < .05 considered significant. Data are summarized as medians.ResultsForty patient pairs (autologous) were compared. Diagnoses included primarily multiple myeloma (60%) and lymphoma (37.5%). High had significantly higher median average inlet rates (69 vs 55 mL/min), whole blood processed (20 vs 16 L), and cycles (15 vs 14) than STD. There were no significant differences in pre‐procedure counts. Collection contents were (high/STD): 306/328 × 106 CD34+ cells, 48/59% CD34+ CE1 (significant), 0.2/0.2 × 109/kg lymphocytes, 45/57% lymphocyte CE1, 63/59 × 109 WBC, 15/16 × 109 granulocytes, and 1.9/1.7 × 1011 platelets.ConclusionsThe simpler, standardized high flow technique did not significantly increase or decrease CD34+ cells or lymphocyte yields, but did significantly decrease CD34+ CE1. The effects on cross‐cellular content were minimal and not clinically significant.