Volume 59, Issue 7 pp. 2264-2275
TRANSFUSION MEDICINE

Reexamination of the chromium-51–labeled posttransfusion red blood cell recovery method

Richard O. Francis

Richard O. Francis

Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Equal contribution to this work.Search for more papers by this author
Sonia Mahajan

Sonia Mahajan

Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Equal contribution to this work.Search for more papers by this author
Francesca Rapido

Francesca Rapido

Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Pôle Neuroscience Tête et Cou, Département d'Anesthésie -Réanimation Hôpital Gui de Chauliac- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Montpellier, France

Search for more papers by this author
Francesca La Carpia

Francesca La Carpia

Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Mark Soffing

Mark Soffing

Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Chaitanya Divgi

Chaitanya Divgi

Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Randy Yeh

Randy Yeh

Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Akiva Mintz

Akiva Mintz

Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Lenhurst Leslie

Lenhurst Leslie

Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Irina Agrest

Irina Agrest

Nuclear Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Matthew S. Karafin

Matthew S. Karafin

Versiti Medical Sciences Institute, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Search for more papers by this author
Yelena Ginzburg

Yelena Ginzburg

Division of Hematology Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Beth H. Shaz

Beth H. Shaz

New York Blood Center, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Steven L. Spitalnik

Steven L. Spitalnik

Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Joseph Schwartz

Joseph Schwartz

Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Tiffany Thomas

Tiffany Thomas

Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author
Xiaoyun Fu

Xiaoyun Fu

BloodWorks Northwest, Seattle, Washington

Search for more papers by this author
Pascal Amireault

Pascal Amireault

Biologie Intégrée du Globule Rouge UMR_S1134, INSERM, Univ. Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Univ. de la Réunion, Univ. des Antilles, Institut National de la Transfusion Sanguine, Laboratory of Excellence GR-Ex, Paris, France

Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Hematological Disorders and Therapeutic Implications U1163/CNRS ERL 8254, INSERM, CNRS, Univ Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

Search for more papers by this author
Pierre Buffet

Pierre Buffet

Biologie Intégrée du Globule Rouge UMR_S1134, INSERM, Univ. Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Univ. de la Réunion, Univ. des Antilles, Institut National de la Transfusion Sanguine, Laboratory of Excellence GR-Ex, Paris, France

Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

Search for more papers by this author
James C. Zimring

James C. Zimring

BloodWorks Northwest, Seattle, Washington

Search for more papers by this author
Angelo D'Alessandro

Angelo D'Alessandro

University of Colorado Denver-Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado

Search for more papers by this author
Eldad A. Hod

Corresponding Author

Eldad A. Hod

Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center-New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York

Address reprint requests to: Dr. Eldad A. Hod, Columbia University Medical Center, 630 West 168th Street, P&S 14-434 New York, NY 10032; e-mail: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author
First published: 19 April 2019
Citations: 23
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants HL115557 and HL121275, by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through Grant Number UL1 TR000040, and by the Webb-Waring Early Career award from the Boettcher Foundation. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The chromium-51–labeled posttransfusion recovery (PTR) study has been the gold-standard test for assessing red blood cell (RBC) quality. Despite guiding RBC storage development for decades, it has several potential sources for error.

METHODS

Four healthy adult volunteers each donated an autologous, leukoreduced RBC unit, aliquots were radiolabeled with technetium-99m after 1 and 6 weeks of storage, and then infused. Subjects were imaged by single-photon-emission computed tomography immediately and 4 hours after infusion. Additionally, from subjects described in a previously published study, adenosine triphosphate levels in transfusates infused into 52 healthy volunteers randomized to a single autologous, leukoreduced, RBC transfusion after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 weeks of storage were correlated with PTR and laboratory parameters of hemolysis.

RESULTS

Evidence from one subject imaged after infusion of technetium-99m–labeled RBCs suggests that, in some individuals, RBCs may be temporarily sequestered in the liver and spleen immediately following transfusion and then subsequently released back into circulation; this could be one source of error leading to PTR results that may not accurately predict the true quantity of RBCs cleared by intra- and/or extravascular hemolysis. Indeed, adenosine triphosphate levels in the transfusates correlated more robustly with measures of extravascular hemolysis in vivo (e.g., serum iron, indirect bilirubin, non–transferrin-bound iron) than with PTR results or measures of intravascular hemolysis (e.g., plasma free hemoglobin).

CONCLUSIONS

Sources of measurement error are inherent in the chromium-51 PTR method. Transfusion of an entire unlabeled RBC unit, followed by quantifying extravascular hemolysis markers, may more accurately measure true posttransfusion RBC recovery.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

ROF, SM, FR, FLC, MS, CD, RY, AM, LL, IA, YG, BHS, JS, TT, XF, PA, PB, and EAH have disclosed no conflicts of interest. Unrelated to the contents of the manuscript, AD is the founder of Omix Technologies, Inc. and a consultant for Hemanext, Inc. MSK received a lecture honorarium from Hemanext, Inc. SLS is on the scientific advisory board of Hemanext, Inc. and is a consultant for Tioma, Inc. JCZ is on the scientific advisory board of Rubius Therapeutics.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.