Volume 31, Issue 5 pp. 459-463
Brief Report

Citrate anticoagulation: Are blood donors donating bone?

Walter Bialkowski

Corresponding Author

Walter Bialkowski

Department of Physical Therapy, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Correspondence to: Walter Bialkowski, Clinical and Translational Rehabilitation Health, Marquette University, P.O. Box 1881, Milwaukee, WI 53201-1881, USA. E-mail: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author
Roberta Bruhn

Roberta Bruhn

Epidemiology Core, Blood Systems Research Institute, San Francisco, California

Search for more papers by this author
Gustaf Edgren

Gustaf Edgren

Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

Search for more papers by this author
Paula Papanek

Paula Papanek

Department of Physical Therapy, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 26 November 2015
Citations: 17

Conflicts of interest: none.

Abstract

An estimated 2.4 million volunteer apheresis blood donation procedures were performed in the United States in 2010, and increases in the proportion of transfused blood products derived from apheresis blood collections have been consistently reported. Anticoagulation is required during apheresis and is achieved with citrate. Donor exposure to citrate causes an acute physiological response to maintain serum mineral homeostasis. Some data are available on the sequelae of this acute response in the days and weeks following exposure, raising questions about bone mineral density in regular apheresis donors. New research is emerging that addresses the potential long-term health outcomes of repeated citrate exposure. This article reviews the acute physiological response to citrate anticoagulation in volunteer blood donors, presents contrasting perspectives on the potential effects of citrate exposure on bone density, and identifies key knowledge gaps in our understanding of long-term health outcomes in apheresis donors. J. Clin. Apheresis 31:459–463, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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