A critical comparison of platelet preparation methods

Purpose of review Platelet concentrates may be prepared from whole blood or by plateletpheresis. Currently, the non-evidence-based preponderance of apheresis units in the United States and the 50: 50 ratio in Europe may not optimize the gifts of whole-blood donors or minimize healthcare costs. Post-storage pooled, whole-blood-derived platelets, on the other hand, do not provide the convenience of or an equivalent level of safety as apheresis platelets. Recent findings Some data suggest that different methods of manufacture of whole-blood-derived platelets (platelet-rich plasma or buffy coat intermediate steps) result in differing degrees of platelet activation, which may impact on the quality of stored concentrates. Recent studies have observed superior radiolabel recovery and post-transfusion increments for platelets derived from apheresis compared with platelet-rich plasma whole-blood-derived platelets. A pre-storage pooling system for whole-blood-derived platelets has just been licensed in the USA, and may eventually combine the benefits of apheresis-derived and whole-blood-derived platelets. The advantages of the European method of manufacture of buffy coat whole-blood-derived platelet concentrate have convinced the Canadian Blood Services to abandon platelet-rich-plasma-derived concentrates. Summary We present a literature-based review of the relative merits of apheresis-derived and whole-blood-derived platelets. Additional studies are needed in order to define the optimal proportion of the platelet supply from apheresis collections and the choice of whole-blood-derived production method for US blood providers.