This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Nitescu, N Articles by Bengtson, J P Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nitescu, N Articles by Bengtson, J P Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Blood salvage with a continuous autotransfusion system compared with a haemofiltration system

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden, nicoletta.nitescu{at}vgregion.se

A Bengtsson

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden

J P Bengtson

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden

Background: Red blood cells may be destroyed by autotransfusion processing during intraoperative salvage. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the blood component recovery rate of techniques built on either continuous centrifugation and washing, or haemofiltration (HF).

Methods: Two different methods used in blood salvage - red cell salvage with continuous processing with centrifugation and saline washing (Continuous Auto Transfusion System, CATS) and whole blood recirculation through a 30000-Da filter, i.e., HF - were compared in a randomized laboratory study using donor whole blood activated by cobra venom factor. The recovery of red blood cells, haemoglobin, free haemoglobin, leucocytes, platelets, albumin, total protein and potassium was measured.

Results: The recovery of red cells was 86% with CATS and 76% with HF. HF had a significantly higher recovery of leucocytes (CATS 20%, HF 63%), platelets (CATS 4%, HF 37%), albumin (CATS 0.2%, HF 70%), total protein (CATS 1.3%, HF 71%) and potassium (CATS 2%, HF 17%). Less than 1% haemolysis was obtained in processed blood from both groups.

Conclusion: Both methods caused little destruction of the red blood cells during processing. There was a larger reinfusion of leucocytes, platelets, albumin, total protein and extracellular potassium when HF was used compared with the ‘CATS’ method.

Perfusion, Vol. 17, No. 5, 357-362 (2002)
DOI: 10.1191/0267659102pf603oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?