Recommendations for in vitro evaluation of blood components collected, prepared and stored in non-DEHP medical devices.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: DEHP, di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, is the most common member of the class of ortho-phthalates, which are used as plasticizers. The Medical Device Regulation has restricted the use of phthalates in medical devices. Also DEHP has been added to the Annex XIV of REACH, "Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals" due to its endocrine disrupting properties to the environment. As such, the sunset date for commercialisation of DEHP-containing blood bags is May 27th 2025. There are major concerns in meeting this deadline as these systems have not yet been fully validated and/or CE-marked. Also, since DEHP is known to affect red cell quality during storage, it is imperative to transit to non-DEHP without affecting blood product quality. Here, EBA members aim to establish common grounds on the evaluation and assessment of blood components collected, prepared and stored in non-DEHP devices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on data as well as the input of relevant stakeholders a rationale for the validation of each component was composed. RESULTS: The red cell components will require the most extensive validation as their quality is directly affected by the absence of DEHP, as opposed to platelet and plasma components. CONCLUSION: Studies in the scope of evaluating the quality of blood products obtained with non-DEHP devices, under the condition that they are carried out according to these recommendations, could be used by all members of the EBA to serve as scientific support in the authorization process specific to their jurisdiction or for their internal validation use.

Assessment of the soluble proteins HMGB1, CD40L and CD62P during various platelet preparation processes and the storage of platelet concentrates: The BEST collaborative study.

BACKGROUND: Structural and biochemical changes in stored platelets are influenced by collection and processing methods. This international study investigates the effects of platelet (PLT) processing and storage conditions on HMGB1, sCD40L, and sCD62P protein levels in platelet concentrate supernatants (PCs). STUDY DESIGN/METHODS: PC supernatants (n = 3748) were collected by each international centre using identical centrifugation methods (n = 9) and tested centrally using the ELISA/Luminex platform. Apheresis versus the buffy coat (BC-PC) method, plasma storage versus PAS and RT storage versus cold (4°C) were investigated. We focused on PC preparation collecting samples during early (RT: day 1-3; cold: day 1-5) and late (RT: day 4-7; cold: day 7-10) storage time points. RESULTS: HMGB1, sCD40L, and sCD62P concentrations were similar during early storage periods, regardless of storage solution (BC-PC plasma and BC-PC PAS-E) or temperature. During storage and without PAS, sCD40L and CD62P in BC-PC supernatants increased significantly (+33% and +41%, respectively) depending on storage temperature (22 vs. 4°C). However, without PAS-E, levels decreased significantly (-31% and -20%, respectively), depending on storage temperature (22 vs. 4°C). Contrastingly, the processing method appeared to have greater impact on HMGB1 release versus storage duration. These data highlight increases in these parameters during storage and differences between preparation methods and storage temperatures. CONCLUSIONS: The HMGB1 release mechanism/intracellular pathways appear to differ from sCD62P and sCD40L. The extent to which these differences affect patient outcomes, particularly post-transfusion platelet increment and adverse events, warrants further investigation in clinical trials with various therapeutic indications.

Survey of blood centre readiness regarding removal of DEHP from blood bag sets: The BEST Collaborative Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) must be removed from blood bag sets in Europe by 27 May 2025. DEHP is known to interact with the red blood cell (RBC) membrane, resulting in reduced haemolysis and thus prolonging shelf-life. Current non-DEHP alternatives result in increased haemolysis requiring reconsideration of the RBC shelf-life. Although the immediate impact of eliminating DEHP is to the European community, the non-DEHP movement could affect blood bag set availability globally. The purpose of this survey is to understand blood centre readiness regarding the transition to non-DEHP blood collection and storage systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 24-question on-line survey was completed by members of the Biomedical Excellence for Safer Transfusion Collaborative research network. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 16 blood collection or processing institutions. A majority of respondents (12/16) indicated that both shelf-life and haemolysis were equally important in selecting non-DEHP blood bag sets. Six respondents would accept a lower RBC product shelf-life compared to current practice. Respondents were not clear on the best non-DEHP vinyl material or RBC storage solution. Three European blood centres indicated they have developed non-DEHP transition plans. One challenge identified regarding the transition to non-DEHP is the extensive validation testing that will be required. CONCLUSION: Blood centres in Europe are concerned with meeting the sunset date for DEHP, considering that limited non-DEHP blood bag and RBC storage solutions are currently available. Banning DEHP in Europe, which may have global ramifications, represents a major challenge not yet fully understood by the transfusion medicine community.

Not all red cell concentrate units are equivalent: international survey of processing and in vitro quality data.

INTRODUCTION: In vitro qualitative differences exist in red cell concentrates (RCCs) units processed from whole blood (WB) depending on the method of processing. Minimal literature exists on differences in processing and variability in quality data. Therefore, we collected information from blood manufacturers worldwide regarding (1) details of WB collection and processing used to produce RCCs and (2) quality parameters and testing as part of routine quality programmes. METHODS: A secure web-based survey was developed, refined after pilot data collection and distributed to blood centres. Descriptive analyses were performed. RESULTS: Data from ten blood centres in nine countries were collected. Six blood centres (60%) processed RCCs using the top-and-top (TAT) method which produces RCCs and plasma, and eight centres (80%) used the bottom-and-top (BAT) which additionally produces buffy coat platelets. Five of the centres used both processing methods; however, four favoured BAT processing. One centre utilized the Reveos automated system exclusively. All centres performed pre-storage leucoreduction. Other parameters demonstrated variability, including active cooling at collection, length of hold before processing, donor haemoglobin limits, acceptable collection weights, collection sets, time to leucoreduction, centrifugation speeds, extraction devices and maximum RCC shelf life. Quality marker testing also differed amongst blood centres. Trends towards higher RCC unit volume, haemolysis and residual leucoctyes were seen in the TAT compared with BAT processing across centres. CONCLUSION: Methods and parameters of WB processing and quality testing of RCCs differ amongst surveyed blood manufacturers. Further studies are needed to assess variations and to potentially improve methods and product quality.