Skip to main content
main-content

19.08.2016 | Original Article | Ausgabe 1/2017

HSS Journal ® 1/2017

Commercial Separation Systems Designed for Preparation of Platelet-Rich Plasma Yield Differences in Cellular Composition

Zeitschrift:
HSS Journal ® > Ausgabe 1/2017
Autoren:
MD Ryan M. Degen, MD Johnathan A. Bernard, MD Kristin S. Oliver, MD Joshua S. Dines
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.​1007/​s11420-016-9519-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Study: Level IV

Abstract

Background

The role of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of sport-related injuries is unclear, largely due to the heterogeneity of clinical results. This may relate to compositional differences in PRP from different separation systems.

Questions/Purposes

This study aims to compare the composition of PRP produced with five different commercially available systems, focusing on cellular concentrations and pH.

Methods

Seven donors (41 ± 12 years) provided blood for PRP preparation using five systems (Arthrex Angel, Emcyte Genesis CS, Arteriocyte Magellan, Harvest SmartPrep, and Biomet GPS III). Post processing, cellular composition was measured including platelets (PLT), white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils (NE), and red blood cells (RBC), as well as pH.

Results

Platelet concentration and capture efficiency were similar between systems, except the Angel 7% preparation had a greater concentration than Genesis CS (2310 ± 524 vs. 1129 ± 264 k/μL). WBC concentration was variable between systems; however, significant differences were only found between the Angel 2% and GPS III preparations (11.0 ± 4.5, 27.3 ± 7.1 k/μL). NE concentration was significantly lower in the Angel 2% and 7% preparations compared with GPS III (0.6 ± 0.6 and 1.8 ± 1.3 k/μL vs. 9.4 ± 7.0 k/μL). RBC concentration was highest in SmartPrep (3.2 ± 0.6 M/μL) and Genesis CS systems (3.1 ± 0.6 M/μL) compared with all other systems (≤1.1 ± 1.2 M/μL). Finally, pH was significantly lower with the SmartPrep system (6.95 ± 0.06) compared with all others (≥7.26 ± 0.06).

Conclusion

Aside from platelet concentration and capture efficiency, significant compositional differences were identified between preparation systems. Caution should be employed when interpreting clinical results of studies utilizing PRP, as the role of compositional differences and their effect on outcome are unknown. Further study is necessary to determine the clinical significance of these differences.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

★ PREMIUM-INHALT
e.Med Interdisziplinär

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de. Zusätzlich können Sie eine Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl in gedruckter Form beziehen – ohne Aufpreis.

Weitere Produktempfehlungen anzeigen
Zusatzmaterial
ESM 1 (PDF 1224 kb)
11420_2016_9519_MOESM1_ESM.pdf
ESM 2 (PDF 1224 kb)
11420_2016_9519_MOESM2_ESM.pdf
ESM 3 (PDF 1224 kb)
11420_2016_9519_MOESM3_ESM.pdf
ESM 4 (PDF 1224 kb)
11420_2016_9519_MOESM4_ESM.pdf
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

HSS Journal ® 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Global Tribology Summit

Global Tribology Summit Editorial

  1. Sie können e.Med Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie 14 Tage kostenlos testen (keine Print-Zeitschrift enthalten). Der Test läuft automatisch und formlos aus. Es kann nur einmal getestet werden.

  2. Sie können e.Med Radiologie 14 Tage kostenlos testen (keine Print-Zeitschrift enthalten). Der Test läuft automatisch und formlos aus. Es kann nur einmal getestet werden.

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Bildnachweise