Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23058859›Full record

Trial reportBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue2013

Qualitative and quantitative cell recovery in umbilical cord blood processed by two automated devices in routine cord blood banking: a comparative study.

Pilar Solves, Dolores Planelles, Vicente Mirabet, Amando Blanquer, Francisco Carbonell-Uberos

Abstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Pilar SolvesCord Blood Bank, Transfusion Centre, Valencia, Spain. solves_pil@gva.es
Dolores Planelles
Vicente Mirabet
Amando Blanquer
Francisco Carbonell-Uberos

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVolume reduction is a widely used procedure in umbilical cord blood banking. It concentrates progenitor cells by reducing plasma and red blood cells, thereby optimising the use of storage space. Sepax and AXP are automated systems specifically developed for umbilical cord blood processing. These systems basically consist of a bag processing set into which cord blood is transferred and a device that automatically separates the different components during centrifugation.

methodsThe aim of this study was to analyse and compare cell recovery of umbilical cord blood units processed with Sepax and AXP at Valencia Cord Blood Bank. Cell counts were performed before and after volume reduction with AXP and Sepax.

resultsWhen analysing all the data (n =1,000 for AXP and n= 670 for Sepax), the percentages of total nucleated cell recovery and red blood cell depletion were 76.76 ± 7.51% and 88.28 ± 5.62%, respectively, for AXP and 78.81 ± 7.25% and 88.32 ± 7.94%, respectively, for Sepax (P <0.005 for both variables). CD34(+) cell recovery and viability in umbilical cord blood units were similar with both devices. Mononuclear cell recovery was significantly higher when the Sepax system was used. DISCUSSION: Both the Sepax and AXP automated systems achieve acceptable total nucleated cell recovery and good CD34(+) cell recovery after volume reduction of umbilical cord blood units and maintain cell viability. It should be noted that total nucleated cell recovery is significantly better with the Sepax system. Both systems deplete red blood cells efficiently, especially AXP which works without hydroxyethyl starch.

Indexed as

Blood BankingBlood Component RemovalCell SurvivalFemaleFetal BloodHumansLeukocytes, MononuclearMale

Identifiers

PMID23058859
PMCPMC3729132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.