ArticleHematology, transfusion and cell therapy
Validation of blood components transport through a pneumatic tube system.
Article in Hematology, transfusion and cell therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Triple apheresis platelet concentrate quality after pneumatic tube system, conveyor box, and courier transport: An observational study.Health science reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUrgent blood component transfusions may be life-saving for patients in hemorrhagic shock. Measures to reduce the time taken to provide these transfusions, such as uncrossmatched transfusion or abbreviated testing, are available. However, transport time is still an additional delay and the use of a pneumatic tube system (PTS) may be an alternative to shorten the transport time of blood components.
objectivesTo assess pneumatic tube system transportation of blood components based on a validation protocol.
methodsPre- and post-transport quality control laboratory parameters, visual appearance, transport time and temperature of the packed red blood cells (RBCs), thawed fresh plasma (TFP), cryoprecipitate (CR), and platelet concentrate (PC) were evaluated. Parameters were compared between transport via pneumatic tube and courier.
resultsA total of 23 units of RBCs, 50 units of TFP, 30 units of CR and ten units of PC were evaluated. No statistically significant differences were found between pre- and post-transport laboratory results. There was also no difference in laboratory parameters between transport modalities (PTS versus courier). All blood components transported matched regulatory requirements for quality criteria. The temperature during transport remained stable and the transport time via PTS was significantly shorter than the courier's transport time (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe PTS was considered a fast, safe and reliable means of transportation for blood components, also securing quality prerequisites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.