ReviewBiomicrofluidics2024
Recent developments in microfluidic passive separation to enable purification of platelets for transfusion.
Review in Biomicrofluidics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Platelet transfusion is a lifesaving therapy intended to prevent and treat bleeding. However, in addition to platelets, a typical unit also contains a large volume of supernatant that accumulates multiple pro-inflammatory contaminants, including residual leukocytes, microaggregates, microparticles, antibodies, and cytokines. Infusion of this supernatant is responsible for virtually all adverse reactions to platelet transfusions. Conventional methods for removing residual leukocytes (leukoreduction) and reducing the volume of transfused supernatant (volume reduction) struggle to mitigate these risks holistically. Leukoreduction filters can remove leukocytes and microaggregates but fail to reduce supernatant volume, whereas centrifugation can reduce volume, but it is ineffective against larger contaminants and damages platelets. Additionally, platelet purification based on these methods is often too logistically complex, time-consuming, and labor-intensive to implement routinely. Emerging microfluidic technologies offer promising alternatives through passive separation mechanisms that enable cell separation with minimal damage and drastically reduced instrumentation size and facility requirements. This review examines recent innovations in microfluidic cell separation that can be used for leukoreduction and volume reduction of platelets. It begins by defining the performance requirements that any separation method must meet to successfully replace conventional methods currently used to perform these tasks. Standard performance metrics are described, including leukocyte depletion efficiency, degree of volume reduction, processing throughput, and platelet recovery. Finally, the review outlines the primary challenges that must be overcome to enable simple-to-use, disposable microfluidic devices capable of both reducing the platelet unit volume and removing pro-inflammatory contaminants, while preserving most functional platelets for transfusion.
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.