Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40894142›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025

Liquid Plasma vs Thawed Plasma: Tracking Coagulation Factor Activity Changes During Storage.

Nalan Yurtsever, Catherine Gereg, Nichelle Perera, Parveen Bahel, Henry M Rinder, Edward L Snyder, Christopher A Tormey, Edward S Lee

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Nichelle Perera
Parveen Bahel
Christopher A TormeyORCID 0000-0003-1785-2245

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Liquid plasma (LQP) stands out as an alternative to thawed plasma (TP) for emergent transfusions due to longer shelf life. We aim to measure fibrinogen, Protein C, Protein S, FV, FVII, and FVIII activity in LQP, quantify how these factors levels change in LQP during storage, and characterize how they compare in LQP to TP. Materials and Methods: Coagulation factor activities were measured on Days 15, 26, and 27 for LQP (n=26) and Day 5 for TP (n=24). Bayesian statistical modeling was used to compare coagulation factor activity and quantify changes in activity during storage. Results: Fibrinogen and Protein C activity in Day 26 LQP (LQP26) was comparable to Day 5 TP (TP5) with posterior mean activity of 252 mg/dL vs 247 mg/dL and 100.4% vs 111.3%, respectively. FV, FVII, and FVIII had slightly lower activity in LQP26 vs TP5 with posterior mean activities of 42.6% vs 58.4%, 55.0% vs 62.2%, and 48.8% vs 55.0%, respectively. Protein S in LQP26 was low with posterior mean activity of 28.0%, which was slightly less than half that of TP5 at 64.9%. From Day 15 to Day 26, FVII in LQP decreased at a rate of -3.49% per day whereas fibrinogen, Protein C, Protein S, FV, and FVIII activity in LQP remained relatively stable. Conclusion: Compared to TP5, LQP26 has comparable activities of fibrinogen, Protein C, FV, FVII, and FVII but lower activity of Protein S. LQP is a viable alternative for use in emergency transfusions and massive transfusion protocols. Highlights: Liquid plasma factor activities, with the exception of protein S, are comparable to thawed plasma in terms of emergency use with the advantage of extended shelf life.Liquid plasma has adequate fibrinogen and Protein C levels on the last day of expiration.Liquid plasma has ∼50% FV, FVII and FVIII levels on the last day of expiration, making it a sufficient replacement option to TP for active bleeding.

Identifiers

PMID40894142
PMCPMC12393582

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.