The correlation of red cell membrane fragility with glucose and pH in PRC during storage
Main Article Content
Keywords
glucose, membrane fragility, packed red cell, pH
Abstract
Introduction: In packed red cells (PRCs), at least 70-80% of red blood cells (RBCs) are viable or circulating in the recipient's circulation 24 hours post-transfusion. Viability correlates with the osmotic fragility of the red cell membrane and the loss of ATP. PRC with citrate phosphate dextrose-adenine-1 (CPDA-1) as a preservative can be stored for up to 35 days, but the Indonesian Red Cross blood transfusion unit only permits up to 14 days. Based on reports that recipients of one-month-old blood developed icterus, the shelf life of red blood cells was established. This research aims to investigate the relationship between glucose and pH in PRC and the fragility of red cell membranes.
Methods: PRC were stored at 4±2°C for 0, 7, 14, 21, 28, and 35 days in a cold room. Glucose, pH, and osmotic fragility tests were performed using samples from PRC. The data were analyzed statistically using SPSS.
Results: There were significant decreases in glucose, pH, and membrane fragility (p<0.05). The decrease of glucose at each observed time is significant if compared with glucose at 0 days because the glucose was consumed for glycolysis. pH was also decreased from 7.56±0.03 on day 0 to 6.81±0.03 on day 35 because of lactate accumulation. The result of the osmotic fragility test shows that 23.45±2.63% of RBC have hemolyzed on day 7 and 75.47± 2.18 % of RBC have hemolyzed on day 14. The correlation between glucose and pH, glucose and membrane fragility, and pH and membrane fragility were strong and significant (r>0.8 and p<0.05). It showed that glycolysis proceeds in stored RBC, but because no glucose was added and pH decreased, the glycolysis diminished. As a consequence, the fragility of the red cell membrane increased.
Conclusion: There is a correlation between red cell membrane fragility and glucose and pH in PRC.
References
2. Brecher M. Technical manual. 15th ed. Maryland: AABB; 2005.
3. Wolfe LC. The membrane and the lesions of storage in preserved red cells. Transfusion. 1985;25(3):185–203. doi: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1985.25385219897.x
4. Yoo E-H, Lee S-Y. Glucose biosensors: an overview of use in clinical practice. Sensors (Basel). 2010;10(5):4558–76. doi: 10.3390/s100504558
5. Priyana A, Setiabudi R. Kualitas Konsentrat Trombosit, Kriopresipitat dan Darah Simpan Produksi LTD PMI DKI Jakarta [Internet]. Universitas Indonesia; 1991. Available from: https://lontar.ui.ac.id/detail?id=82458&lokasi=lokal
6. Soewaoto H, Sadikin M, Kurniati M, Wanandi S, Prijanti A, Harahap I. Biokimia eksperimen laboratorium. Jakarta: Widya Medika; 2001.
7. Lynch MJ, Raphael SS. Lynch’s Medical Laboratory Technology. 4th ed. W.B. Saunders; 1983.
8. Calbreath DF. Clinical Chemistry: A Fundamental Textbook. 2nd ed. W B Saunders; 1992.
9. European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and HealthCare. Guide to the preparation, use and quality assurance of blood components. 8th ed. Germany: Council of Publishing; 2002.
10. Guppy M, Attwood P V, Hansen IA, Sabaratnam R, Frisina J, Whisson ME. pH, temperature and lactate production in human red blood cells: implications for blood storage and glycolytic control. Vox Sang. 1992;62(2):70–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1423-0410.1992.tb01173.x
11. Burta O. The evolution of oxidative stress markers along blood storage. Abstr 27th Congr ISBT. 2002;83(2):620.
12. Ho J, Sibbald WJ, Chin-Yee IH. Effects of storage on efficacy of red cell transfusion: when is it not safe? Crit Care Med. 2003 Dec;31(12 Suppl):S687-97. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000099349.17094.A3