Reexamination of the chromium‐51–labeled posttransfusion red blood cell recovery method

BACKGROUND: The chromium-51-labeled posttransfusion recovery (PTR) study has been the gold-standard test for assessing red blood cell (RBC) quality. Despite guiding RBC storage development for decades, it has several potential sources for error. METHODS: Four healthy adult volunteers each donated an autologous, leukoreduced RBC unit, aliquots were radiolabeled with technetium-99m after 1 and 6 weeks of storage, and then infused. Subjects were imaged by single-photon-emission computed tomography immediately and 4 hours after infusion. Additionally, from subjects described in a previously published study, adenosine triphosphate levels in transfusates infused into 52 healthy volunteers randomized to a single autologous, leukoreduced, RBC transfusion after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 weeks of storage were correlated with PTR and laboratory parameters of hemolysis. RESULTS: Evidence from one subject imaged after infusion of technetium-99m-labeled RBCs suggests that, in some individuals, RBCs may be temporarily sequestered in the liver and spleen immediately following transfusion and then subsequently released back into circulation; this could be one source of error leading to PTR results that may not accurately predict the true quantity of RBCs cleared by intra- and/or extravascular hemolysis. Indeed, adenosine triphosphate levels in the transfusates correlated more robustly with measures of extravascular hemolysis in vivo (e.g., serum iron, indirect bilirubin, non-transferrin-bound iron) than with PTR results or measures of intravascular hemolysis (e.g., plasma free hemoglobin). CONCLUSIONS: Sources of measurement error are inherent in the chromium-51 PTR method. Transfusion of an entire unlabeled RBC unit, followed by quantifying extravascular hemolysis markers, may more accurately measure true posttransfusion RBC recovery.