Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This research aimed to evaluate the performance of a closed blood collection system and to compare it with an open system in terms of feasibility, tolerability by the donor, quality of blood collected and bacterial contamination. METHODS: Eight feline blood donors were prospectively and randomly subjected to both collection methods. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and blood pressure (BP) were evaluated before sedation, after sedation and after blood collection. The duration of the donation, the formation of a hematoma, and the degree of hemolysis and packed cell volume (PCV) of each blood unit were evaluated. Aliquot samples were aseptically collected from each unit and tested for bacterial contamination by culture and PCR on days 0, 14 and 28 of storage. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between collection methods for HR and RR at any time point. Before sedation, the mean systolic BP was significantly higher with the closed system (closed 169 mmHg, open 137 mmHg; P = 0.003). The average duration of collection was significantly shorter with the closed system (closed 3 mins 10 s, open 8 mins; P = 0.035); however, the prevalence of a successful blood collection with a single venipuncture and hematoma formation were not significantly different between systems. The mean unit PCV was significantly higher with the open system (closed 31%, open 34%; P = 0.026). On bacterial culture, 15/16 units were negative at all time points (closed 7; open 8). Using PCR, 5/16 units were positive for Ralstonia species for at least one time point (closed 3; open 2). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our designed closed system appears to be well adapted to feline blood collection and was well tolerated by the donors, performing similarly to an open system, and could represent a valuable clinical device for the development of a feline blood bank, namely feline blood storage.