Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood–comparison between waterbath and dry warming device. Röllig, C, Babatz, J, Wagner, I, Maiwald, A, Schwarze, V, Ehninger, G, & Bornhäuser, M Cytotherapy, 4(6):551–555, 2002. ![Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood–comparison between waterbath and dry warming device [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex BACKGROUND Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood (MPB) is routinely performed for autologous and allogeneic MPB transplantation. Usually thawing is achieved by submerging the cell bag in a waterbath (37 degrees C temperature). We compared the effectiveness of thawing cryopreserved MPB in a waterbath with an electric dry-warming device containing warmed gel pads (Sahara, Transmed). METHODS Two cryopreserved bags from each of 31 apheresis procedures were thawed in a waterbath and under dry conditions in parallel. Viability (dye exclusion), apoptosis/necrosis (annexin/propidiumiodide staining) and clonogenic potential (CFU-E plus BFU-E, CFU-GM) of the cells were tested after thawing. RESULTS Statistical analysis by Wilcoxon matched-pair test showed no significant difference between the thawing procedures in terms of the in vitro parameters tested. DISCUSSION Our results indicate that thawing of cryopreserved MPB using dry warming and water bath give similar viability, apoptosis/necrosis rate and clonogenic potential. Both procedures take about the same amount of time and are easy to perform. Nevertheless, the potentially decreased risk of bacterial contamination of either the cell product or the patient room, and guidelines of good clinical practice (GCP), favor the use of the dry warming procedure.
@article{rollig_thawing_2002,
title = {Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood--comparison between waterbath and dry warming device},
volume = {4},
issn = {1465-3249},
url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12568991},
doi = {10.1080/146532402761624719},
abstract = {BACKGROUND
Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood (MPB) is routinely performed for autologous and allogeneic MPB transplantation. Usually thawing is achieved by submerging the cell bag in a waterbath (37 degrees C temperature). We compared the effectiveness of thawing cryopreserved MPB in a waterbath with an electric dry-warming device containing warmed gel pads (Sahara, Transmed).
METHODS
Two cryopreserved bags from each of 31 apheresis procedures were thawed in a waterbath and under dry conditions in parallel. Viability (dye exclusion), apoptosis/necrosis (annexin/propidiumiodide staining) and clonogenic potential (CFU-E plus BFU-E, CFU-GM) of the cells were tested after thawing.
RESULTS
Statistical analysis by Wilcoxon matched-pair test showed no significant difference between the thawing procedures in terms of the in vitro parameters tested.
DISCUSSION
Our results indicate that thawing of cryopreserved MPB using dry warming and water bath give similar viability, apoptosis/necrosis rate and clonogenic potential. Both procedures take about the same amount of time and are easy to perform. Nevertheless, the potentially decreased risk of bacterial contamination of either the cell product or the patient room, and guidelines of good clinical practice (GCP), favor the use of the dry warming procedure.},
number = {6},
urldate = {2012-06-12TZ},
journal = {Cytotherapy},
author = {Röllig, C and Babatz, J and Wagner, I and Maiwald, A and Schwarze, V and Ehninger, G and Bornhäuser, M},
year = {2002},
pmid = {12568991},
keywords = {Cell Survival, Cryopreservation, Durable Medical Equipment, Heating, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization, Humans, Marketingaktiv, Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Stem Cells, Tissue Preservation, Water},
pages = {551--555}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"ddMSwWskjdtgzGBwE","bibbaseid":"rllig-babatz-wagner-maiwald-schwarze-ehninger-bornhuser-thawingofcryopreservedmobilizedperipheralbloodcomparisonbetweenwaterbathanddrywarmingdevice-2002","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2019-02-11T13:21:02.203Z","title":"Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood–comparison between waterbath and dry warming device","author_short":["Röllig, C","Babatz, J","Wagner, I","Maiwald, A","Schwarze, V","Ehninger, G","Bornhäuser, M"],"year":2002,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/jkuemmel","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood–comparison between waterbath and dry warming device","volume":"4","issn":"1465-3249","url":"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12568991","doi":"10.1080/146532402761624719","abstract":"BACKGROUND Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood (MPB) is routinely performed for autologous and allogeneic MPB transplantation. Usually thawing is achieved by submerging the cell bag in a waterbath (37 degrees C temperature). We compared the effectiveness of thawing cryopreserved MPB in a waterbath with an electric dry-warming device containing warmed gel pads (Sahara, Transmed). METHODS Two cryopreserved bags from each of 31 apheresis procedures were thawed in a waterbath and under dry conditions in parallel. Viability (dye exclusion), apoptosis/necrosis (annexin/propidiumiodide staining) and clonogenic potential (CFU-E plus BFU-E, CFU-GM) of the cells were tested after thawing. RESULTS Statistical analysis by Wilcoxon matched-pair test showed no significant difference between the thawing procedures in terms of the in vitro parameters tested. DISCUSSION Our results indicate that thawing of cryopreserved MPB using dry warming and water bath give similar viability, apoptosis/necrosis rate and clonogenic potential. Both procedures take about the same amount of time and are easy to perform. Nevertheless, the potentially decreased risk of bacterial contamination of either the cell product or the patient room, and guidelines of good clinical practice (GCP), favor the use of the dry warming procedure.","number":"6","urldate":"2012-06-12TZ","journal":"Cytotherapy","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Röllig"],"firstnames":["C"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Babatz"],"firstnames":["J"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Wagner"],"firstnames":["I"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Maiwald"],"firstnames":["A"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Schwarze"],"firstnames":["V"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Ehninger"],"firstnames":["G"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Bornhäuser"],"firstnames":["M"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2002","pmid":"12568991","keywords":"Cell Survival, Cryopreservation, Durable Medical Equipment, Heating, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization, Humans, Marketingaktiv, Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Stem Cells, Tissue Preservation, Water","pages":"551–555","bibtex":"@article{rollig_thawing_2002,\n\ttitle = {Thawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood--comparison between waterbath and dry warming device},\n\tvolume = {4},\n\tissn = {1465-3249},\n\turl = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12568991},\n\tdoi = {10.1080/146532402761624719},\n\tabstract = {BACKGROUND\n\nThawing of cryopreserved mobilized peripheral blood (MPB) is routinely performed for autologous and allogeneic MPB transplantation. Usually thawing is achieved by submerging the cell bag in a waterbath (37 degrees C temperature). We compared the effectiveness of thawing cryopreserved MPB in a waterbath with an electric dry-warming device containing warmed gel pads (Sahara, Transmed).\n\n\nMETHODS\n\nTwo cryopreserved bags from each of 31 apheresis procedures were thawed in a waterbath and under dry conditions in parallel. Viability (dye exclusion), apoptosis/necrosis (annexin/propidiumiodide staining) and clonogenic potential (CFU-E plus BFU-E, CFU-GM) of the cells were tested after thawing.\n\n\nRESULTS\n\nStatistical analysis by Wilcoxon matched-pair test showed no significant difference between the thawing procedures in terms of the in vitro parameters tested.\n\n\nDISCUSSION\n\nOur results indicate that thawing of cryopreserved MPB using dry warming and water bath give similar viability, apoptosis/necrosis rate and clonogenic potential. Both procedures take about the same amount of time and are easy to perform. Nevertheless, the potentially decreased risk of bacterial contamination of either the cell product or the patient room, and guidelines of good clinical practice (GCP), favor the use of the dry warming procedure.},\n\tnumber = {6},\n\turldate = {2012-06-12TZ},\n\tjournal = {Cytotherapy},\n\tauthor = {Röllig, C and Babatz, J and Wagner, I and Maiwald, A and Schwarze, V and Ehninger, G and Bornhäuser, M},\n\tyear = {2002},\n\tpmid = {12568991},\n\tkeywords = {Cell Survival, Cryopreservation, Durable Medical Equipment, Heating, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization, Humans, Marketingaktiv, Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Stem Cells, Tissue Preservation, Water},\n\tpages = {551--555}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Röllig, C","Babatz, J","Wagner, I","Maiwald, A","Schwarze, V","Ehninger, G","Bornhäuser, M"],"key":"rollig_thawing_2002","id":"rollig_thawing_2002","bibbaseid":"rllig-babatz-wagner-maiwald-schwarze-ehninger-bornhuser-thawingofcryopreservedmobilizedperipheralbloodcomparisonbetweenwaterbathanddrywarmingdevice-2002","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12568991"},"keyword":["Cell Survival","Cryopreservation","Durable Medical Equipment","Heating","Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization","Humans","Marketingaktiv","Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation","Practice Guidelines as Topic","Stem Cells","Tissue Preservation","Water"],"downloads":0},"search_terms":["thawing","cryopreserved","mobilized","peripheral","blood","comparison","between","waterbath","dry","warming","device","röllig","babatz","wagner","maiwald","schwarze","ehninger","bornhäuser"],"keywords":["cell survival","cryopreservation","durable medical equipment","heating","hematopoietic stem cell mobilization","humans","marketingaktiv","peripheral blood stem cell transplantation","practice guidelines as topic","stem cells","tissue preservation","water"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["nGDaM3ijM4PbPdhb7"]}