Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 18;2015(11):CD010983. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010983.pub2
Study Reason for exclusion
Aderka 1986 A non‐randomised retrospective study
Agliastro 2006 Comparison of apheresis versus buffy coat platelet transfusions ( abstract)
Akkök 2007 Comparison of apheresis versus buffy coat platelet transfusions
Anderson 1997 Comparison of apheresis versus buffy coat ‐derived versus platelet rich plasma ‐derived platelet products
Andreu 2009 Review
Andrew 1993 Wrong patient group ‐ premature infants
Arnold 2004 Comparison of apheresis versus whole blood ‐derived platelet transfusions
Arnold 2006 Wrong patient group ‐ intensive treatment unit
Avvisati 2003 Review
Bai 2004 Wrong patient group ‐ solid tumours
Benjamin 2002 Review
Bentley 2000 Comparison of autologous versus allogeneic platelet transfusions
Blajchman 2008 Review
Blumberg 2002 Comparison of washed versus standard platelet transfusions
Blumberg 2004 Comparison of washed versus standard platelet transfusions
Blundell 1996 Comparison of standard versus pathogen inactivated platelets
Buhrkuhl 2010 Review
Callow 2002 A non‐randomised prospective study with historical control
Cameron 2007 A non‐randomised prospective study
Carr 1990 Comparison of ABO‐matched versus mismatched platelet products
Casbard 2004 Systematic review and wrong patient group
Chaoui 2005 Observational prospective study
Chaurasia 2012 A non‐randomised prospective study
Cid 2007 Systematic review of differing platelet transfusion doses
Corash 2001 Comparison of intercept platelet components versus standard platelet components
Couban 2002 Comparison of plasma reduction and leucodepletion
de Wildt‐Eggen 2000 Comparison of platelet concentrates in plasma versus additive solution
Decaudin 2004 Non‐randomised prospective study
Di Pietro 1998 Comparison of HLA ‐matched versus random ‐donor apheresis platelet components
Diedrich 2009 Comparison of platelet products stored 1 ‐ 5 versus 6 ‐ 7 days
Dumont 2011 Comparison of buffy coat versus platelet rich plasma platelet concentrates
Dzik 2004 Review
Eder 2007 Non‐randomised observational study
Elting 2002 Retrospective analysis ‐ lymphoma and solid tumours
Elting 2003 Non‐randomised retrospective cohort ‐ lymphoma and solid tumours
Fanning 1995 Wrong patient group ‐ gynaecological cancer
Follea 2004 Guideline
Friedmann 2002 A non‐randomised retrospective analysis
Gajic 2006 Wrong patient group ‐ intensive treatment unit
Gerday 2009 Wrong patient group ‐ neonates
Gil‐Fernandez 1996 A non‐randomised retrospective historical control study (different platelet transfusion thresholds)
Gmür 1983 Comparison of single ‐donor versus pooled platelet products
Gmür 1991 A non‐randomised prospective cohort observational study (different platelet transfusion thresholds)
Goodnough 2001 Fewer than 80% of participants diagnosed with a haematological disorder ‐ different platelet doses
Goodnough 2002 Review
Goodnough 2005 Review
Goodrich 2008 Comparison of pathogen inactivated versus standard apheresis platelets
Greeno 2007 A non‐randomised prospective observational study (different platelet transfusion thresholds)
Grossman 1980 Comparison of prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusions
Gurkan 2007 Comparison of apheresis versus pooled platelet products
Hardan 1994 A non‐randomised observational study, therapeutic platelets only, historical control reported only as an abstract
Harrup 1999 Comparison of buffy coat plasma versus T‐sol platelet transfusions
Heal 1993 Comparison of ABO ‐compatible versus mismatched platelet transfusions
Heal 2004 Review
Heddle 1994 Comparison of plasma from platelet concentrates versus platelets
Heddle 1999 Comparison of plasma removal versus leucodepletion
Heddle 2002 Comparison of plasma removal versus leucodepletion
Heddle 2003 Systematic review ‐ methods of assessing bleeding outcome
Heddle 2005 Comparison of whole blood ‐derived platelets stored as a pool versus individually
Heddle 2007 Review
Heddle 2009 Comparison of a low dose versus standard platelet component dose
Higby 1974 Comparison of prophylactic platelets versus platelet poor plasma
ISRCTN01292427 Comparison of dynamic light scattering‐screened versus unscreened platelets
ISRCTN49080246 Comparison of 1 ‐ 5 versus 6 ‐ 7 day ‐old platelet transfusions
ISRCTN56366401 Comparison of different types of platelet component
Jelic 2006 Review
Johansson 2007 Wrong patient group ‐ ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm
Julmy 2009 Wrong patient group ‐ ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm
Kakaiya 1981 Comparison of apheresis versus pooled platelet concentrates
Kerkhoffs 2010 Comparison of standard platelets versus pathogen inactivated platelets versus platelets stored in PAS II media
Klumpp 1999 A randomised cross‐over study. This study was included within the previous systematic review ; however, due to stricter inclusion/exclusion criteria, this study has now been excluded from the review.
Only laboratory outcomes were reported.
37% of participants had a non‐haematological malignancy (breast cancer)
Kluter 1996 Comparison of random ‐donor platelet components from pooled buffy coats versus apheresis platelet components
Lapierre 2003 Comparison of standard apheresis platelet products versus a donor reduction policy
Lawrence 2001 A non‐randomised retrospective historical control study (different platelet transfusion thresholds)
Leach 1991 Comparison of warmed versus standard platelet transfusions
Lee 1989 Comparison of ABO ‐matched versus mismatched platelet transfusions
Levi 2002 Review
Lordkipanidze 2009 Review
Lozano 2003 Review
Lozano 2010 Efficacy of older platelet transfusions
Lozano 2011 Comparison of pathogen inactivated versus conventional platelet products
Lu 2011 Comparison of a low ‐dose versus standard ‐dose platelet component
Martel 2004 Review
McCullough 2004 Comparison of pathogen inactivated versus conventional apheresis platelets
McNicol 2003 Review
Messerschmidt 1988 Comparison of HLA ‐matched versus mismatched platelet transfusions
Mirasol 2010 Comparison of pathogen inactivated versus conventional platelet products
Murphy 1982 Comparison of a prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusion policy
Murphy 1986 Comparison of HLA ‐matched and leucodepleted blood products
Navarro 1998 A non‐randomised retrospective historical control observational study (different platelet transfusion thresholds)
NCT00699621 Wrong patient group ‐ intracerebral haemorrhage
NCT01615146 Comparison of a prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusion policy
Nevo 2007 A non‐randomised retrospective analysis (different platelet thresholds)
Norol 1998 A non‐randomised prospective comparison ( 3 different doses of platelets)
Norville 1994 Comparison of 2 different infusion pumps for platelet transfusions
Norville 1997 Comparison of 2 different infusion rates
Oksanen 1991 Comparison of pre‐ versus poststorage leucodepletion of p latelet rich plasma ‐derived platelet transfusions
Oksanen 1994 Comparison of leucodepleted buffy coat ‐derived platelet transfusions versus historical control
Paananen 2009 Non‐randomised study (unclear whether prospective or retrospective)
Pamphilon 1996 Comparison of buffy coat platelet components, single ‐donor apheresis non‐leucocyte depleted and single ‐donor apheresis leucocyte‐depleted platelet components
Paramo 2004 Review
Poon 2003 Review
Qureshi 2007 Audit of platelet transfusions in the United Kingdom
Rabinowitz 2010 Review
Rayment 2005 Review
Razzaghi 2012 Systematic review of platelet transfusion threshold in people with gastrointestinal bleeding
Rebulla 2009 Comparison of pathogen inactivated versus standard platelet components
Reed 1986 Wrong patient group ‐ massive transfusion
Roberts 2003 Review
Roy 1973 Comparison of different platelet component doses
Sagmeister 1999 A non‐randomised retrospective study (aplastic anaemia)
Sakakura 2003 Review
Samama 2005 Guideline
Schiffer 1983 Comparison of leucodepleted versus standard platelet concentrates
Sensebe 2004 Comparison of different platelet component doses
Shanwell 1992 Comparison of fresh versus stored platelets
Shehata 2009 Systematic review ‐ ABO ‐identical versus non‐identical platelet transfusions
Shen 2007 Review
Singer 1988 Single ‐donor HLA ‐matched versus random ‐donor platelets
Sintnicolaas 1981 Comparison of single ‐donor and multiple ‐donor platelet components
Sintnicolaas 1982 Comparison of a prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusion policy
Sintnicolaas 1995 Comparison of leucocyte depleted versus standard platelets
Slichter 1998 Comparison of apheresis versus pooled platelet components
Slichter 2004 Review
Slichter 2006 Comparison of pathogen inactivated versus conventional apheresis platelets
Slichter 2007 Review
Slichter 2010 Comparison of different platelet component doses
Slichter 2012 Review
Solomon 1978 Comparison of a prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusion policy
Sosa 2003 Review
Spiess 2004 Wrong patient group ‐ cardiac
Stanworth 2013 Comparison of a prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusion policy
Steffens 2002 Comparison of different platelet component doses
Strauss 2004 Review
Strauss 2005 Review
Strindberg 1996 Comparison of apheresis versus buffy coat platelet products
Sweeney 2000 Comparison of pre‐storage leucodepleted versus bedside leucodepleted platelets
Tinmouth 2003 Review
Tinmouth 2004 Comparison of low ‐dose platelet components versus standard ‐dose platelet components
Tosetto 2009 Guideline
TRAP 1997 Comparison of standard pooled platelet product versus irradiated pooled platelet product versus leucodepleted pooled platelet product versus apheresis platelet product
Vadhan‐Raj 2002 Wrong patient group ‐ gynaecological malignancy
Van Marwijk 1991 Comparison of leucodepleted platelet products prepared by filtration or centrifugation
van Rhenen 2003 Comparison of pathogen inactivated versus standard buffy coat ‐derived platelet transfusions
Velik‐Salchner 2007 Non‐human study
Verma 2008 A non‐randomised observational study
Wandt 1998 A non‐randomised prospective cohort study (not randomised at the participant level)
Wandt 2005 A non‐randomised prospective study with an historical case control (therapeutic versus prophylactic platelet transfusions)
Wandt 2006 A non‐randomised prospective study with an historical case control (therapeutic versus prophylactic platelet transfusions)
Wandt 2010 Review
Wandt 2012 Comparison of a prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusion policy
Wang 2002 A comparison of acetaminophen and diphenhydramine versus placebo as premedication for platelet transfusions
Wang 2005 Review
Weigand 2009 Prospective observational study
Williamson 1994 Comparison of standard versus bedside leucodepleted platelet products
Woodard 2002 Review
Zahur 2002 Prospective observational study
Zeller 2014 Review
Zhao 2002 Comparison of leucodepleted versus standard platelet transfusions
Zumberg 2002 This study was included within the previous systematic review ; however, due to stricter inclusion/exclusion criteria, this study has now been excluded from the review.
31% of participants had a non‐haematological malignancy (breast cancer)

HLA = human leukocyte antigen