fig3

Figure 3. Variability comparison in the evaluated variables of MPC-EV and PC-EV. (A) Coefficient of variation (%) from each variable evaluated for pEV isolated from PC and MPC, including pEV characteristics, in vitro functionality results, and surface markers profile. Values represent the mean of CV ± SEM. 10 PCs (n = 10; pooling 5 different donors each) and 9 MPCs (n = 9, pooling 50 different donors each) were used for variability analyses; (B) Global differences in CV (%) of PC-EV and MPC-EV of all the variables evaluated represented as the mean of the CV ± SEM (n = 12). The differences between the parametric means were determined using the t-test statistical method. Significant differences are expressed by *P < 0.05. In Figure 3A, P values for PC-EV vs. MPC-EV were: Protein concentration (P = 0.4062), particle concentration (P > 0.9999), purity (P > 0.9999), protein/lipid ratio (P > 0.9999), wound healing ratio (P > 0.9999), metabolic activity (P > 0.9999), CD81 (P = 0.5766), CD63 (P = 0.0122), CD9 (P > 0.9999); CD41b (P = 0.8835); CD42a (P = 0.9303), CD62p (P = 0.4880 ), and CD29 (P = 0.9834). PC: platelet concentrate; MPC: multiple platelet concentrate; pEV: platelet lysate-derived extracellular vesicles.