a The Blizard Institute, Barts & The London School of Medicine and Dentistry , Queen Mary University of London , London , UK.
b Intensive Care Unit , Western General Hospital , Edinburgh , UK.
Platelets. 2018 Nov;29(7):686-689. doi: 10.1080/09537104.2018.1466388. Epub 2018 May 1.
In this short article, submitted as part of the review on platelet function testing, we illustrate the quantitative and qualitative differences between classical light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and 96-well plate aggregometry. We show that responses to platelet agonists and antagonists differ depending upon the method of aggregation testing. For example, in 96-well aggregometry, responses to collagen are strongly inhibited by P2Y receptor antagonists while in LTA they are much less affected. Furthermore, we explore the importance of differences in the mechanical environment upon platelet aggregation. We emphasize that LTA and 96-well aggregometry are not interchangeable assays. These two assays are best used as complementary tests to explore platelet function in depth.
在这篇短文作为血小板功能检测综述的一部分提交，我们说明了经典的光传输聚集检测（LTA）和 96 孔板聚集检测之间的定量和定性差异。我们表明，对血小板激动剂和拮抗剂的反应取决于聚集检测方法。例如，在 96 孔板聚集检测中，胶原引起的反应强烈受到 P2Y 受体拮抗剂的抑制，而在 LTA 中则受影响较小。此外，我们还探讨了机械环境对血小板聚集的影响的重要性。我们强调，LTA 和 96 孔板聚集检测不是可互换的检测方法。这两种检测方法最好作为互补测试，以深入探索血小板功能。
