Comparison of animal and human blood for in vitro dynamic thrombogenicity testing of biomaterials.

BACKGROUND

To determine suitable alternatives to human blood for in vitro dynamic thrombogenicity testing of biomaterials, four different animal blood sources (ovine, bovine, and porcine blood from live donors, and abattoir porcine blood) were compared to fresh human blood.

METHODS

To account for blood coagulability differences between individual donors and species, each blood pool was heparinized to a donor-specific concentration immediately before testing in a dynamic flow loop system. The target heparin level was established using a static thrombosis pre-test. For dynamic testing, whole blood was recirculated at room temperature for 1 h at 200 ml/min through a flow loop containing a single test material. Four materials with varying thrombotic potentials were investigated: latex (positive control), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (negative control), silicone (intermediate thrombotic potential), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) (historically thromboresistant). Thrombus weight and surface area coverage on the test materials were quantified, along with platelet count reduction in the blood.

RESULTS

While donor-specific heparin levels varied substantially from 0.6 U/ml to 7.0 U/ml among the different blood sources, each source was able to differentiate between the thrombogenic latex and the thromboresistant PTFE and HDPE materials (p < 0.05). However, only donor ovine and bovine blood were sensitive enough to differentiate an increased response for the intermediate thrombotic silicone material compared to PTFE and HDPE.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrated that multiple animal blood sources (particularly donor ovine and bovine blood) may be suitable alternatives to fresh human blood for dynamic thrombogenicity testing when appropriate control materials and donor-specific anticoagulation levels are used.