Menys V C, Belcher P R, Noble M I, Evans R D, Drossos G E, Pillai R, Westaby S
Department of Biological Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK.
Thromb Haemost. 1994 Oct;72(4):511-8.
We determined changes in platelet aggregability following cardiopulmonary bypass, using optical aggregometry to assess macroaggregation in platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and platelet counting to assess microaggregation both in whole blood and PRP. Hirudin was used as the anticoagulant to maintain normocalcaemia. Microaggregation (%, median and interquartile range) in blood stirred with collagen (0.6 micrograms/ml) was only marginally impaired following bypass (91 [88, 93] at 10 min postbypass v 95 (92, 96] prebypass; n = 22), whereas macroaggregation (amplitude of response; cm) in PRP stirred with collagen (1.0 micrograms/ml) was markedly impaired (9.5 [8.0, 10.8], n = 41 v 13.4 [12.7, 14.3], n = 10; p < 0.0001). However, in PRP, despite impairment of macroaggregation (9.1 [8.5, 10.1], n = 12), microaggregation was near-maximal (93 [91, 94]), as in whole blood stirred with collagen. In contrast, in aspirin-treated patients (n = 14), both collagen-induced microaggregation in whole blood (49 [47, 52]) and macroaggregation in PRP (5.1 [3.8, 6.6]) were more markedly impaired, compared with control (both p < 0.001). Similarly, in PRP, macroaggregation with ristocetin (1.5 mg/ml) was also impaired following bypass (9.4 [7.2, 10.7], n = 38 v 12.4 [10.0, 13.4]; p < 0.0002, n = 20), but as found with collagen, despite impairment of macroaggregation (7.2 [3.5, 10.9], n = 12), microaggregation was again near-maximal (96 [93, 97]). The response to ristocetin was more markedly impared after bypass in succinylated gelatin (Gelofusine) treated patients (5.6 [2.8, 8.6], n = 17; p < 0.005 v control), whereas the response to collagen was little different (9.3 v 9.5).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
我们采用光学聚集测定法评估富血小板血浆(PRP)中的大聚集,并通过血小板计数评估全血和PRP中的微聚集,以此来确定体外循环后血小板聚集性的变化。使用水蛭素作为抗凝剂以维持正常血钙水平。用胶原蛋白(0.6微克/毫升)搅拌的血液中的微聚集(%,中位数和四分位间距)在体外循环后仅略有受损(体外循环后10分钟时为91[88,93],术前为95[92,96];n = 22),而用胶原蛋白(1.0微克/毫升)搅拌的PRP中的大聚集(反应幅度;厘米)则明显受损(9.5[8.0,10.8],n = 41,对比13.4[12.7,14.3],n = 10;p < 0.0001)。然而,在PRP中,尽管大聚集受损(9.1[8.5,10.1],n = 12),但微聚集接近最大值(93[91,94]),如同用胶原蛋白搅拌的全血一样。相比之下,在阿司匹林治疗的患者(n = 14)中,与对照组相比,胶原蛋白诱导的全血微聚集(49[47,52])和PRP中的大聚集(5.1[3.8,6.6])均更明显受损(两者p < 0.001)。同样,在PRP中,用瑞斯托霉素(1.5毫克/毫升)诱导的大聚集在体外循环后也受损(9.4[7.2,10.7],n = 38,对比12.4[10.0,13.4];p < 0.0002,n = 20),但与胶原蛋白情况相同,尽管大聚集受损(7.2[3.5,10.9],n = 12),微聚集再次接近最大值(96[93,97])。在琥珀酰明胶(佳乐施)治疗的患者中,体外循环后对瑞斯托霉素的反应受损更明显(5.6[2.8,8.6],n = 17;与对照组相比p < 0.005),而对胶原蛋白的反应差异不大(9.3对比9.5)。(摘要截选至250词)