4.0 Article

Differences in clotting parameters between species for preclinical large animal studies of cardiovascular devices

Journal

JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL ORGANS
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 138-141

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10047-017-1003-4

Keywords

Clotting; Animals; Thromboelastography; Medical devices; Preclinical study

Funding

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [JP17K10745]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17K10745] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several species of domestic animals are used in preclinical studies evaluating the safety and feasibility of medical devices; however, the relevance of animal models to human health is often not clear. The purpose of this study was to compare the clotting parameters of animal models to determine which animals most adequately mimic human clotting parameters. The clotting parameters of the different species were assessed in whole blood by in vitro thromboelastography using the clotting activators, such as tissue factor (extrinsic clotting screening test, EXTEMA (R)) and partial thromboplastin phospholipid (intrinsic clotting screening test, IINTEMA (R)). The measurements were performed using normal blood samples from humans (n = 13), calves (n = 18), goats (n = 56) and pigs (n = 8). Extrinsic clotting time (CT) and the intrinsic CT were significantly prolonged in calves compared to humans (249.9 +/- 91.3 and 376.4 +/- 124.4 s vs. 63.5 +/- 11.8 and 192.5 +/- 29.0 s, respectively, p < 0.01). The maximum clot firmness (MCF) in domestic animals (EXTEMA (R): 77-87 mm, IINTEMA (R): 66-78 mm) was significantly higher than that of humans (EXTEMA (R): 59.1 +/- 6.0 mm, IINTEMA (R): 58.8 +/- 1.5 mm, p < 0.01), and calves and goats exhibited longer time to MCF (MCF-t) than did humans and pigs (p < 0.01). Our results show that there are relevant differences in the four species' extrinsic and intrinsic clotting parameters. These cross-comparisons indicate that it is necessary to clarify characteristics of clotting properties in preclinical animal studies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available