4.3 Article

Leukocyte-Platelet Aggregates in Acute and Subacute Ischemic Stroke

Journal

CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 276-282

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000228710

Keywords

Acute stroke; Platelet leukocyte interactions; Ischemic stroke; Flow cytometry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Leukocyte-platelet aggregates appear to be a stable and sensitive marker of platelet activation as suggested by studies in coronary heart disease. We tested the hypothesis that leukocyte-platelet aggregates are increased after ischemic stroke and investigated the contribution of different leukocyte subtypes to such increase. Methods: We serially determined granulocyte-, lymphocyte-and monocyte-platelet aggregates, using flow cytometry at days 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 90 in patients with ischemic stroke (n = 45) and in age-and sex-matched healthy control subjects (n = 30). Results: Granulocyte-platelet aggregates (granulocytes with >= 1 platelet/mu l) were more common in patients than control subjects from day 1 through day 10 (p < 0.04, respectively), but not on day 90 after stroke. The percentage of granulocytes forming aggregates was increased on days 1-3 after stroke but not at other time points. Lymphocyte-platelet aggregates were not more common at any time point after stroke. Total numbers and percentages of monocytes forming platelet aggregates were significantly increased on day 2 (p = 0.003), but not at other time points after stroke. Conclusion: The 3 leukocyte subtypes showed different kinetics regarding aggregate formation with platelets after ischemic stroke. Increase of monocyte-platelet aggregates is short-lived and may reflect an acute reaction to cerebral ischemia, whereas granulocyte-platelet aggregate formation persists into the subacute phase, suggesting that they are a particularly sensitive parameter reflecting both prothrombotic and inflammatory processes after stroke. Copyright (C) 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available