4.6 Article

Evaluation of the profile of thrombin generation during the process of whole blood clotting as assessed by thrombelastography

期刊

JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS
卷 3, 期 9, 页码 2039-2043

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2005.01513.x

关键词

thrombelastograph; thrombin generation; whole blood clotting

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [P01 HL046703, P01 HL046703-140001] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study was to evaluate the possibility of linking the tracing of whole blood clotting in a thrombelastograph (R) (TEG (R)) hemostasis system with the generation of thrombin assessed by thrombin/antithrombin complex (TAT). Citrated whole blood containing corn trypsin inhibitor from volunteers was clotted in the presence of CaCl2 and tissue factor. Clotting was monitored with the eight channels of a TEG (R) system. At different time points, the whole blood TEG (R) reaction cups were kept in a cold quenching solution, centrifuged, and the supernatants were kept at -80 degrees C until assayed for TAT by ELISA. The total thrombus generation (TTG) was calculated from the first derivative of the TEG (R) waveform and was compared with thrombin generation measured by TAT. The two vector values - the TAT thrombin generation data and the corresponding TEG (R) TTG - were analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficients (i) and linear, non-linear and natural log (In) transformation of TAT values for least-squares goodness-of-fit curves. The best least-squares fit is an exponential curve. Linearizing using the In of the TAT thrombin generation variable produces the same r (0.94) as of the exponential curve. The prediction equation is y = 8.0465 + 0.0005x (P <= 0.0001), where y is the TAT thrombin generation variable in the In transformation and x is the TEG (R) TTG variable. The high magnitude of r and the high significance of the prediction equation demonstrate the high efficacy of the prediction of TAT thrombin generation by the use of TEG (R) TTG.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据