Comparison of multiple electrode aggregometry with lumi‐aggregometry for the diagnosis of patients with mild bleeding disorders

Essentials There is a clinical need for new technologies to measure platelet function in whole blood. Mild bleeding disorders were evaluated using multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA). MEA is insensitive at detecting patients with mild platelet function and secretion defects. More studies are requi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of thrombosis and haemostasis Vol. 15; no. 10; pp. 2045 - 2052
Main Authors Al Ghaithi, R., Drake, S., Watson, S. P., Morgan, N. V., Harrison, P.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England Elsevier Limited 01.10.2017
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Essentials There is a clinical need for new technologies to measure platelet function in whole blood. Mild bleeding disorders were evaluated using multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA). MEA is insensitive at detecting patients with mild platelet function and secretion defects. More studies are required to investigate MEA in patients with a defined set of platelet disorders. Summary Background Multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) measures changes in electrical impedance caused by platelet aggregation in whole blood. This approach is faster, more convenient and offers the advantage over light transmission aggregometry (LTA) of assessing platelet function in whole blood and reducing preanalytical errors associated with preparation of platelet‐rich plasma (PRP). Several studies indicate the utility of this method in assessing platelet inhibition in individuals taking antiplatelet agents (e.g. aspirin and clopidogrel). Objective Our current study sought to evaluate the ability of MEA in diagnosing patients with mild bleeding disorders by comparison with light transmission lumi‐aggregometry (lumi‐LTA). Methods Forty healthy subjects and 109 patients with a clinical diagnosis of a mild bleeding disorder were recruited into the UK Genotyping and Phenotyping of Platelets study (GAPP, ISRCTN 77951167). MEA was performed on whole blood using one or two concentrations of ADP, PAR‐1 peptide, arachidonic acid and collagen. Lumi‐LTA was performed in PRP using several concentrations of ADP, adrenaline, arachidonic acid, collagen, PAR‐1 peptide and ristocetin. Results Of 109 patients tested, 54 (49%) patients gave abnormal responses by lumi‐LTA to one or more agonists. In contrast, only 16 (15%) patients were shown to have abnormal responses to one or more agonists by MEA. Conclusions In this study we showed that MEA is less sensitive in identifying patients with abnormal platelet function relative to lumi‐LTA.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:1538-7933
1538-7836
1538-7836
DOI:10.1111/jth.13784