Sampling conditions influence multiple electrode platelet aggregometry in cardiac surgery patients

Arterial and venous blood sampling is equally applicable for coagulation and fibrinolysis analyses

OBJECTIVES

No consensus exists upon whether arterial and venous blood samples are equivalent when it comes to coagulation analyses. We therefore conducted a comparative cohort study to clarify if arteriovenous differences affect analyses of primary and secondary hemostasis as well as fibrinolysis.

METHODS

Simultaneous paired blood samplings were obtained from a cannula in the radial artery and an antecubital venipuncture in 100 patients immediately before or one day after thoracic surgery. Analyses of platelet count and aggregation, International Normalized Ratio (INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), antithrombin, thrombin time, fibrinogen, D-dimer, rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), thrombin generation, prothrombin fragment 1 + 2, and an in-house dynamic fibrin clot formation and lysis assay were performed.

RESULTS

No differences were found between arterial and venous samples for the far majority of parameters. The only differences were found in INR, median (IQR): venous, 1.1 (0.2) vs. arterial, 1.1 (0.2) (p<0.002) and in prothrombin fragment 1 + 2: venous, 289 (209) pmol/L vs. arterial, 279 (191) pmol/L (p<0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The sampling site does not affect the majority of coagulation analyses. Small differences were found for two parameters. Due to numerically very discrete differences, they are of no clinical relevance. In conclusion, the present data suggest that both samples obtained from arterial and venous blood may be applied for analyses of coagulation and fibrinolysis.

Quantification of platelet function - a comparative study of venous and arterial blood using a novel flow cytometry protocol

Studies of platelet function in surgical patients often involve both arterial and venous sampling. Possible effects of different sampling sites could be important, but have not been thoroughly investigated. We aimed to compare platelet function in arterial and venous blood samples using a novel flow cytometry protocol and impedance aggregometry. Arterial and venous blood was collected before anesthesia in 10 patients undergoing cardiac surgery of which nine was treated with acetylsalicylic acid until the day before surgery. Flow cytometry included simultaneous analysis of phosphatidylserine exposure, active conformation of the fibrinogen receptor (PAC-1 binding), α-granule and lysosomal release (P-selectin and LAMP-1 exposure) and mitochondrial membrane integrity. Platelets were activated with ADP or peptides activating thrombin receptors (PAR1-AP/PAR4-AP) or collagen receptor GPVI (CRP-XL). Leukocyte-platelet conjugates and P-selectin exposure were evaluated immediately in fixated samples. For impedance aggregometry (Multiplate®), ADP, arachidonic acid, collagen and PAR1-AP (TRAP) were used as activators. Using impedance aggregometry and in 27 out of 37 parameters studied with flow cytometry there was no significant difference between venous and arterial blood sampling. Arterial blood showed more PAC-1 positive platelets when activated with PAR1-AP or PAR4-AP and venous blood showed more monocyte-platelet and neutrophil-platelet conjugates and higher phosphatidylserine exposure with CRP-XL alone and combined with PAR1-AP or PAR4-AP. We found no differences using impedance aggregometry. In conclusion, testing of platelet function by flow cytometry and impedance aggregometry gave comparable results for most of the studied parameters in venous and arterial samples. Flow cytometry identified differences in PAC-1 binding when activated with PAR1-AP, exposure of phosphatidyl serine and monocyte/neutrophil-platelet conjugates, which might reflect differences in blood sampling technique or in flow conditions in this patient cohort with coronary artery disease. These differences might be considered when comparing data from different sample sites, but caution should be exercised if a different protocol is used or another patient group is studied.