Cargando…

External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme

INTRODUCTION: To perform Calibrated Automated Thrombography (CAT), the use of reduced plasma volumes (referred to as “MidiCAT”) makes it possible to more efficiently use limited volumes of valuable biobanked plasma samples and decreases expenses for reagents. It is, however, unclear whether the Midi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Charles, Sebastien, Guyotat, Denis, Fontana, Pierre, Tardy, Bernard, Lecompte, Thomas, Chalayer, Emilie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9635262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36337867
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.998687
_version_ 1784824675399892992
author Charles, Sebastien
Guyotat, Denis
Fontana, Pierre
Tardy, Bernard
Lecompte, Thomas
Chalayer, Emilie
author_facet Charles, Sebastien
Guyotat, Denis
Fontana, Pierre
Tardy, Bernard
Lecompte, Thomas
Chalayer, Emilie
author_sort Charles, Sebastien
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: To perform Calibrated Automated Thrombography (CAT), the use of reduced plasma volumes (referred to as “MidiCAT”) makes it possible to more efficiently use limited volumes of valuable biobanked plasma samples and decreases expenses for reagents. It is, however, unclear whether the MidiCAT procedure is suitable when thrombin generation (TG) is studied in the presence of added thrombomodulin (TG-TM). Moreover, a simplified centrifugation scheme would facilitate biobanking, if appropriate, for more sensitive coagulation studies. We aimed to compare the results of “MidiCAT” (halved plasma and reagent volumes) with those from regular CAT, in the absence or presence of TM, as well as to study the impact of a single-centrifugation scheme for plasma preparation before freezing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plasma samples were prepared from the citrated blood from 20 Geneva hospital diverse patients without gross coagulation abnormalities with a single- or double-centrifugation scheme. Samples were kept frozen at −80°C and thawed just before the TG assay in duplicate under two conditions: 1 pM tissue factor (TF) or 5 pM TF + TM. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: (1) We externally validated “MidiCAT” and also extended the validation to TG-TM. Whatever the method (CAT or MidiCAT), intra-assay (assessed with duplicates) CV was below 6% (1 pM TF) or below 10% (5 pM TF + TM) for ETP. Agreement between the MidiCAT and CAT results was satisfactory; the p coefficients were above 0.95 for ETP and above 0.90 for most other parameters; biases for ETP were +10.0% (1 pM FT) and +13.5% (5 pM + TM). (2) The centrifugation scheme markedly affected the results obtained in the presence of TM, whereas the bias and limit of agreement (difference plots) were low for the no TM condition. The bias in the presence of TM was obvious, more marked with plasma samples sensitive to TM when double centrifuged: the lower the ETP-TM, the greater the relative difference between the ETP-TM of plasma samples prepared with just single centrifugation and the reference plasma samples. Thus, a single-centrifugation procedure, as is often used for plasma biobanking, is suitable for TG study only if it is not performed in the presence of TM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9635262
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96352622022-11-05 External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme Charles, Sebastien Guyotat, Denis Fontana, Pierre Tardy, Bernard Lecompte, Thomas Chalayer, Emilie Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine INTRODUCTION: To perform Calibrated Automated Thrombography (CAT), the use of reduced plasma volumes (referred to as “MidiCAT”) makes it possible to more efficiently use limited volumes of valuable biobanked plasma samples and decreases expenses for reagents. It is, however, unclear whether the MidiCAT procedure is suitable when thrombin generation (TG) is studied in the presence of added thrombomodulin (TG-TM). Moreover, a simplified centrifugation scheme would facilitate biobanking, if appropriate, for more sensitive coagulation studies. We aimed to compare the results of “MidiCAT” (halved plasma and reagent volumes) with those from regular CAT, in the absence or presence of TM, as well as to study the impact of a single-centrifugation scheme for plasma preparation before freezing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plasma samples were prepared from the citrated blood from 20 Geneva hospital diverse patients without gross coagulation abnormalities with a single- or double-centrifugation scheme. Samples were kept frozen at −80°C and thawed just before the TG assay in duplicate under two conditions: 1 pM tissue factor (TF) or 5 pM TF + TM. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: (1) We externally validated “MidiCAT” and also extended the validation to TG-TM. Whatever the method (CAT or MidiCAT), intra-assay (assessed with duplicates) CV was below 6% (1 pM TF) or below 10% (5 pM TF + TM) for ETP. Agreement between the MidiCAT and CAT results was satisfactory; the p coefficients were above 0.95 for ETP and above 0.90 for most other parameters; biases for ETP were +10.0% (1 pM FT) and +13.5% (5 pM + TM). (2) The centrifugation scheme markedly affected the results obtained in the presence of TM, whereas the bias and limit of agreement (difference plots) were low for the no TM condition. The bias in the presence of TM was obvious, more marked with plasma samples sensitive to TM when double centrifuged: the lower the ETP-TM, the greater the relative difference between the ETP-TM of plasma samples prepared with just single centrifugation and the reference plasma samples. Thus, a single-centrifugation procedure, as is often used for plasma biobanking, is suitable for TG study only if it is not performed in the presence of TM. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9635262/ /pubmed/36337867 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.998687 Text en Copyright © 2022 Charles, Guyotat, Fontana, Tardy, Lecompte and Chalayer. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Cardiovascular Medicine
Charles, Sebastien
Guyotat, Denis
Fontana, Pierre
Tardy, Bernard
Lecompte, Thomas
Chalayer, Emilie
External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme
title External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme
title_full External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme
title_fullStr External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme
title_full_unstemmed External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme
title_short External validation of the MidiCAT variant of thrombography: Comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme
title_sort external validation of the midicat variant of thrombography: comparison with calibrated automated thrombography and study of the centrifugation scheme
topic Cardiovascular Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9635262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36337867
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.998687
work_keys_str_mv AT charlessebastien externalvalidationofthemidicatvariantofthrombographycomparisonwithcalibratedautomatedthrombographyandstudyofthecentrifugationscheme
AT guyotatdenis externalvalidationofthemidicatvariantofthrombographycomparisonwithcalibratedautomatedthrombographyandstudyofthecentrifugationscheme
AT fontanapierre externalvalidationofthemidicatvariantofthrombographycomparisonwithcalibratedautomatedthrombographyandstudyofthecentrifugationscheme
AT tardybernard externalvalidationofthemidicatvariantofthrombographycomparisonwithcalibratedautomatedthrombographyandstudyofthecentrifugationscheme
AT lecomptethomas externalvalidationofthemidicatvariantofthrombographycomparisonwithcalibratedautomatedthrombographyandstudyofthecentrifugationscheme
AT chalayeremilie externalvalidationofthemidicatvariantofthrombographycomparisonwithcalibratedautomatedthrombographyandstudyofthecentrifugationscheme