Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Three Manual Noncommercial Methods to Prepare Equine Platelet-Rich Plasma

Full text
Author(s):
Segabinazzi, Lorenzo G. T. M. [1, 2] ; Podico, Giorgia [1, 3] ; Rosser, Michael F. [4] ; Nanjappa, Som G. [4] ; Alvarenga, Marco A. [2] ; Canisso, Igor F. [1, 3]
Total Authors: 6
Affiliation:
[1] Univ Illinois, Coll Vet Med, Dept Vet Clin Med, Urbana, IL 61802 - USA
[2] Sao Paulo State Univ UNESP, Sch Vet Med & Anim Sci, BR-18618681 Botucatu, SP - Brazil
[3] Univ Illinois, Coll Vet Med, Dept Comparat Biosci, Urbana, IL 61802 - USA
[4] Univ Illinois, Coll Vet Med, Dept Pathobiol, Urbana, IL 61802 - USA
Total Affiliations: 4
Document type: Journal article
Source: ANIMALS; v. 11, n. 6 JUN 2021.
Web of Science Citations: 0
Abstract

Simple Summary Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a popular therapy in human and veterinary medicine. This study compared three manual noncommercial methods to prepare PRP and its cooling. The three methods concentrated platelets and did not alter viability. Method 1 (i.e., involving double centrifugation) resulted in the greatest platelet concentrations, while method 3 (sedimentation) resulted in the lowest platelet concentration and greater contamination with white blood cells (WBC). Cooling increased platelet agglutination over time across methods and affected platelet viability in PRP obtained with method 3. It remains unknown whether the different methods and cooling would affect PRP's clinical efficacy. In light of PRP's increasing popularity in veterinary practice, this study aimed to compare three manual methods to prepare and cool equine PRP. The blood of 18 clinically healthy mares was collected via venipuncture in a blood transfusion bag (method 1), blood tubes (method 2), and a syringe (method 3). In method 1, samples were double centrifuged; method 2 involved one centrifugation, and in method 3 the syringe was kept in an upright position to sediment for 4 h. After processing with three methods, PRP and platelet-poor plasma (PPP) were extracted and assessed for red (RBC) and white blood cell counts (WBC), platelet counts, and viability. In a subset of mares (n = 6), samples were processed with the three methods, and PRP was evaluated at 6 and 24 h postcooling at 5 degrees C. Method 1 resulted in the highest and method 3 in the lowest platelet concentration (p < 0.05), and the latter also had greater contamination with WBC than the others (p < 0.001). Platelet viability was similar across treatments (p > 0.05). Cooling for 24 h did not affect platelet counts in all methods (p > 0.05); however, platelet viability was reduced after cooling PRP produced by method 3 (p = 0.04), and agglutination increased over time in all methods (p < 0.001). The three methods increased (1.8-5.6-fold) platelet concentration in PRP compared to whole blood without compromising platelet viability. In conclusion, all three methods concentrated platelets and while cooling affected their viability. It remains unknown whether the different methods and cooling would affect PRP's clinical efficacy. (AU)

FAPESP's process: 18/02856-3 - Clinical, molecular and proteomic aspects of the uterus of susceptible mares treated with biological therapies: platelet rich plasma and stem cells conditioned medium; and firocoxib.
Grantee:Marco Antonio Alvarenga
Support Opportunities: Regular Research Grants