Key result
The Clot Signature Analyzer parameters correlated with conventional methods, but platelet hemostasis time was not increased after of aspirin, unlike conventional bleeding time.
Why the study?
Does the Clot Signature Analyzer (CSA) accurately detect changes in hemostasis compared to conventional bleeding time and platelet aggregation in healthy volunteers exposed to aspirin?
Does the Clot Signature Analyzer (CSA) accurately detect changes in hemostasis compared to conventional bleeding time and platelet aggregation in healthy volunteers exposed to aspirin?
The Clot Signature Analyzer is not consistently suitable for detecting hemostatic abnormalities compared to conventional bleeding time and platelet aggregation following low-dose aspirin exposure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
CSA may miss low-dose aspirin effects; leaves open its role versus bleeding time pending validation.
Several variables affect bleeding time that make it difficult to obtain consistent measurements. The Clot Signature Analyzer (CSA) has been developed to assess in vitro hemostasis using well-controlled flow chambers. In this study, the equivalencies in the CSA parameters with the conventional bleeding time or platelet aggregation methods were evaluated in subjects exposed to aspirin. The CSA parameters, platelet hemostasis time (PHT) and collagen-induced thrombus formation (CITF), were compared to bleeding time (Surgicutt2) and collagen-induced platelet aggregation, respectively. Fifty-three healthy volunteers were given two doses of aspirin (81 and 243 mg) in one day. Following the baseline period, the volunteers took 81 mg of aspirin and then took 243 mg 2 hours later. The changes in each value from the baseline to that at either aspirin dose (2 hours after dosing) were evaluated. Platelet hemostasis time and CITF correlated well with bleeding time and aggregation, respectively, but PHT was not significantly increased after 81 mg of aspirin, whereas bleeding time was significantly increased. The variation in PHT was slightly higher than that of bleeding time. At 81 mg, CITF was significantly increased but aggregation was not, even though the variation was comparable. This suggests that PHT and CITF can simulate the changes in bleeding time and aggregation, respectively, but the sensitivity of PHT for detecting the changes in bleeding time was no better than the conventional method. Also, CITF was more sensitive than aggregation in detecting platelet response to collagen. In conclusion, the proposed CSA is not always suitable for detecting hemostatic abnormalities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Igawa et al. (1999) studied Healthy volunteers (n=53). Clot Signature Analyzer (CSA) vs. Conventional bleeding time and collagen-induced platelet aggregation was evaluated on Changes in hemostasis parameters from baseline to 2 hours after aspirin dosing. The Clot Signature Analyzer parameters correlated with conventional methods, but platelet hemostasis time was not increased after of aspirin, unlike conventional bleeding time.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: