RESUMEN
The results of in vitro dynamic thrombogenicity testing of biomaterials and medical devices can be significantly impacted by test conditions. To develop and standardize a robust dynamic in vitro thrombogenicity tool, the key test parameters need to be appropriately evaluated and optimized. We used a flow loop test system previously developed in our laboratory to investigate the effects of sample length and the number of samples per test loop on the thrombogenicity results. Porcine blood heparinized to a donor-specific target concentration was recirculated at room temperature through polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tubing loops containing test materials for 1 h at 200 mL/min. Four test materials (polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), latex, PVC, and silicone) with various thrombotic potentials in two sample lengths (12 and 18 cm) were examined. For the 12-cm long materials, two different test configurations (one and two samples per loop) were compared. Thrombogenicity was assessed through percent thrombus surface coverage, thrombus weight, and platelet count reduction in the blood. The test system was able to effectively differentiate the thrombogenicity profile of the materials (latex > silicone > PVC ≥ PTFE) at all test configurations. Increasing test sample length by 50% did not significantly impact the test results as both 12 and 18 cm sample lengths were shown to equally differentiate thrombotic potentials between the materials. The addition of a second test sample to each loop did not increase the test sensitivity and may produce confounding results, and thus a single test sample per loop is recommended.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To determine suitable alternatives to human blood for in vitro dynamic thrombogenicity testing of biomaterials, four different animal blood sources (ovine, bovine, and porcine blood from live donors, and abattoir porcine blood) were compared to fresh human blood. METHODS: To account for blood coagulability differences between individual donors and species, each blood pool was heparinized to a donor-specific concentration immediately before testing in a dynamic flow loop system. The target heparin level was established using a static thrombosis pre-test. For dynamic testing, whole blood was recirculated at room temperature for 1 h at 200 ml/min through a flow loop containing a single test material. Four materials with varying thrombotic potentials were investigated: latex (positive control), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (negative control), silicone (intermediate thrombotic potential), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) (historically thromboresistant). Thrombus weight and surface area coverage on the test materials were quantified, along with platelet count reduction in the blood. RESULTS: While donor-specific heparin levels varied substantially from 0.6 U/ml to 7.0 U/ml among the different blood sources, each source was able to differentiate between the thrombogenic latex and the thromboresistant PTFE and HDPE materials (p < 0.05). However, only donor ovine and bovine blood were sensitive enough to differentiate an increased response for the intermediate thrombotic silicone material compared to PTFE and HDPE. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated that multiple animal blood sources (particularly donor ovine and bovine blood) may be suitable alternatives to fresh human blood for dynamic thrombogenicity testing when appropriate control materials and donor-specific anticoagulation levels are used.
