Article Text

Download PDFPDF
In-vitro study of species-specific coagulation differences in animals and humans using rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM)
  1. Raimund Lechner1,
  2. M Helm1,
  3. M Müller2,
  4. T Wille3,
  5. H J Riesner2 and
  6. B Friemert2
  1. 1 Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine and Pain Medicine, German Armed Forces Hospital of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
  2. 2 Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, German Armed Forces Hospital of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
  3. 3 Bundeswehr Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Munich, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Raimund Lechner, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, German Armed Forces Hospital of Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany; raimundedgarlechner{at}bundeswehr.org

Abstract

Animal tests are conducted in all fields of trauma research, but transferability of these data to humans is limited. For example, it is still unclear which animal species is most similar to humans in terms of physiology of blood coagulation. To improve transferability and raise awareness of the existing differences, we compared human coagulation to coagulation of different animals. Rotational thromboelastometry was used to analyse the blood of pigs, sheep, rabbits and dogs. Animal data were compared with human coagulation based on the number of significant differences of the test parameters and on a descriptive comparison of the extent of relative deviation of the single values. All animal species showed significant differences in coagulation properties when compared with humans. Coagulation parameters of dogs and sheep were on average most similar to humans. However, there is no animal which is most similar to humans concerning all aspects of coagulation. Differences in coagulation between humans and animals are significant. This must be taken into account when transferring animal test data to humans.

  • rotational thromboelastometry
  • human
  • dog
  • pig
  • rabbit
  • sheep
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors All authors made substantial contribution to conception/design or acquisition of data or analysis/interpretation of the data. All authors contributed to design the article or revised it critically. In addition, all authors approved the manuscript and agree with the submission to JRAMC.

  • Funding This work was undertaken with financial support from the Medical Office of the German Armed Forces (32K3 – S – 101213).

  • Disclaimer This work has not been published elsewhere and is not currently under process in another journal.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval Committee of the University of Ulm (ref. no. 231/11).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.