RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To describe and analyze a new protocol for the extraction of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for use in clinical practice and compare this technique with methods that have been previously described in the medical literature. METHODS: We extracted PRP from 20 volunteers using four different protocols (single spin at 1600 ×g, single spin at 600 ×g, double spin at 300 and 700 ×g, and double spin at 600 and 900 ×g). In another group of 12 individuals, we extracted PRP with our new technique (named 'turn down-turn up') consisting of a double spin (200 ×g and 1600 ×g) closed system using standard laboratory equipment (including an ordinary benchtop centrifuge), where the blood remained in the same tube during all processes, reducing the risk of contamination. Platelet counts adjusted to baseline values were compared using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). RESULTS: Using the four previously described protocols (mentioned above), we obtained concentrations of platelets that were 1.15-, 2.07-, 2.18-, and 3.19-fold greater than the baseline concentration, respectively. With the turn down-turn up technique, we obtained a platelet count that was 4.17-fold (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.09 to 5.25) greater than the baseline platelet count (p=0.063 compared with the double spin at 600 and 900 ×g method). The total cost of the disposable materials used in the extraction process was less than US$10.00 per individual. CONCLUSION: In the present study, we described a simple and safe method for obtaining PRP using low-cost devices.
Assuntos
Centrifugação/métodos , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/métodos , Plasma Rico em Plaquetas , Adulto , Centrifugação/economia , Centrifugação/normas , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/economia , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/normas , Análise Custo-Benefício , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Contagem de Plaquetas , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To describe and analyze a new protocol for the extraction of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for use in clinical practice and compare this technique with methods that have been previously described in the medical literature. METHODS: We extracted PRP from 20 volunteers using four different protocols (single spin at 1600 ×g, single spin at 600 ×g, double spin at 300 and 700 ×g, and double spin at 600 and 900 ×g). In another group of 12 individuals, we extracted PRP with our new technique (named 'turn down-turn up') consisting of a double spin (200 ×g and 1600 ×g) closed system using standard laboratory equipment (including an ordinary benchtop centrifuge), where the blood remained in the same tube during all processes, reducing the risk of contamination. Platelet counts adjusted to baseline values were compared using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). RESULTS: Using the four previously described protocols (mentioned above), we obtained concentrations of platelets that were 1.15-, 2.07-, 2.18-, and 3.19-fold greater than the baseline concentration, respectively. With the turn down-turn up technique, we obtained a platelet count that was 4.17-fold (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.09 to 5.25) greater than the baseline platelet count (p=0.063 compared with the double spin at 600 and 900 ×g method). The total cost of the disposable materials used in the extraction process was less than US$10.00 per individual. CONCLUSION: In the present study, we described a simple and safe method for obtaining PRP using low-cost devices.