两种冷沉淀凝血因子制备方法的比较

Comparison of two preparation methods of cryoprecipitated antihemophilic factor

目的探讨不同制备方法对冷沉淀凝血因子质量的影响。方法新鲜冰冻血浆244袋,随机分为冷藏箱过夜融化离心法组与全自动水浴融化虹吸法组,各122袋。冷藏箱过夜融化离心法组应用储血冷藏箱过夜融化离心法进行检测,全自动水浴融化虹吸法组应用全自动水浴融化虹吸法进行检测。观察比较两组冷沉淀凝血因子的FⅧ、纤维蛋白原(Fgb)含量及合格率。结果全自动水浴融化虹吸法组FⅧ含量(169.1±62.7)IU高于冷藏箱过夜融化离心法组的(127.6±48.8)IU,Fgb含量(309.2±81.3)mg低于冷藏箱过夜融化离心法组的(372.7±125.3)mg,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组FⅧ、Fgb合格率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论两种方法制备的冷沉淀凝血因子均符合国家标准,全自动水浴融化虹吸法制备的冷沉淀合格率高,制备效率高,制备过程信息化,可追溯,但是仪器的性能有待进一步提高。

Objective To discuss the effect of different preparation methods of cryoprecipitated antihemophilic factor.Methods A total of 244 bags of fresh frozen plasma were randomly divided into centrifugation method group and siphon group,each with 122 bags.The centrifugation group was tested by the overnight thawing centrifugation method in the blood storage refrigerator,and the siphon method group was tested by the automatic water bath melting siphon method.The FⅧand fibrinogen(Fgb)contents of cold precipitated coagulation factors and its qualified rates in cryoprecipitated antihemophilic factor were observed and compared between the two groups.Results The FⅧcontent(169.1±62.7)IU of the siphon group was higher than(127.6±48.8)IU of the centrifugation method group,and Fgb content(309.2±81.3)mg was lower than(372.7±125.3)mg of the centrifugation method group.All the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the qualified rates of FⅧand Fgb between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion The cryoprecipitated antihemophilic factor prepared by the two methods all reached the national standards.The cryoprecipitate prepared by the automatic water bath melting siphon method has a high qualified rate,high preparation efficiency,and the preparation process is informative and traceable,but the performance of the apparatus need to be further improved.