| Literature DB >> 24078918 |
Anna Marcinkowska-Gapinska1, Honorata Nawrocka-Bogusz.
Abstract
The influence of magnetic field on whole blood rheological properties remains a weakly known phenomenon. An in vitro analysis of the magnetic field influence on the rheological properties of healthy persons blood is presented in this work. The study was performed on blood samples taken from 25 healthy nonsmoking persons and included comparative analysis of the results of both the standard rotary method (flow curve measurement) and the oscillatory method known also as the mechanical dynamic analysis, performed before and after exposition of blood samples to magnetic field. The principle of the oscillatory technique lies in determining the amplitude and phase of the oscillations of the studied sample subjected to action of a harmonic force of controlled amplitude and frequency. The flow curve measurement involved determining the shear rate dependence of blood viscosity. The viscoelastic properties of the blood samples were analyzed in terms of complex blood viscosity. All the measurements have been performed by means of the Contraves LS40 rheometer. The data obtained from the flow curve measurements complemented by hematocrit and plasma viscosity measurements have been analyzed using the rheological model of Quemada. No significant changes of the studied rheological parameters have been found.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24078918 PMCID: PMC3775424 DOI: 10.1155/2013/490410
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
The values of blood rheological parameters and Quemada's model in the group of healthy patients before and after magnetic field.
| Rheological parameter | Group | |
|---|---|---|
| Before magnetic field ( | After magnetic field ( | |
| Hematocrit (Hct) | 44.0 ± 0.5 | 44.0 ± 0.5 |
| Plasma viscosity ( | 1.33 ± 0.03* | 1.41 ± 0.01 |
| Relative blood viscosity at 0.1 s−1 | 39.04 ± 2.47 | 36.88 ± 2.18 |
| Relative blood viscosity at 1 s−1 | 15.84 ± 0.79 | 15.29 ± 0.75 |
| Relative blood viscosity at 10 s−1 | 6.47 ± 0.24 | 6.35 ± 0.22 |
| Relative blood viscosity at 100 s−1 | 3.62 ± 0.09 | 3.54 ± 0.08 |
| Quemada model parameter | 4.16 ± 0.07 | 4.15 ± 0.06 |
| Quemada model parameter | 1.77 ± 0.04 | 1.94 ± 0.23 |
| Quemada model parameter | 5.78 ± 0.66 | 6.08 ± 0.64 |
*P < 0.02.
Figure 1Dependence of the viscous and elastic components of the complex viscosity and the complex viscosity on the rms value of the shear rate amplitude γ 0′ (for oscillation frequency of 0.5 Hz) in the studied group of healthy patients. The rms value of a sinusoidal function is by factor 21/2 smaller than the amplitude.
Figure 2Correlation between the parameters of Quemada model: γ ′ and k .
Figure 3Correlation between the elastic component of the complex viscosity and the γ ′ parameter of Quemada model.
Figure 4Correlation between the elastic component of the complex viscosity and the k parameter of Quemada model.
The values of the viscous and elastic components of the complex viscosity in the group of healthy patients before and after magnetic field.
| Rheological parameter | Before magnetic field ( | After magnetic field ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Value of | 9.25 ± 0.44 | 8.08 ± 0.33 | <0.04 |
| Value of | 10.76 ± 0.36 | 10.85 ± 0.37 | — |
| Value of | 8.70 ± 0.21 | 8.78 ± 0.26 | — |
| Value of | 7.92 ± 0.19 | 8.03 ± 0.23 | — |
| Value of | 12.03 ± 0.46 | 12.15 ± 0.56 | — |
| Value of | 7.20 ± 0.31 | 7.40 ± 0.39 | — |
| Value of | 1.22 ± 0.06 | 1.22 ± 0.06 | — |
| Value of | 0.54 ± 0.02 | 0.55 ± 0.02 | — |