Bertil Uggla1, Torbjörn K Nilsson2. 1. School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden. Electronic address: bertil.uggla@orebroll.se. 2. Department of Medical Biosciences/Clinical Chemistry, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Plasma or serum hyperviscosity in plasma cell dyscrasias (PCD) has been described as a risk factor for circulatory disturbances. Whole blood viscosity (WBV) would theoretically be a better biomarker but has not been studied in PCD. DESIGN AND METHODS: Plasma viscosity (PV) and WBV were measured in 89 subjects with PCD and in 60 healthy blood donors by free oscillation rheometry. A complete blood count was obtained using an automated hematology analyzer. Plasma proteins were quantitated by immunoturbidimetry. RESULTS: The reference intervals for men & women were 1.16-1.36 & 1.16-1.38 mPa for PV, and 4.9-6.3 & 4.4-6.2 mPa for WBV, respectively. Of the PCD patients, 71% had PV above the reference limit and 40% were above the WBV limit. Multivariate analysis showed that WBV was independently related to hematocrit, PV, concentration of the monoclonal protein (M-protein), plasma fibrinogen concentration and albumin concentration. This model accounted for 76% of the variance in WBV. When the same model was applied to PV, only the concentration of the M-protein was significantly related and the model accounted only for 20% of the variance in PV. CONCLUSION: PV cannot be used as a surrogate marker for WBV in PCD patients. Whole blood viscosity should replace plasma viscosity in patients with PCD.
OBJECTIVES: Plasma or serum hyperviscosity in plasma cell dyscrasias (PCD) has been described as a risk factor for circulatory disturbances. Whole blood viscosity (WBV) would theoretically be a better biomarker but has not been studied in PCD. DESIGN AND METHODS: Plasma viscosity (PV) and WBV were measured in 89 subjects with PCD and in 60 healthy blood donors by free oscillation rheometry. A complete blood count was obtained using an automated hematology analyzer. Plasma proteins were quantitated by immunoturbidimetry. RESULTS: The reference intervals for men & women were 1.16-1.36 & 1.16-1.38 mPa for PV, and 4.9-6.3 & 4.4-6.2 mPa for WBV, respectively. Of the PCDpatients, 71% had PV above the reference limit and 40% were above the WBV limit. Multivariate analysis showed that WBV was independently related to hematocrit, PV, concentration of the monoclonal protein (M-protein), plasma fibrinogen concentration and albumin concentration. This model accounted for 76% of the variance in WBV. When the same model was applied to PV, only the concentration of the M-protein was significantly related and the model accounted only for 20% of the variance in PV. CONCLUSION:PV cannot be used as a surrogate marker for WBV in PCDpatients. Whole blood viscosity should replace plasma viscosity in patients with PCD.