BACKGROUND: Higher hematocrit increases the oxygen-carrying capacity of blood but also increases blood viscosity, thus decreasing blood flow through the microvasculature and reducing the oxygen delivery to tissues. Therefore, an optimal value of hematocrit that maximizes tissue oxygenation must exist. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We used viscometry and an artificial microvascular network device to determine the optimal hematocrit in vitro. Suspensions of fresh red blood cells (RBCs) in plasma, normal saline, or a protein-containing buffer and suspensions of stored red blood cells (at Week 6 of standard hypothermic storage) in plasma with hematocrits ranging from 10 to 80% were evaluated. RESULTS: For viscometry, optimal hematocrits were 10, 25.2, 31.9, 37.1, and 37.5% for fresh RBCs in plasma at shear rates of 3.2 or less, 11.0, 27.7, 69.5, and 128.5 inverse seconds. For the artificial microvascular network, optimal hematocrits were 51.1, 55.6, 59.2, 60.9, 62.3, and 64.6% for fresh RBCs in plasma and 46.4, 48.1, 54.8, 61.4, 65.7, and 66.5% for stored RBCs in plasma at pressures of 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 cm H2 O. CONCLUSION: Although exact optimal hematocrit values may depend on specific microvascular architecture, our results suggest that the optimal hematocrit for oxygen delivery in the microvasculature depends on perfusion pressure. Therefore, anemia in chronic disorders may represent a beneficial physiological response to reduced perfusion pressure resulting from decreased heart function and/or vascular stenosis. Our results may help explain why a therapeutically increasing hematocrit in such conditions with RBC transfusion frequently leads to worse clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Higher hematocrit increases the oxygen-carrying capacity of blood but also increases blood viscosity, thus decreasing blood flow through the microvasculature and reducing the oxygen delivery to tissues. Therefore, an optimal value of hematocrit that maximizes tissue oxygenation must exist. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We used viscometry and an artificial microvascular network device to determine the optimal hematocrit in vitro. Suspensions of fresh red blood cells (RBCs) in plasma, normal saline, or a protein-containing buffer and suspensions of stored red blood cells (at Week 6 of standard hypothermic storage) in plasma with hematocrits ranging from 10 to 80% were evaluated. RESULTS: For viscometry, optimal hematocrits were 10, 25.2, 31.9, 37.1, and 37.5% for fresh RBCs in plasma at shear rates of 3.2 or less, 11.0, 27.7, 69.5, and 128.5 inverse seconds. For the artificial microvascular network, optimal hematocrits were 51.1, 55.6, 59.2, 60.9, 62.3, and 64.6% for fresh RBCs in plasma and 46.4, 48.1, 54.8, 61.4, 65.7, and 66.5% for stored RBCs in plasma at pressures of 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 cm H2 O. CONCLUSION: Although exact optimal hematocrit values may depend on specific microvascular architecture, our results suggest that the optimal hematocrit for oxygen delivery in the microvasculature depends on perfusion pressure. Therefore, anemia in chronic disorders may represent a beneficial physiological response to reduced perfusion pressure resulting from decreased heart function and/or vascular stenosis. Our results may help explain why a therapeutically increasing hematocrit in such conditions with RBC transfusion frequently leads to worse clinical outcomes.
Authors: Jeffrey L Carson; Michael L Terrin; Helaine Noveck; David W Sanders; Bernard R Chaitman; George G Rhoads; George Nemo; Karen Dragert; Lauren Beaupre; Kevin Hildebrand; William Macaulay; Courtland Lewis; Donald Richard Cook; Gwendolyn Dobbin; Khwaja J Zakriya; Fred S Apple; Rebecca A Horney; Jay Magaziner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Walter H Reinhart; Nathaniel Z Piety; Jeremy W Deuel; Asya Makhro; Thomas Schulzki; Nikolay Bogdanov; Jeroen S Goede; Anna Bogdanova; Rajaa Abidi; Sergey S Shevkoplyas Journal: Transfusion Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Jose M Sosa; Nathan D Nielsen; Seth M Vignes; Tanya G Chen; Sergey S Shevkoplyas Journal: Clin Hemorheol Microcirc Date: 2014 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Jalal K Ghali; Inder S Anand; William T Abraham; Gregg C Fonarow; Barry Greenberg; Henry Krum; Barry M Massie; Scott M Wasserman; Marie-Louise Trotman; Yan Sun; Beat Knusel; Paul Armstrong Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-01-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alexander Kulier; Jack Levin; Rita Moser; Gudrun Rumpold-Seitlinger; Iulia Cristina Tudor; Stephanie A Snyder-Ramos; Patrick Moehnle; Dennis T Mangano Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-07-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Stije J Leopold; James A Watson; Atthanee Jeeyapant; Julie A Simpson; Nguyen H Phu; Tran T Hien; Nicholas P J Day; Arjen M Dondorp; Nicholas J White Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 11.069