| Literature DB >> 33846383 |
Mario Gutierrez1, Mark Shamoun2, Katie Giger Seu3, Tyler Tanski1, Theodosia A Kalfa3, Omolola Eniola-Adefeso4,5,6.
Abstract
In this work, we utilized a parameterization model of ektacytometry to quantify the bulk rigidity of the rigid red blood cell (RBC) population in sickle cell disease (SCD) patients. Current ektacytometry techniques implement laser diffraction viscometry to estimate the RBC deformability in a whole blood sample. However, the diffraction measurement is an average of all cells present in the measured sample. By coupling an existing parameterization model of ektacytometry to an artificially rigid RBC model, we formulated an innovative system for estimating the average rigidity of the rigid RBC population in SCD blood. We demonstrated that this method could more accurately determine the bulk stiffness of the rigid RBC populations. This information could potentially help develop the ektacytometry technique as a tool for assessing disease severity in SCD patients, offering novel insights into the disease pathology and treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33846383 PMCID: PMC8041827 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-86582-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Ektacytometry analysis of various rigid RBC populations with varying RBC membrane stiffnesses. Ektacytometry curves for various rigid-to-healthy fractions ranging from 0 to 100% in increments of 10% rigid RBCs present. Rigid RBCs have been treated with: (A) 1.0 mM. (B) 0.9 mM. (C) 0.75 mM. (D) 0.5 mM TBHP. (E) Maximum EI recorded at 60 Pa for each rigid fraction condition is compared to EImax of the healthy condition, these ratios are plotted as a function of rigid RBC fraction present. Linear regression is used to determine the slope of these rigid-to-healthy ratio trends. (F) Slopes of rigid-to-healthy ratio trends are plotted as a function of TBHP concentration.
Sickle cell disease patient general information and ektacytometry maximum elongation values.
| Patient | SCD Genotype | Age | Gender | Therapy | %S Fraction | Measured Bulk EImax | Predicted Rigid RBC Pop. EImax |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | - | Years | (M/F) | - | % | - | - |
| 1 | SS | 13 | M | CT | 20.7 | 0.465 | ~ 0.01 |
| 2 | SS | 6 | F | CT | 48.7 | 0.421 | 0.198 |
| 3 | SC | 18 | M | HU | 50.3 | 0.465 | 0.299 |
| 4 | SS | 9 | M | CT | 75.2 | 0.266 | 0.145 |
| 5 | SS | 19 | F | CT | 21.1 | 0.539 | 0.188 |
| 6 | SS | 18 | M | CT | 34.4 | 0.462 | 0.136 |
| 7 | SS | 13 | M | HU | 89.9 | 0.297 | 0.259 |
| 8 | SS | 16 | M | CT | 43.1 | 0.401 | 0.095 |
| 9 | SS | 1.5 | F | - | 89.9 | 0.548 | 0.539 |
| 10 | SS | 15 | M | HU | 79.3 | 0.454 | 0.407 |
| 11 | SC | 17 | M | HU | 47.6 | 0.301 | ~ 0.01 |
| 12 | SS | 15 | M | CT | 55.8 | 0.482 | 0.362 |
| 13 | SS | 2 | F | CT | 37.4 | 0.606 | 0.561 |
| 14 | SS | 21 | F | - | 90.6 | 0.512 | 0.499 |
| 15 | SS | 15 | M | HU | 86.6 | 0.437 | 0.407 |
Information includes SCD genotype, age in years, gender (male or female), current patient therapy chronic transfusions (CT) or Hydroxyurea (HU), %S fraction as determined by blood electrophoresis, and maximum EI measured via ektacytometry in the actual SCD patient blood sample. The table also includes the predicted EImax of rigid population, i.e., %S Fraction. Missing therapies indicate the patient is not under any type of treatment at the time of the measurement.
Figure 2Predicting the rigidity of the rigid RBC populations in sickle-cell disease patients. (A), Average maximum EIs of healthy donors, actual bulk patient measured maximum EIs, and predicted maximum EIs of rigid population. Actual healthy and patient ektacytometry curves compared with predicted patient bulk ektacytometry curve and predicted curve of the rigid RBC population: (B), patient 2. (C), patient 6. (D), patient 7. Error analysis of the predicted EIs as a function of shear was performed using least square difference analysis. Error bars are plotted as standard deviation of the predicted elongation values. Student’s t-tests are performed to determine significance between Actual Patient curves and Predicted Bulk Curves, no significant difference is found for any patient using an α = 0.05, p-values > 0.05.