Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2021-12-17
Comparison between whole blood viscosity measured and calculated in subjects with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and in patients with multiple myeloma: Re-evaluation of our survey
in this study, with a re-evaluation of the hemorheological determinants previously described in MGUS subjects and in MM patients, we have detected the calculated whole blood viscosity, according whether to the hematocrit and total plasma protein concentration (de Simone formula) or to the haematocrit and plasma fibrinogen level (Merrill formula), and a marker of the erythrocyte aggregation (albumin/fibrinogen level).
METHODS:
data were expressed as means±standard deviation. Student’s t test for unpaired data was used to compare MGUS subjects and MM patients. The correlation coefficient between mean erythrocyte aggregation (MEA) and hematocrit (Ht) was evaluated in MGUS, MM and MGUS + MM groups using the Spearman test.
RESULTS:
the comparison between MGUS and MM shows that the measured blood viscosity and calculated blood viscosity based on hematocrit and total plasma protein, but not which estimated in relation to the hematocrit and plasma fibrinogen, differentiate the two groups. A difference between the two groups also regards the measured erythrocyte aggregation and its surrogate marker. In addition, the measured plasma viscosity at low shear rate (0.51 s–1) and, in particular, the ratio between plasma viscosity at low (0.51 s–1) and high (450 s–1) shear rates distinguish MGUS and MM.
CONCLUSIONS:
calculated blood viscosity (de Simone formula and other formulas) and the surrogate marker of erythrocyte aggregation disclose an alike trend with the corresponding hemorheological determinants obtained by using their direct measurement.
de SimoneG, DevereuxRB, ChienS, AldermanMH, AtlasSA, LaraghJH. Relation of blood viscosity to demographic and physiologic variables and to cardiovascular risk factors in apparently normal adults. Circulation. 1990;81:107–17.
2.
HoieggenA, FossumE, MoanA, EngerE, KjeldsenSE. Whole-blood viscosity and the insulin-resistence syndrome. J Hypertens. 1998;16:203–10.
3.
NwoseEU. Cardiovascular risk assessment and support techniques: Whole blood viscosity assessment issue I: Extrapolation chart and reference values. N Am J Med Sci. 2010;2:165–9.
4.
NwoseEU, RichardsRS. Whole blood viscosity issue VIII: Comparison of extrapolation method with diagnostic digital viscometer. N Am J Med Sci. 2011;3:333–5.
5.
GoriT, WildPS, SchnabelR, SchulzA, PfeifferN, BlettnerM, et al. The distribution of whole blood viscosity, its determinants and relationship with arterial blood pressure in the community: cross-sectional analysis from the Gutenberg Healthy Sutdy. Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis. 2015;9:354–65.
6.
Taco-VasquezED, BarreraF, Serrano-DuenasM, JimenezE, RocutsA, PerezER. Association between blood viscosity and cardiovascular risk factors in patients with arterial hypertension in a high altitude setting. Cureus. 2019;11:e3925.
7.
VosslerM, BeutelA, SchaferS, MuxelS, JabsA, ForconiS, et al. Parameters of blood viscosity do not correlate with the extent of coronary and carotid atherosclerosis and with endothelial function in patients undergoing coronary angiograpohy. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2012;52:245–54.
8.
EnginM, GuvencO. Investigation of the predictive values of triglyceride/HDL cholesterol ratio and whole blood viscosity with regard to severe peripheral or carotid artery disease in patients scheduled for coronary bypass. The Heart Surgery Forum. 2020;23:314.
9.
CekirdekciEI, BuganB. Whole blood viscosity in microvascular angina and coronary artery disease:significance and utility. Rev Port Cardiol. 2020;39:17–23.
10.
CirakogluOF, AslanAO, YilmazAS, KulS, DursunI. Usefulness of whole blood viscosity estimated by de Simone’s formula to predict left ventricular thrombus formation within on year following acute anterior myocardial infarction. Biorheology. 2020;1:1–13.
11.
MoanA, NordbyG, OsI, BirkelandKI, KjeldsenSE. Relationship between hemorrheological factors and insulin sensitivity in health young men. Metabolism. 1994;43:423–7.
12.
NwoseEU, RichardsRS, BwititiPT. Cardiovascular risks in prediabetes:preliminary data on “vasculopathy triad”. N Am J Med Sci. 2014;6:328–32.
13.
IraceC, ScarinciF, ScorciaV, BruzzichessiD, FiorentinoR, RandazzoG, et al. Association among low whole blood viscosity, haematocrit, haemoglobin and diabetic retinopathy in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95:94–8.
14.
MinatoS, TakenouchiA, UchidaJ, TsuboiA, KurataM, FukuoK, et al. Association of whole blood viscosity with metabolic syndrome in typoe 2 diabetic patients:independent association with post-breakfast triglyceridemia. J Clin Med Res. 2017;332-8.
15.
WuH-C, LeeL-C, WangW-J. Plasmapheresis for hypertriglyceridemia: the association between blood viscosity and triglyceride clearance rate. J Clin Lab Anal. 2019;33:e22688.
16.
DuyulerPT, DuyulerS, IleriM, DemirM, DoluAK, BasyigitF. Evaluation of whole blood viscosity in patients with aortic sclerosis. J Teh Univ Heart Ctr. 2017;12:6–10.
17.
SercelikA, BesniliAF. The contribution of whole blood viscosity to the process to aortic valve sclerosis. Med Pric Pract. 2018;27:173–8.
18.
SenturkB, AkdenizB, YilmazMB, KahramanBO, AcarB, UsluS, et al. Whole blood viscosity in systemic sclerosis: a potential biomarker of pulmonary hypertension?Clinical Rheumatology. 2020;39:49–56.
19.
MerrillEW, ChengCS, PelletierGA. Yield stress of normal blood as a function of endogenous fibrinogen. Journal of Applied Physiology. 1969;26:1–3.
20.
MishraN, SinghN. Blood viscosity, lipid profile, and lipid peroxidation in type-1 diabetic patients with good and poor glycaemic control. N Am J Med Sci. 2013;5:562–6.
21.
DhasY, BanerjeeJ, MishraN. Blood viscosity, glycemic markers and blood pressure: a study in middle-aged normotensive and hypertensive type 2 diabetics. Ind J Clin Biochem. 2020;35:102–8.
22.
CaimiG. Clinical disorders determining sclerocytemic hyperviscosity and skin ulcers. Series on Biomechenics. 2017;31:45–9.
23.
DintenfassL. Haemorheology of diabetes mellitus. Adv Microcirc (Microcirculation in Diabetes). 1979;8:14–36.
LoweGDO, BarbenelJC. Plasma and blood viscosity. In: Clinical Blood Rheology. Lowe G.D.O. Ed. CRC Press, Inc, Florida, 1988, pp. 11–44.
26.
RamplingMW. Red cell aggregation and Yield stress. In: Clinical Blood Rheology. Lowe G.D.O. Ed, CRC Press, Inc, Florida, 1988, pp. 45–64.
27.
NeuB, MeiselmanHJ. Red blood cell aggregation. In: Handbook of Hemorheology and Hemodynamics. Baskurt O.K. et al. (Eds) IOS Press. 2007, pp. 114–136.
28.
CastilloJJ. Plasma cell disorders. Prim Care Dec. 2016;43:677–91.
29.
CaimiG, CarlisiM, MontanaM, GalláE, Lo PrestiR, HoppsE, et al. Erythrocyte deformability and hemorheological profile in multiple myeloma. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2018;68:25–34.
30.
CaimiG, HoppsE, CarlisiM, MontanaM, GalláE, Lo PrestiR, et al. Hemorheological parameters in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS). Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2018;68:51–9.
31.
CaimiG, CarlisiM, MontanaM, GalláE, HoppsE, Lo PrestiR, et al. Red blood cell deformability in multiple myeloma. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2018;69:233–8.
32.
HarknessJ. Measurement of plasma viscosity. In Clinical aspects of blood viscosity and red cell deformability. G.D.O. Lowe, J.C. Barbanel and C. Forbes, Springer, Berlin; 1981, pp. 79–90.
33.
CokeletGR, MeiselmanHJ. Macro- and micro-rheological properties of blood, in Handbook of Hemorheology and Hemodynamics, Baskurt OK, Hardeman PR, Rampling MW, Meiselman H.J. eds, IOS Press, Amsterdam. 2007, pp. 45–71.
34.
PattersonCC, BlankenbergS, Ben-ShlomoY, HeslopL, BayerA, LoweG, et al. Which biomarkers are predictive specifically for cardiovascular or for non-cardiovascular in men? Evidence from the Caerphilly Perspective Study (CaPS). Int J Cardiol. 2015;201:113–11.
