{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017006802721088437, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.4416058394160585, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Protocols for preparation of platelet rich plasma (PRP) in Quarter Horses

ABSTRACT: This study compared two protocols for preparation of platelet rich plasma (PRP) and evaluated the association between manual and automated methods for platelet count using a prospective study design. Eight clinically healthy Quarter Horses had venous blood samples collected at rest. After collection, blood samples were centrifuged twice, using two different protocols including a period of sample resting, either at the start or at the end of the protocol. Platelet counting at the start of the protocol, during, and after obtaining PRP was conducted manually or with an automated counter, followed by comparison of the two methods. In order to investigate platelet degranulation during the protocol, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) was measured at each preparation stage. The protocol with sample resting before centrifugation yielded a more concentrated PRP, and the study verified that both manual and automated methods are comparable and can be used interchangeably for platelet counting. VEGF concentration did not differ significantly between protocols, or among protocol stages. The results indicate that choice of protocol for PRP preparation will affect the quantity of platelets in the final product, although platelet degranulation was not observed as evidenced by the stable VEGF concentrations measured. A larger yield of non-degranulated platelets in PRP is desirable since more α-granules will be present, therefore Protocol II is recommended. Both manual and automated counts reliably allow clinicians to obtain platelet counts and the choice of utilizing a manual or automated method is unlikely to interfere with evaluation of the final PRP product.