ORTALAMA TROMBOSİT HACMİ/TROMBOSİT SAYISI (MPV/PLT) ORANI İLE KORONER YAVAŞ AKIM ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ

Öz

Amaç Koroner yavaş akim (KYA) koroner anatomik yapının normal olmasına rağmen anjiyografi sırasında verilen opak maddenin yavaş
ilerlediğinin gözlenmesi seklinde tanımlanmıştır. Akut koroner sendromlu hastalarda yapılan çalışmalarda olumsuz kardiyovasküler olay
gelişimi ile trombosit arasında ilişki saptanmıştır. Bu çalışmada amacımız koroner yavaş� akımı varlığı ile ortalama trombosit hacmi/
trombosit sayısı oranı arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesidir.
Metod ve
Bulgular
Çalışmamıza 200 hasta dahil edildi. Koroner yavaş akim grubunda MPV, MPV/PLT ve Trombosit değerlerinde KYA olmayan gruba
göre anlamlı derecede fark izlendi (8.42±1.64, 7.77±1.51 p=0.04; 0.046±0.022, 0.03±0.01 p=0.01; 256.08±65.45, 236.38±59.28,
p=0.02). Korelasyon analizinde KYA ile MPV, MPV/PLT ve Trombosit değerleri arasında pozitif yonde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ilişki
izlendi (r=0.21 p=0.002; r=0.20, p=0.03; r=0.15, p=0.02)
Sonuç Çalışmamızda MPV, trombosit ve MPV/PLT ile KYA arasında anlamlı ilişki bulundu. Bu trombosit parametrelerinin ölçümü ucuz ve yaygın
olarak kullanılmaktadır ve KYA tanısında belirteç olarak kullanılması için prospektif çalışmalara ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Koroner yavaş akim,trombosit,trombosit sayısı,ortalama trombosit hacmi

Relatıonshıp Between Coronary Slow Flow And Mean Platelet Volume/Platelet Count Ratıo

Abstract

Aim Coronary Slow Flow (CSF) was defi ned with slow progression of the opaque substance against normal coronary anatomy during
angiography. Studies with acute coronary syndrome showed that there is a relationship between adverse cardiovascular events and
platelet. The goal of this study was to investigate the relationship between CSF and Mean Trombosit Volume/Trombosit count (MPV/
PLT) ratio in patients with coronary slow fl ow.
Material
and
Method
200 patients were included in our study. There was a signifi cant difference in MPV, MPV / PLT and Trombosit values in the CSF group according to non-CSF group (8.42±1.64, 7.77±1.51 p=0.04; 0.046±0.022, 0.03±0.01 p=0.01; 256.08±65.45, 236.38±59.28,
p=0.02).
There was a positive and signifi cant relationship between CSF and MPV, MPV / PLT ratio and platelet count in correlation analyze
(r=0.21 p=0.002; r=0.20, p=0.03; r=0.15, p=0.02, respectively).
Conclusion MPV, platelet count, and MPV / PLT ratio were signifi cantly related to CSF in our study.
The measurement of these platelet parameters is cheap and widely used.
In order to use as a marker of these parameters in the diagnosis of CSF, prospective studies are needed. 

Keywords

• Coronary slow fl ow,Trombosit,Trombosit count,Mean Trombosit Volume

Kaynakça

1. 1. Tambe AA, Demany MA, Zimmerman HA, Mascarenhas E. Angina pectoris and slow flow velocity of dye in coronary arteries--a new angiographic finding. Am Heart J. 1972 Jul;84(1):66–71.
2. 2. Sezgin AT, Sgrc A, Barutcu I, Topal E, et al. Vascular endothelial function in patients with slow coronary flow. Coron Artery Dis. 2003;14(2):155–161.
3. 3. Cin VG, Pekdemir H, Camsar A, Ciçek D, et al. Diffuse intimal thickening of coronary arteries in slow coronary flow. Jpn Heart J. 2003 Nov;44(6):907–19.
4. 4. Beltrame JF, Limaye SB, Horowitz JD. The coronary slow flow phenomenon--a new coronary microvascular disorder. Cardiology. 2002;97(4):197–202.
5. 5. Yazici HU, Poyraz F, Sen N, Tavil Y, et al. Relationship between mean trombosit volume and left ventricular systolic function in patients with metabolic syndrome and ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Clin Invest Med. 2011;34(6):330–335.
6. 6. Fagher B, Sjögren A, Sjögren U. Trombosit counts in myocardial infarction, angina pectoris and peripheral artery disease. Acta Med Scand. 1985;217(1):21–6.
7. 7. Tsiara S, Elisaf M, Jagroop IA, Mikhailidis DP. Platelets as predictors of vascular risk: is there a practical index of trombosit activity? Clin Appl Thromb. 2003;9(3):177–190.
8. 8. Chu S, Becker R, Berger P, Bhatt D, et al. Mean trombosit volume as a predictor of cardiovascular risk: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Thromb Haemost. 2010;8(1):148–56.

9. 9. Gibson CM, Cannon CP, Daley WL, Dodge JT, et al. TIMI frame count: a quantitative method of assessing coronary artery flow. Circulation. 1996 Mar 1;93(5):879–88.
10. 10. Gibson C, Cannon C, Piana R, Maher K, et al. Relationship of coronary flow to myocardial infarction size: use of new simple methods to subclassify TIMI 2 and 3 flows. Circulation. 1992;86.
11. 11. Pekdemir H, Cin VG, Çiçek D, Çamsari A, et al. Slow coronary flow may be a sign of diffuse atherosclerosis. Contribution of FFR and IVUS. Acta Cardiol. 2004;59(2):127–33.
12. 12. Yilmaz H, Demir I, Uyar Z. Clinical and coronary angiographic characteristics of patients with coronary slow flow. Acta Cardiol. 2008;63(5):579–84.
13. 13. Hawkins BM, Stavrakis S, Rousan TA, Abu-Fadel M, et al. Coronary slow flow. Circ J. 2012;76(4):936–42.
14. 14. Cay S, Biyikoglu F, Cihan G, Korkmaz S. Mean trombosit volume in the patients with cardiac syndrome X. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2005;20(3):175–8.
15. 15. Gökçe M, Kaplan S, Tekelioǧlu Y, Erdoǧan T, et al. Trombosit function disorder in patients with coronary slow flow. Clin Cardiol Int Index Peer‐Reviewed J Adv Treat Cardiovasc Dis. 2005;28(3):145–8.
16. 16. Şenaran H, Ileri M, AltinbaŞ A, KoŞar A, et al. Thrombopoietin and mean trombosit volume in coronary artery disease. Clin Cardiol. 2001;24(5):405–8.
17. 17. Tatlı E, Yildirim T, Aktoz M. Does coronary slow flow phenomenon lead to myocardial ischemia? Int J Cardiol. 2009;131(3):e101–2.
18. 18. Endler G, Klimesch A, Sunder‐Plassmann H, Schillinger M, et al. Mean trombosit volume is an independent risk factor for myocardial infarction but not for coronary artery disease. Br J Haematol. 2002;117(2):399–404.
19. 19. Martin J, Shaw T, Heggie J, Penington D. Measurement of the density of human platelets and its relationship to volume. Br J Haematol. 1983;54(3):337–52.
20. 20. Bitigen A, Tanalp AC, Elonu OH, Karavelioglu Y, et al. Mean trombosit volume in patients with isolated coronary artery ectasia. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2007;24(2):99–103.
21. 21. Nurkalem Z, Alper AT, Orhan AL, Zencirci AE, et al. Mean trombosit volume in patients with slow coronary flow and its relationship with clinical presentation. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2008;36(6):363–7.
22. 22. Panova-Noeva M, Schulz A, Hermanns I, Grossmann V, et al. Sex specific differences in genetic and non-genetic determinants of mean trombosit volume: results from the Gutenberg Health Study. Blood. 2015;blood-2015.
23. 23. Khandekar M, Khurana A, Deshmukh S, Kakrani A, et al. Trombosit volume indices in patients with coronary artery disease and acute myocardial infarction: an Indian scenario. J Clin Pathol. 2006;59(2):146–9.
24. 24. Azab B, Torbey E, Singh J, Akerman M, et al. Mean trombosit volume/trombosit count ratio as a predictor of long-term mortality after non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Platelets. 2011;22(8):557–66.
25. 25. Ozyurtlu F, Yavuz V, Cetin N, Acet H, et al. The association between coronary slow flow and trombosit distribution width among patients with stable angina pectoris. Postępy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej Adv Interv Cardiol. 2014;10(3):161–5.