ArticlePharmacological reports : PR2025
Red cell microparticles produced using high-pressure extrusion enhance both primary and secondary hemostasis.
Article in Pharmacological reports : PR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent therapies to treat excessive bleeding are associated with significant complications, which may outweigh their benefits. Red blood cell-derived microparticles (RMPs) are a promising hemostatic agent. Previous studies demonstrated that they reduce bleeding in animal models, correct coagulation defects in patient blood, and have an excellent safety profile. However, their exact mechanism of action is not known. We investigated the potential role of RMPs on primary and secondary hemostasis.
methodsTo evaluate the effects of RMPs, prepared using high-pressure extrusion, on primary hemostasis, we employed platelet aggregometry with platelet inhibitors, eptifibatide, and ticagrelor, with and without RMPs. To evaluate their effects on secondary hemostasis, we employed thromboelastography with plasma deficient in factors VII, VIII, IX, XI, and XII with and without RMPs.
resultsWe found that RMPs significantly increased collagen-induced platelet aggregation. However, there were no significant differences with and without RMP in the presence of the platelet inhibitors, indicating that RMPs may work through these receptors, either directly or indirectly. For secondary hemostasis, RMPs significantly decreased clotting times for plasma deficient in factors VII, VIII, IX, and XI but not in XII.
conclusionsOur results indicate that RMPs enhance primary hemostasis and both pathways of secondary hemostasis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.