Bovine and porcine heparins: different drugs with similar effects on human haemodialysis

BMC Research Notes

Paulo AS Mourão³  Jocemir R Lugon²  Maurilo Leite¹  Simone M Rembold²  Lisandra AC Teixeira³  Ana MF Tovar³ 

[1] Serviço de Nefrologia, Departamento de Clínica Médica, Hospital Universitário Clementino Fraga Filho, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil;Divisão de Nefrologia, Departamento de Medicina Clínica, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Brazil;Instituto de Bioquímica Médica, Hospital Universitário Clementino Fraga Filho, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

关键词: Haemodialysis;    Antithrombotic effects;    Heparin;   

Others  :  1142422
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-6-230

 received in 2012-10-30, accepted in 2013-06-07,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Heparins from porcine and bovine intestinal mucosa differ in their structure and also in their effects on coagulation, thrombosis and bleeding. However, they are used as undistinguishable drugs.

Methods

We compared bovine and porcine intestinal heparin administered to patients undergoing a particular protocol of haemodialysis. We compared plasma concentrations of these two drugs and also evaluated how they affect patients and the dialyzer used.

Results

Compared with porcine heparin, bovine heparin achieved only 76% of the maximum plasma concentration as IU mL^-1. This observation is consistent with the activities observed in the respective pharmaceutical preparations. When the plasma concentrations were expressed on weight basis, bovine heparin achieved a maximum concentration 1.5 fold higher than porcine heparin. The reduced anticoagulant activity and higher concentration, on weight basis, achieved in the plasma of patients under dialysis using bovine instead of porcine heparin did not affect significantly the patients or the dialyzer used. The heparin dose is still in a range, which confers security and safety to the patients.

Discussion

Despite no apparent difference between bovine and porcine intestinal heparins in the haemodialysis practice, these two types of heparins should be used as distinct drugs due to their differences in structure and biological effects.

Conclusions

The reduced anticoagulant activity achieved in the plasma of patients under dialysis using bovine instead of porcine heparin did not affect significantly the patients or the dialyzer.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Tovar et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Yavari M, Becker RC: Anticoagulant therapy during cardiopulmonary bypass. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2008, 26:218-228.
• [2]Davenport A: Optimization of heparin anticoagulation for hemodialysis. Hemodial Int 2011, 15(S1):S43-S48.
• [3]Shen JI, Winkelmayer WC: Use and safety of unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation during maintenance hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2012, 60:473-486.
• [4]Mulloy B, Gray E, Barrowcliffe TW: Characterization of unfractionated heparin: comparison of materials from the last 50 years. Thromb Haemost 2000, 84:1052-1056.
• [5]Aquino RS, Pereira MS, Vairo BC, Cinelli LP, Santos GR, Fonseca RJ, Mourão PA: Heparins from porcine and bovine intestinal mucosa: Are they similar drugs? Thromb Haemost 2010, 103:1005-1015.
• [6]Tovar AMF, Capillé NVM, Santos GRC, Vairo BC, Oliveira SN, Fonseca RJ, Mourão PA: Heparin from bovine intestinal mucosa: glycans with multiple sulfation patterns and anticoagulant effects. Thromb Haemost 2012, 107:903-915.
• [7]Casu B, Guerrini M, Naggi A, Torri G, De-Ambrosi L, Boveri G, Gonella S, Cedro A, Ferró L, Lanzarotti E, Paterno M, Attolini M, Valle MG: Characterization of sulfated patterns of beef and pig mucosal heparins by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Arzneimittelforschung 1996, 46:472-477.
• [8]Guerrini M, Bisio A, Torri G: Combined quantitative 1H and 13C nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy for characterization of heparin preparations. Sem Thromb Hemost 2001, 27:473-482.
• [9]Gruenwald CE, Manlhiot C, Abadilla AA, Kwok J, Maxwell S, Holtby HM, Brandão LR, Chan AK, Crawford-Lean L, Foreman C, Caldarone CA, Van Arsdell GS, McCrindle BW: Heparin brand is associated with postsurgical outcomes in children undergoing cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2012, 93:878-883.
• [10]Arsenault KA, Paikin JS, Hirsh J, Dale B, Whitlock RP, Teoh K, Young E, Ginsberg JS, Weitz JI, Eikelboom JW: Subtle differences in commercial heparins can have serious consequences for cardiopulmonary bypass patients: A randomized controlled trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012, 144:944-950. e3
• [11]Noble H, Kelly D, Rawlings-Anderson K, Meyer J: Concept analysis of renal supportive care: the changing world of nephrology. J Adv Nurs 2007, 59:644-653.
• [12]Sesso RC, Lopes AA, Thomé FS, Lugon JR, Santos DR: 2010 report of the Brazilian dialysis census. J Bras Nefrol 2011, 33:442-447.
• [13]Castro MO, Pomin VH, Santos LL, Vilela-Silva ACES, Hirohashi N, Pol-Fachin L, Verli H, Mourão PAS: A Unique 2-sulfated β-galactan from the egg jelly of the sea urchin Glyptocidaris crenularis: Conformation flexibility versus induction of the sperm acrosome reaction. J Biol Chem 2009, 284:18790-18800.
• [14]Diquélou A, Barbaste C, Gabaig AM, Trumel C, Abella-Bourges N, Guelfi JF, Bousquet Mélou A: Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a therapeutic dose of unfractionated heparin (200 U/kg) administered subcutaneously or intravenously to healthy dogs. Vet Clin Pathol 2005, 34:237-242.
• [15]Bitter T, Muir HM: A modified uronic acid carbazole reaction. Anal Biochem 1962, 4:330-334.
• [16]Melo EI, Pereira MS, Cunha RS, Sá MP, Mourão PA: Heparin quality control in the Brazilian market: Implications in the cardiovascular surgery. Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc 2008, 23:169-174.
• [17]Zhang Z, Li B, Suwan J, Zhang F, Wang Z, Liu H, Mulloy B, Linhardt RJ: Analysis of pharmaceutical heparins and potential contaminants using 1H-NMR and PAGE. J Pharm Sci 2009, 98:4017-4026.