4.5 Article

Clinical Applicability of Rapid Thrombelastography and Functional Fibrinogen Thrombelastography to Adult Liver Transplantation

Journal

LIVER TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 20, Issue 9, Pages 1097-1105

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lt.23923

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CSL Behring (Marburg, Germany)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Unlike kaolin thrombelastography (k-TEG), the clinical utility of rapid thrombelastography (r-TEG) and functional fibrinogen thrombelastography (FF-TEG) has not been tested in liver transplantation (LT). These thrombelastography techniques were simultaneously performed at the time of the skin incision (the baseline) and 30 minutes after graft reperfusion (III + 30) for 27 consecutive adult LT patients. k-TEG and r-TEG parameters [alpha angle (alpha) and maximum amplitude of the clot (MA)] were compared in addition to the assay time. Estimated FF-TEG fibrinogen levels were compared with plasma fibrinogen measurements. At the baseline, the values of Spearman's correlation coefficient (r) between k-TEG and r-TEG were moderate for a (r=0.40, P=0.06) and strong for MA (r=0.90, P < 0.01). At III + 30, r was 0.46 (P < 0.05) for alpha and 0.80 (P < 0.01) for MA. The average time required to measure MA via r-TEG was decreased in comparison with k-TEG [from 29.7 to 21.6 minutes at the baseline (a 22% reduction) and from 29.6 to 22.9 minutes at III + 30 (a 23% reduction)]. FF-TEG correlated strongly with the plasma fibrinogen level at the baseline (r = 0.90, P < 0.01); however, FF-TEG overestimated the fibrinogen level at III + 30 (r = 0.58, P = 0.01). In conclusion, in adult LT, r-TEG correlates with k-TEG strongly for MA but only moderately for alpha. FF-TEG estimates the plasma fibrinogen level well at the baseline; however, it must be interpreted with caution because of its overestimation after graft reperfusion when the plasma fibrinogen level often decreases to less than 100 mg/dL. (C) 2014 AASLD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available