4.5 Article

Thromboelastometry: Relation to the severity of liver cirrhosis in patients considered for liver transplantation

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 96, 期 23, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007101

关键词

Child-Pugh; hypercoagulability; liver failure; MELD; prognosis; thromboelastometry

资金

  1. Swedish Medical Research Council [04210]
  2. County Council of Stockholm [502033]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The severity of liver disease is assessed by scoring systems, which include the conventional coagulation test prothrombin time-the international normalized ratio (PT-INR). However, PT-INR is not predictive of bleeding in liver disease and thromboelastometry (ROTEM) has been suggested to give a better overview of the coagulation system in these patients. It has now been suggested that coagulation as reflected by tromboelastomety may also be used for prognostic purposes. The objective of our study was to investigate whether thrombelastometry may discriminate the degree of liver insufficiency according to the scoring systems Child Pugh and Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD).Forty patients with chronic liver disease of different etiologies and stages were included in this observational cross-sectional study. The severity of liver disease was evaluated using the Child-Pugh score and the MELD score, and blood samples for biochemistry, conventional coagulation tests, and ROTEM were collected at the time of the final assessment for liver transplantation. Statistical comparisons for the studied parameters with scores of severity were made using Spearman correlation test and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves.Spearman correlation coefficients indicated that the thromboelastometric parameters did not correlate with Child-Pugh or MELD scores. The ROC curves of the thromboelastometric parameters could not differentiate advanced stages from early stages of liver cirrhosis.Standard ROTEM cannot discriminate the stage of chronic liver disease in patients with severe chronic liver disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据