Revisiting Hartert's 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography.

Thrombelastography (TEG)/thromboelastometry (ROTEM) devices measure viscoelastic clot strength as clot amplitude (A). Transformation of clot amplitude into clot elasticity (E with TEG; CE with ROTEM) is sometimes necessary (eg, when calculating platelet component of the clot). With TEG, clot amplitude is commonly transformed into shear modulus (G; expressed in Pa or dyn/cm2) as follows: G = (5000 × A)/(100 - A). Use of the constant "5000" stems from Hartert's 50-year-old calculation of G for a normal blood clot. We question the value of calculating G as follows: (1) It may be questioned whether TEG/ROTEM analysis enable measurement of elasticity because viscosity may also contribute to clot amplitude. (2) It has been suggested that absolute properties of a blood clot cannot be measured with TEG/ROTEM analysis because the strain amplitude applied by the device is uncontrolled and changes during the course of coagulation. (3) A review of the calculation of G using Hartert's methods and some updated assumptions suggests that the value of 5000 is unreliable. (4) Recalculation of G for the ROTEM device yields a different value from that with Hartert TEG, indicating a degree of inaccuracy with the calculations. (5) Shear modulus is simply a multiple of E/CE and, because of the unreliability of G in absolute terms, it provides no additional value versus E/CE. The TEG and ROTEM are valuable coagulation assessment tools that provide an evaluation of the viscoelastic properties of a clot, not through measuring absolute viscoelastic forces but through continuous reading of the clot amplitude relative to an arbitrary, preset scale.

Over 50 Years of Fibrinogen Concentrate.

March 2013 represented the 50th anniversary of the first license granted for a fibrinogen concentrate. In this review, we look at the history of bleeding management that led to the development of fibrinogen concentrate, discuss its current use, and consider future developments for this product.

Assessing the Methodology for Calculating Platelet Contribution to Clot Strength (Platelet Component) in Thromboelastometry and Thrombelastography.

The viscoelastic properties of blood clot have been studied most commonly using thrombelastography (TEG) and thromboelastometry (ROTEM). ROTEM-based bleeding treatment algorithms recommend administering platelets to patients with low EXTEM clot strength (e.g., clot amplitude at 10 minutes [A10] <40 mm) once clot strength of the ROTEM® fibrin-based test (FIBTEM) is corrected. Algorithms based on TEG typically use a low value of maximum amplitude (e.g., <50 mm) as a trigger for administering platelets. However, this parameter reflects the contributions of various blood components to the clot, including platelets and fibrin/fibrinogen. The platelet component of clot strength may provide a more sensitive indication of platelet deficiency than clot amplitude from a whole blood TEG or ROTEM® assay. The platelet component of the formed clot is derived from the results of TEG/ROTEM® tests performed with and without platelet inhibition. In this article, we review the basis for why this calculation should be based on clot elasticity (e.g., the E parameter with TEG and the CE parameter with ROTEM®) as opposed to clot amplitude (e.g., the A parameter with TEG or ROTEM®). This is because clot elasticity, unlike clot amplitude, reflects the force with which the blood clot resists rotation within the device, and the relationship between clot amplitude (variable X) and clot elasticity (variable Y) is nonlinear. A specific increment of X (ΔX) will be associated with different increments of Y (ΔY), depending on the initial value of X. When calculated correctly, using clot elasticity data, the platelet component of the clot can provide a valuable insight into platelet deficiency in emergency bleeding.

Rapid measurement of fibrinogen concentration in whole blood using a steel ball coagulometer.

BACKGROUND: Fibrinogen plays a key role in hemostasis and is the first coagulation factor to reach critical levels in bleeding patients. Current European guidelines on the management of traumatic or perioperative bleeding recommend fibrinogen supplementation at specific threshold levels. Whole blood viscoelastic tests provide fast evaluation of fibrin deficits. Fast measurement of plasma fibrinogen concentration is not yet available. We investigated a method to rapidly determine whole blood fibrinogen concentration using standard Clauss assays and a steel ball coagulometer and provide an estimate of the "plasma-equivalent" fibrinogen concentration within minutes by adjustment of the measured whole blood fibrinogen concentration with a quickly measureable hemoglobin-derived hematocrit. METHODS: The feasibility of this approach was tested with a Clauss assay using multiple porcine fresh blood samples obtained during in vivo bleeding, hemodilution, and after treatment with hemostatic therapy. Two different Clauss assays were then tested using multiple human volunteers' blood samples diluted in vitro and supplemented with fibrinogen concentrate. Comparative measurements with fibrin-based thromboelastometry tests were performed. RESULTS: Regression and Bland-Altman analyses of derived "plasma-equivalent" fibrinogen and measured plasma fibrinogen concentration was excellent in porcine and human blood samples, especially in the ranges relevant to traumatic or perioperative bleeding. CONCLUSION: Fast whole blood fibrinogen measurements could be considered as an alternative to plasma fibrinogen measurement for acute bleeding management in trauma and perioperative care settings. Further studies are needed to prove this concept and determine the turnaround times for its clinical application in emergency departments and operating theaters.

The effectiveness of different functional fibrinogen polymerization assays in eliminating platelet contribution to clot strength in thromboelastometry.

BACKGROUND: Viscoelastic tests such as functional fibrinogen polymerization assays (FFPAs) in thrombelastography (TEG®) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) measure clot elasticity under platelet inhibition. Incomplete platelet inhibition influences maximum clot firmness (MCF) of FFPAs. We compared the ability of existing and newly developed FFPAs to eliminate the platelet contribution to clot strength. METHODS: MCF of whole blood (WB), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and platelet-poor plasma samples was recorded using a ROTEM device with different FFPAs, including the TEG functional fibrinogen test (FFTEG) and different ROTEM-based assays: the standard fib-tem reagent (FIBTEM), a lyophilized single-portion reagent fib-tem S (FIBTEM-S), a newly developed reagent FIBTEM PLUS, as well as FIBTEM or the standard extrinsic activation reagent ex-tem® (EXTEM) combined with 10-µg abciximab (FIBTEM-ABC/EXTEM-ABC). RESULTS: In WB (platelet count [mean ± SD], 183 ± 37 × 10/µL; plasma fibrinogen concentration, 2.49 ± 0.58 g/L), FFTEG and EXTEM-ABC showed higher MCF (15.7 ± 2.8 mm) than FIBTEM or FIBTEM-S (11.4 ± 3.3 mm, P < 0.001), whereas FIBTEM-ABC and FIBTEM PLUS resulted in lower MCF (9.3 ± 2.8 mm, P < 0.001). In 2 different PRP samples, with platelet counts of 407 ± 80 × 10/µL and 609 ± 127 × 10/µL, FIBTEM-ABC and FIBTEM PLUS reduced platelet contribution to clot strength within 95% confidence interval limits of -1.4 to 0.1 mm and -1.2 to 0.4 mm, respectively. Using all FFPAs it was observed that the Pearson correlation coefficient between plasma fibrinogen concentration and WB MCF was high (range, 0.75-0.93) and significant, regardless of the underlying platelet inhibiting component. Evaluating differences in the interception of regression lines by using analysis of covariance, we compared platelet-poor plasma and both PRP samples within the same assays and found that in contrast to the FIBTEM-ABC and FIBTEM PLUS assays, the FFTEG, EXTEM-ABC, FIBTEM, and FIBTEM-S methods still detected residual platelet activity and grossly overestimated fibrin clot strength in samples with high platelet counts. CONCLUSIONS: FFPAs based solely on glycoprotein-IIb/IIIa inhibition, such as FFTEG or EXTEM-ABC, are less effective than cytochalasin D-based assays, such as FIBTEM or FIBTEM-S, at inhibiting the platelet component of clot strength. The FIBTEM PLUS assay, and the combination of FIBTEM and abciximab, sufficiently inhibits platelet contribution to clot elasticity. The combination of a glycoprotein-IIb/IIIa receptor blocker and cytochalasin D allows evaluation of functional fibrinogen polymerization without platelet "noise." In a clinical setting, the significance of potent platelet inhibition ensures a more accurate assessment of MCF and therefore the need for fibrinogen supplementation therapy. Further studies are necessary to investigate the application and impact of these tests in a clinical situation.

Thromboelastometric maximum clot firmness in platelet-free plasma is influenced by the assay used.

BACKGROUND: Viscoelastic tests such as functional fibrinogen polymerization assays (FFPAs) in thrombelastography (TEG(®)) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM(®)) measure the elasticity of extrinsically activated clotting under conditions of platelet inhibition. There are no reports on whether components of the FFPAs have any effects on fibrin polymerization, aside from the effects of platelet inhibition. METHODS: Using various platelet-free plasma (PFP) preparations, we compared the extrinsically activated EXTEM thromboelastometric assay with 3 FFPAs: FIBTEM, FIBTEM PLUS, and the Functional Fibrinogen Test(®) (FFTEG). These FFPAs activate coagulation extrinsically but additionally inhibit platelet function. We used calibration plasma (Instrumentation Laboratory and Siemens), pooled fresh-frozen plasma (Octaplas) and freshly prepared PFP from a healthy volunteer. EXTEM and all FFPAs were run in parallel on a ROTEM device. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range) maximum clot firmness (MCF) values for all plasma preparations were: 20.5 mm (17.25-22.0 mm) in EXTEM, 23.0 mm (18.5-24.0 mm) in FIBTEM, 23.0 mm (18.25-24.75 mm) in FIBTEM PLUS, and 18.0 mm (16.0-19.0 mm) in FFTEG. Compared with EXTEM, FIBTEM and FIBTEM PLUS (P < 0.01) showed increased MCF values whereas FFTEG (P < 0.001) showed decreased MCF values. Further experiments in PFP showed that the platelet inhibitors used in the FFPAs (cytochalasin D or the glycoprotein-IIb/IIIa inhibitor abciximab) were not causing these alterations in MCF. However, reducing the activating tissue factor concentration (by diluting the extrinsic assay) decreased the MCF. CONCLUSIONS: We speculate that FIBTEM and FIBTEM PLUS may contain stabilizing agents that enhance fibrin polymerization whereas FFTEG might contain less tissue factor than the ROTEM assays.

Effects of fibrinogen concentrate as first-line therapy during major aortic replacement surgery: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Fibrinogen is suggested to play an important role in managing major bleeding. However, clinical evidence regarding the effect of fibrinogen concentrate (derived from human plasma) on transfusion is limited. The authors assessed whether fibrinogen concentrate can reduce blood transfusion when given as intraoperative, targeted, first-line hemostatic therapy in bleeding patients undergoing aortic replacement surgery. METHODS: In this single-center, prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, patients aged 18 yr or older undergoing elective thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic replacement surgery involving cardiopulmonary bypass were randomized to fibrinogen concentrate or placebo, administered intraoperatively. Study medication was given if patients had clinically relevant coagulopathic bleeding immediately after removal from cardiopulmonary bypass and completion of surgical hemostasis. Dosing was individualized using the fibrin-based thromboelastometry test. If bleeding continued, a standardized transfusion protocol was followed. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group and 32 patients in the placebo group were eligible for the efficacy analysis. During the first 24 h after the administration of study medication, patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group received fewer allogeneic blood components than did patients in the placebo group (median, 2 vs. 13 U; P < 0.001; primary endpoint). Total avoidance of transfusion was achieved in 13 (45%) of 29 patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group, whereas 32 (100%) of 32 patients in the placebo group received transfusion (P < 0.001). There was no observed safety concern with using fibrinogen concentrate during aortic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Hemostatic therapy with fibrinogen concentrate in patients undergoing aortic surgery significantly reduced the transfusion of allogeneic blood products. Larger multicenter studies are necessary to confirm the role of fibrinogen concentrate in the management of perioperative bleeding in patients with life-threatening coagulopathy.

Comparison of whole blood fibrin-based clot tests in thrombelastography and thromboelastometry.

BACKGROUND: Fibrin-based clot firmness is measured as maximum amplitude (MA) in the functional fibrinogen (FF) thrombelastographic assay and maximum clot firmness (MCF) in the FIBTEM thromboelastometric assay. Differences between the assays/devices may be clinically significant. Our objective was to compare clot firmness parameters through standard (FF on a thrombelastography device [TEG®]; FIBTEM on a thromboelastometry device [ROTEM®]) and crossover (FF on ROTEM®; FIBTEM on TEG®) analyses. METHODS: Whole-blood samples from healthy volunteers were subjected to thrombelastography and thromboelastometry analyses. Samples were investigated native and following stepwise dilution with sodium chloride solution (20%, 40%, and 60% dilution). Samples were also assessed after in vitro addition of medications (heparin, protamine, tranexamic acid) and 50% dilution with hydroxyethyl starch, gelatin, sodium chloride, and albumin. RESULTS: FF produced higher values than FIBTEM, regardless of the device, and TEG® produced higher values than ROTEM®, regardless of the assay. With all added medications except heparin 400 U/kg bodyweight, FF MA remained significantly higher (P < 0.05) than FIBTEM MCF, which was largely unchanged. FF MA was significantly reduced (P = 0.04) by high-dose heparin and partially restored with protamine. Fifty percent dilution with hydroxyethyl starch, albumin, and gelatin decreased FIBTEM MCF and FF MA by >50%. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate differences when measuring fibrin-based clotting via the FF and FIBTEM assays on the TEG® and ROTEM® devices. Point-of-care targeted correction of fibrin-based clotting may be influenced by the assay and device used. For the FF assay, data are lacking.

Transfusion in trauma: thromboelastometry-guided coagulation factor concentrate-based therapy versus standard fresh frozen plasma-based therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Thromboelastometry (TEM)-guided haemostatic therapy with fibrinogen concentrate and prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) in trauma patients may reduce the need for transfusion of red blood cells (RBC) or platelet concentrate, compared with fresh frozen plasma (FFP)-based haemostatic therapy. METHODS: This retrospective analysis compared patients from the Salzburg Trauma Centre (Salzburg, Austria) treated with fibrinogen concentrate and/or PCC, but no FFP (fibrinogen-PCC group, n = 80), and patients from the TraumaRegister DGU receiving ≥ 2 units of FFP, but no fibrinogen concentrate/PCC (FFP group, n = 601). Inclusion criteria were: age 18-70 years, base deficit at admission ≥ 2 mmol/L, injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 16, abbreviated injury scale for thorax and/or abdomen and/or extremity ≥ 3, and for head/neck < 5. RESULTS: For haemostatic therapy in the emergency room and during surgery, the FFP group (ISS 35.5 ± 10.5) received a median of 6 units of FFP (range: 2, 51), while the fibrinogen-PCC group (ISS 35.2 ± 12.5) received medians of 6 g of fibrinogen concentrate (range: 0, 15) and 1200 U of PCC (range: 0, 6600). RBC transfusion was avoided in 29% of patients in the fibrinogen-PCC group compared with only 3% in the FFP group (P< 0.001). Transfusion of platelet concentrate was avoided in 91% of patients in the fibrinogen-PCC group, compared with 56% in the FFP group (P< 0.001). Mortality was comparable between groups: 7.5% in the fibrinogen-PCC group and 10.0% in the FFP group (P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: TEM-guided haemostatic therapy with fibrinogen concentrate and PCC reduced the exposure of trauma patients to allogeneic blood products.

A comparison of fibrinogen measurement methods with fibrin clot elasticity assessed by thromboelastometry, before and after administration of fibrinogen concentrate in cardiac surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Fibrinogen concentrate administration can be guided by measuring fibrinogen concentration or quality of the fibrin-based clot. This study compared different fibrinogen concentration measurement methods with maximum clot firmness (MCF) of the fibrin clot, assessed by thromboelastometry (FIBTEM), in 33 cardiovascular surgery patients receiving fibrinogen concentrate for hemostatic therapy. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Blood samples were collected after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and after fibrinogen concentrate administration. FIBTEM MCF was measured using a rotational thromboelastometry device (ROTEM, Tem International). Fibrinogen concentration was measured using photo-optical (CA-7000, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics), mechanical (KC-10 steel ball, Schnitger and Gross hook, Amelung GmbH), and electromechanical (STA-R, Diagnostica Stago) coagulometers. Assessments included agreement between fibrinogen concentration measurements and correlations between fibrinogen concentration and FIBTEM MCF. RESULTS: After CPB, correlations were significant (p < 0.001) between FIBTEM MCF and fibrinogen concentration determined by steel ball (r = 0.71), hook (r = 0.73), STA-R (r = 0.81), and CA-7000 (r = 0.82) coagulometers. After fibrinogen concentrate administration, agreement between fibrinogen measurement methods was severely impaired, and correlations with FIBTEM MCF were 0.39 (steel ball), 0.33 (hook), 0.59 (STA-R), and 0.33 (CA-7000). CONCLUSION: Agreement between fibrinogen concentration measurement methods decreased considerably after fibrinogen concentrate administration. All methods correlated acceptably with FIBTEM MCF at the end of CPB, but not after hemostatic therapy. Further investigation is needed to explain these findings.