The Choice between Plasma-Based Common Coagulation Tests and Cell-Based Viscoelastic Tests in Monitoring Hemostatic Competence: Not an either-or Proposition.

There has been a significant interest in the last decade in the use of viscoelastic tests (VETs) to determine the hemostatic competence of bleeding patients. Previously, common coagulation tests (CCTs) such as the prothrombin time (PT) and partial thromboplastin time (PTT) were used to assist in the guidance of blood component and hemostatic adjunctive therapy for these patients. However, the experience of decades of VET use in liver failure with transplantation, cardiac surgery, and trauma has now spread to obstetrical hemorrhage and congenital and acquired coagulopathies. Since CCTs measure only 5 to 10% of the lifespan of a clot, these assays have been found to be of limited use for acute surgical and medical conditions, whereby rapid results are required. However, there are medical indications for the PT/PTT that cannot be supplanted by VETs. Therefore, the choice of whether to use a CCT or a VET to guide blood component therapy or hemostatic adjunctive therapy may often require consideration of both methodologies. In this review, we provide examples of the relative indications for CCTs and VETs in monitoring hemostatic competence of bleeding patients.

Viscoelastic Hemostatic Assays: A Primer on Legacy and New Generation Devices.

Viscoelastic hemostatic assay (VHAs) are whole blood point-of-care tests that have become an essential method for assaying hemostatic competence in liver transplantation, cardiac surgery, and most recently, trauma surgery involving hemorrhagic shock. It has taken more than three-quarters of a century of research and clinical application for this technology to become mainstream in these three clinical areas. Within the last decade, the cup and pin legacy devices, such as thromboelastography (TEG® 5000) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM® delta), have been supplanted not only by cartridge systems (TEG® 6S and ROTEM® sigma), but also by more portable point-of-care bedside testing iterations of these legacy devices (e.g., Sonoclot®, Quantra®, and ClotPro®). Here, the legacy and new generation VHAs are compared on the basis of their unique hemostatic parameters that define contributions of coagulation factors, fibrinogen/fibrin, platelets, and clot lysis as related to the lifespan of a clot. In conclusion, we offer a brief discussion on the meteoric adoption of VHAs across the medical and surgical specialties to address COVID-19-associated coagulopathy.

Preventing Thrombohemorrhagic Complications of Heparinized COVID-19 Patients Using Adjunctive Thromboelastography: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of COVID-19 patients with heparin is not always effective in preventing thrombotic complications, but can also be associated with bleeding complications, suggesting a balanced approach to anticoagulation is needed. A prior pilot study supported that thromboelastography and conventional coagulation tests could predict hemorrhage in COVID-19 in patients treated with unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin, but did not evaluate the risk of thrombosis. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study included 79 severely ill COVID-19 patients anticoagulated with intermediate or therapeutic dose unfractionated heparin. Two stepwise logistic regression models were performed with bleeding or thrombosis as the dependent variable, and thromboelastography parameters and conventional coagulation tests as the independent variables. RESULTS: Among all 79 patients, 12 (15.2%) had bleeding events, and 20 (25.3%) had thrombosis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified a prediction model for bleeding (adjusted R2 = 0.787, p < 0.001) comprised of increased reaction time (p = 0.016), decreased fibrinogen (p = 0.006), decreased D-dimer (p = 0.063), and increased activated partial thromboplastin time (p = 0.084). Multivariate analysis of thrombosis identified a weak prediction model (adjusted R2 = 0.348, p < 0.001) comprised of increased D-dimer (p < 0.001), decreased reaction time (p = 0.002), increased maximum amplitude (p < 0.001), and decreased alpha angle (p = 0.014). Adjunctive thromboelastography decreased the use of packed red cells (p = 0.031) and fresh frozen plasma (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Significantly, this study demonstrates the need for a precision-based titration strategy of anticoagulation for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Since severely ill COVID-19 patients may switch between thrombotic or hemorrhagic phenotypes or express both simultaneously, institutions may reduce these complications by developing their own titration strategy using daily conventional coagulation tests with adjunctive thromboelastography.