Back to Search Results

Thromboelastography versus standard coagulation testing in the assessment and reversal of coagulopathy among cirrhotics: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Barbara and Zucker School of Medicine for Hofstra/Northwell Health. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Transplantation, Sandra Atlas Bass Center for Liver Diseases and Transplantation, Barbara and Zucker School of Medicine for Hofstra/Northwell Health. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hepatology, Sandra Atlas Bass Center for Liver Diseases and Transplantation, Barbara and Zucker School of Medicine for Hofstra/Northwell Health, Manhasset, New York. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine and Avera Transplant Institute, Division of Hepatology, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA.

European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology. 2020;32(3):291-302
Full text from:

Other resources

Abstract
The utility of thromboelastography/thromboelastometry currently has unvalidated clinical benefit in the assessment and reversal of coagulopathy among cirrhotic patients as compared to standard coagulation testing. A novel systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in order to assess pooled outcome data among patients receiving thromboelastography/thromboelastometry as compared to standard coagulation testing. As compared to standard coagulation testing, there was a significant reduction in the number of patients requiring pRBC, platelet, and fresh frozen plasma transfusions among thromboelastography/thromboelastometry group with pooled OR 0.53 (95% CI 0.32-0.85; P = 0.009), 0.29 (95% CI 0.12-0.74; P = 0.009), and 0.19 (95% CI 0.12-0.31; P < 0.00001), respectively. Similarly, there was a significant reduction in number of pRBC, platelet, and fresh frozen plasma units transfused in the thromboelastography/thromboelastometry group with pooled MD -1.53 (95% CI -2.86 to -0.21; P = 0.02), -0.57 (95% CI -1.06 to -0.09; P = 0.02), and -2.71 (95% CI -4.34 to -1.07; P = 0.001), respectively. There were significantly decreased total bleeding events with pooled OR 0.54 (95% CI 0.31-0.94; P = 0.03) and amount of intraoperative bleeding during liver transplantation with pooled MD -1.46 (95% CI -2.49 to -0.44; P = 0.005) in the thromboelastography/thromboelastometry group. Overall, there was no significant difference in mortality between groups with pooled OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.63-1.30; P = 0.60). As compared to standard coagulation testing, a thromboelastography/thromboelastometry-guided approach to the assessment and reversal of cirrhotic coagulopathy improves overall number of patients exposed to blood product transfusions, quantity of transfusions, and bleeding events.
Study details
Study Design : Systematic Review
Language : eng
Credits : Bibliographic data from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine