If you don't remember your password, you can reset it by entering your email address and clicking the Reset Password button. You will then receive an email that contains a secure link for resetting your password
If the address matches a valid account an email will be sent to __email__ with instructions for resetting your password
Comparative retrospective study on the validity of point-of-care testing device for massive obstetrical hemorrhage: dry hematology vs thromboelastography
Early recognition of hypofibrinogenemia and prompt initiation of transfusion therapy in patients with massive obstetrical hemorrhage can improve prognosis. There are reports on the usefulness of point-of-care testing, which provides quicker test results compared with fibrinogen measurements using the conventional Clauss method.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to compare and investigate the diagnostic accuracy of dry hematology and thromboelastography in point-of-care testing for the diagnosis of hypofibrinogenemia.
STUDY DESIGN
A single-center, retrospective study of 126 massive obstetrical hemorrhage cases with point-of-care testing before treatment was initiated. The correlation of fibrinogen values with the Clauss method and the diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia were compared between dry hematology and thromboelastography.
RESULTS
Fibrinogen value in dry hematology showed a strong positive correlation with values measured by the Clauss method, and the diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia was high, but there were many residuals above 100 mg/dL, and the distribution of these residuals was not uniform. Although thromboelastography cannot be used to directly measure fibrinogen values, maximum amplitude citrated functional fibrinogen, amplitude-10 citrated rapid thromboelastography, and amplitude-10 citrated functional fibrinogen showed a strong positive correlation with fibrinogen values using the Clauss method, and no significant difference in correlation or diagnostic accuracy was observed relative to dry hematology.
CONCLUSION
Dry hematology and thromboelastography were equally accurate in diagnosing hypofibrinogenemia, with results correlating well with fibrinogen values measured by the Clauss method.
The number of reports on the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing (POCT) devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage (MOH) is limited. Although various types of POCT devices are currently used in clinical practice, few comparisons have been done between them.
Key findings
POCT devices were highly accurate in diagnosing hypofibrinogenemia, and there was no difference in accuracy among POCT devices.
What does this add to what is known?
We compared the diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia in MOH between devices and found no substantial differences.
Introduction
Massive obstetrical hemorrhage (MOH) is a life-threatening condition and one of the leading causes of maternal death.
MOH often presents with coagulopathy, especially when fibrinogen initially falls below the hemostatic threshold and requires high-dose coagulation factor replacement. Because blood fibrinogen levels correlate with the severity of MOH,
it is important to diagnose hypofibrinogenemia early and initiate appropriate coagulation factor replacement. In recent years, point-of-care testing (POCT), a rapid and simple measurement of blood coagulation function, has attracted attention, and there have been many reports on its clinical effectiveness in the field of obstetrics.
The CG02N whole blood coagulation analyzer (A&T Corporation, Kanagawa, Japan) can rapidly and quantitatively measure fibrinogen levels, whereas TEG 6s (Haemonetics Corporation, Braintree, MA) does not directly measure fibrinogen levels but performs a comprehensive evaluation of coagulation and hemostatic function, including the influence of platelets, using whole blood. TEG 6s can measure the viscoelasticity of blood clots using various reagents simultaneously, resonating the clots and expressing their amplitudes graphically. ROTEM (Pentapharm GmbH, Munich, Germany), which is based on the principle of thromboelastometry, is also widely used in daily clinical practice and its use has been reported in many cases.
The measurement principles of thromboelastography and thromboelastometry are generally the same, with the only difference being the pins and cups of the testing equipment. Our medical institution uses the CP3000 (Sekisui Medical Co, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan), which measures fibrinogen using the Clauss method for the definitive diagnosis of hypofibrinogenemia, but it has drawbacks such as a long examination time, large size, and high cost of the device for installation in a primary medical institution. The aforementioned POCT equipment enables testing in a short time and at low cost, and test results are reported to correlate well with fibrinogen levels in conventional blood testing.
Because POCT devices can quickly and easily assess blood coagulation activity, there have been many reports of their use in the field of emergency medicine, such as trauma
Effect of thromboelastography (TEG®) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) on diagnosis of coagulopathy, transfusion guidance and mortality in trauma: descriptive systematic review.
However, studies comparing the usefulness of each POCT instrument in treating MOH are scarce, and no studies have compared the usefulness of dry hematology and thromboelastography. Therefore, we retrospectively examined the diagnostic accuracy of POCT (dry-hematology, thromboelastography, or both) in MOH cases seen at our institution in correlation with fibrinogen levels measured by the Clauss method to detect hypofibrinogenemia (≤150 mg/dL, ≤200 mg/dL), which is particularly important in MOH. In addition, Bland–Altman plots were used to measure the residuals between the POCT device measurements and the fibrinogen values in the Clauss method.
Materials and Methods
Study setting
Figure 1 shows the research targets of this study. This was a retrospective study of 320 cases of MOH seen at Saitama Medical University, Saitama Medical Center, between April 2016 and March 2019. A retrospective analysis was performed on 126 patients who underwent simultaneous blood testing with POCT (CG02N only, TEG 6s only, or both) and fibrinogen measurement with CP3000 using the conventional Clauss method during the first blood draw before transfusion, after being diagnosed with MOH. Data were collected retrospectively from medical records. Because of the difference in the timing of the introduction of CG02N and TEG 6s at our institution, the results were categorized into cases measured only with CG02N (Group 1), cases measured only with TEG 6s (Group 2), and cases measured with both (Group 3).
Figure 1Study flowchart
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
In this study, CG02N based on dry hematology and TEG 6s based on thromboelastography were used as POCT instruments for obstetrical hemorrhage cases. The measurement mechanism of dry hematology is that fibrinogen can be measured directly by dry methods without using reagents, and the results are available within tens of seconds. Thromboelastography is a wet method that uses reagents to evaluate the coagulation and fibrinolytic systems of the blood, and takes approximately 30 minutes to obtain all results. The details of the POCT devices are provided in Supplemental File 1.
Various definitions of hypofibrinogenemia
Reported cutoff values for hypofibrinogenemia vary.
) postpartum, or those who were diagnosed with MOH after delivery in another institution and were transferred to our institution.
Exclusion criteria
Cases with a total blood loss of <1000 mL, cases in which endpoints could not be evaluated retrospectively (eg, incomplete medical records), and cases in which blood transfusion or tranexamic acid was administered before POCT measurement were excluded.
Method of analysis for Group 1
The correlation between fibrinogen levels from CG02N and those from CP3000 measured by the Clauss method was examined in all 65 patients who were tested only with CG02N. We also estimated the diagnostic accuracy of CG02N for hypofibrinogenemia (≤150 mg/dL and ≤200 mg/dL) using the Clauss method.
Method of analysis for Group 2
In Group 2, only 29 patients who were measured using TEG 6s were included. Because TEG 6s does not directly measure fibrinogen values, we examined the correlation between those indexes that can be directly measured and fibrinogen values measured using the conventional Clauss method. We also estimated the diagnostic accuracy of each TEG 6s index against hypofibrinogenemia using the Clauss method.
Method of analysis for Group 3
A total of 32 patients who were simultaneously tested using CG02N and TEG 6s were included in the study. The correlation between fibrinogen values measured using both CG02N and TEG 6s and those measured using the Clauss method was determined. The diagnostic accuracy of the 2 methods for hypofibrinogenemia was then compared.
Ethics approval and participant consent
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Saitama Medical Center, Saitama Medical University.
Characteristics of the medical institution where the study was conducted
This study was conducted at Saitama Medical Center, Saitama Medical University, a general perinatal medical center located in Saitama Prefecture. Our institutions accept all cases of MOH that occur in primary and secondary medical facilities in Saitama Prefecture. Therefore, we often encounter patients who have lost >1000 mL of blood but are transferred to our institution without receiving blood transfusions or tranexamic acid.
The basic policy for MOH patients at our institution is described below. When a patient with MOH is transported to our institution, blood analysis is performed immediately on arrival. Simultaneously with the measurement of coagulation activity by POCT, fibrinogen measurement by the Clauss method is initiated. Blood transfusion is then started on the basis of the patient's vital signs, total blood loss at the time of transport, and results from POCT. For hypofibrinogenemia, fibrinogen concentrate should be administered first, with the red cell concentrate (RCC) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) being approximately 1:1. After transfusion, frequent blood tests are performed to check for vital signs and to minimize complications from excessive transfusion.
Statistical analysis
For the comparison between dry hematology and thromboelastography in Group 3, the Fisher exact ratio test was used for nominal variables, the Shapiro–Wilk test for normality, and t-tests were used for continuous variables. For comparisons of patient background among Groups 1, 2, and 3, the Fisher exact ratio test was used for nominal variables, and 1-way analysis of variance for continuous variables. The area under the curve (AUC) in the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the accuracy of the hypofibrinogenemia diagnosis. JMP version 14 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) was used for statistical analysis.
Results
Comparison between groups
Table 1 shows the comparison of obstetrical backgrounds among the groups. Group 2 had significantly fewer gestational weeks at delivery compared with Groups 1 and 3 (35.5±3.9 vs 37.9±4.2 vs 37.9±4.2 weeks), higher body mass index (24.0±3.7 vs 22.6±3.6 vs 21.8 ±3.8), and higher cesarean delivery rates (82.8% vs 36.9% vs 59.4%), respectively. There were no significant differences in maternal age, primiparity rates, or intrauterine fetal death rates among the 3 groups.
Table 1Obstetrical characteristics of each group
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
Characteristic
Group 1: analyzed with CG02N (n=65)
Group 2: analyzed with TEG 6s (n=29)
Group 3: analyzed with both CG02N and TEG 6s (n=32)
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
There were statistically significant differences among the three groups.
The Fisher exact ratio test was used to compare nominal variables and 1-way analysis of variance was used to compare continuous variables.
a,b Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
c There were statistically significant differences among the three groups.
Table 2 lists the results of a blood test from the hospital laboratory for each group, and the amount of blood loss, transfusion volume, and causative disease of MOH. Group 2 had less preexamination and total bleeding than Groups 1 and 3, significantly lower doses of RCC, FFP, platelet concentrate, and fibrinogen concentrate, and significantly higher hemoglobin and fibrinogen levels on blood tests.
Table 2Hematological data of each group
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
Hematological data
Group 1: analyzed with CG02N (n=65)
Group 2: analyzed with TEG 6s (n=29)
Group 3: analyzed with both CG02N and TEG 6s (n=32)
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
a,b Multiple comparisons were performed for variables that showed statistically significant differences among the three groups. Compared to a, b showed a statistically significant difference
c There were statistically significant differences among the three groups.
Figure 2 shows a scatter plot of fibrinogen values measured using the Clauss method with CP3000 and fibrinogen values measured with CG02N. The correlation coefficient was 0.7944 (P<.001), indicating a significant correlation between the 2 variables.
Figure 2Scatter plots for fibrinogen measured by Clauss method and CG02N
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
The solid red line represents the regression line and the dashed red line represents the 95% confidence interval; regression line: y=49.905871+0.6937446*x; correlation coefficient: 0.7944; coefficient of determination (R2): 0.631071.
Table 3 lists the diagnostic accuracy of each POCT device for hypofibrinogenemia using the Clauss method. The AUCs calculated from ROC curves for fibrinogen <150 mg/dL and <200 mg/dL for the respective definitions of hypofibrinogemia were 0.969 and 0.881, respectively.
Table 3Area under the curve values using receiver operating characteristic curves for hypofibrinogenemia of ≤150 mg/dL and ≤200 mg/dL
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
Group
AUC value for fibrinogen ≤150 mg/dL
95% CI
AUC value for fibrinogen ≤200 mg/dL
95% CI
Correlation coefficient for fibrinogen values by Clauss method
Analysis 1 (measured by CG02N)
Fibrinogen measured by CG02N
0.969
(0.925–1.000)
0.881
(0.798–0.963)
0.794
Analysis 2 (measured by TEG 6S)
MA-CFF (mm)
0.936
(0.837–1.000)
0.940
(0.851–1.000)
0.74
A-10 CRT (mm)
0.987
(0.952–1.000)
0.920
(0.822–1.000)
0.57
A-10 CFF (mm)
0.962
(0.891–1.000)
0.946
(0.838–1.000)
0.67
Analysis 1 and Analysis 2 show correlation coefficients between fibrinogen values determined by the Clauss method and each item in TEG 6s.
A-10 CFF, amplitude-10 citrated functional fibrinogen; A-10 CRT, amplitude-10 citrated rapid thromboelastography; AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; MA-CFF, maximum amplitude citrated functional fibrinogen.
Table 3 also lists the AUC for each TEG 6s value using the ROC curve for hypofibrinogenemia and the correlation coefficient with the fibrinogen value using the Clauss method (for TEG 6s, only the 3 parameters with high AUC values are listed; other parameters are included in Supplemental File 2). The diagnostic accuracy of each of the TEG 6s parameters was high for levels of hypofibrinogenemia at ≤150 mg/dL and ≤200 mg/dL, with high AUC values for maximum amplitude citrated functional fibrinogen (MA-CFF), amplitude-10 citrated rapid thromboelastography (A-10 CRT), and amplitude-10 citrated functional fibrinogen (A-10 CFF), and other parameters. Significant positive correlations with fibrinogen values were also observed using the Clauss method.
Figure 3 shows a Bland–Altman plot of fibrinogen values measured with CG02N vs those measured using the Clauss method. The mean difference in fibrinogen values for CG02N vs the Clauss method was 17.3 mg/dL (95% confidence interval, 0.61–33.9). The plots did not show a consistent distribution, and there were a certain number of measured residuals that showed residuals of 100 mg/dL or more, regardless of fibrinogen value.
Figure 3Bland-Altman plot of fibrinogen of CG02N vs Clauss method
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
The vertical axis represents the difference between the fibrinogen values of the Clauss method and CG02N, and the horizontal axis represents the mean of the 2 values. The solid red line indicates the mean of the difference, and the dashed red line indicates its 95% confidence interval.
Table 4 lists the AUC values for the fibrinogen values from the CG02N and each of the TEG 6s parameters using the ROC curve for hypofibrinogenemia, the P values of the ROC comparison between CG02N and each of the TEG 6s parameters, and the correlation coefficient of the Clauss method for fibrinogen values (for TEG 6s, only the top 3 parameters with the highest AUC values are listed; other parameters are presented in Supplemental File 3). Both CG02N and TEG 6s had high AUC values for the diagnosis of hypofibrinogenemia and high diagnostic accuracy for both definitions of hypofibrinogenemia. There was no significant difference in the AUC values of CG02N and TEG 6s on the ROC curve for diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia. A strong positive correlation was shown between the Clauss method and fibrinogen levels in CG02N (as in Analysis 1), and TEG 6s also showed strong positive correlations for MA-CFF, A-10 CRT, and A-10 CFF.
Table 4Area under the curve values using receiver operating characteristic curve for hypofibrinogenemia at ≤150 mg/dL and ≤200 mg/dL
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
P value of t-test comparing CG02N against AUC values for hypofibrinogenemia.
Correlation coefficient for fibrinogen values by Clauss method
Fibrinogen measured by: CG02N (mg/dL)
0.961
(0.882–1.000)
—
0.949
(0.878–1.000)
—
0.91
TEG 6s
MA-CFF (mm)
0.952
(0.885– 1.000)
.758
0.933
(0.835–1.000)
.777
0.87
A-10 CRT (mm)
0.942
(0.854–1.000)
.325
0.961
(0.903–1.000)
.726
0.87
A-10 CFF (mm)
0.961
(0.882–1.000)
1
0.957
(0.897–1.000)
.795
0.91
Analysis 3 and comparison with AUC values of CG02N for hypofibrinogenemia were done using Clauss method correlation coefficients between fibrinogen values and each item.
A-10 CFF, amplitude-10 citrated functional fibrinogen; A-10 CRT, amplitude-10 citrated rapid thromboelastography; AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; MA-CFF, maximum amplitude citrated functional fibrinogen.
a P value of t-test comparing CG02N against AUC values for hypofibrinogenemia.
Figure 4 shows a scatter plot of fibrinogen values from CG02N and each parameter of TEG 6s against fibrinogen values using the Clauss method. Only the 3 parameters having the highest correlation coefficients with fibrinogen values measured by the Clauss method among all the TEG 6s parameters are shown. The nonlinear model using logistic regression is indicated by the solid line in the figure. Fibrinogen values were generally linearly correlated across the entire range for CG02N and MA-CFF and A-10 CFF in TEG 6s. A-10 CRT tended to give higher results when fibrinogen using the Clauss method was low and lower results when fibrinogen was high.
Figure 4Scatter plots for fibrinogen measured by each POCT and Clauss method
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
Figure 5 shows a Bland–Altman plot for the fibrinogen values measured by the Clauss method in Analysis 3. The fibrinogen values in CG02N showed a certain number of plots with large residuals >100 mg/dL regardless of the distribution of fibrinogen values in the Clauss method, similar to the results of Analysis 1. For the other parameters in the TEG 6s (MA-CFF, A-10 CRT, A-10 CFF), the correlations were strong, but the variation tended to increase as the fibrinogen values increased.
Figure 5Bland-Altman plot of fibrinogen of TEG6s vs Clauss method
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
The vertical axis shows the difference between the fibrinogen values of the Clauss method and each TEG 6s parameter, and the horizontal axis shows the mean of the 2 values. The solid red line indicates the mean difference and the dashed red line the 95% confidence interval.
Table 5 uses ROC curves to indicate the comparison of the A-10 CFF and TEG 6s parameters that correlate best with fibrinogen values using the Clauss method for the diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia. The A-10 CFF cutoff for the diagnosis of hypofibrinogenemia at ≤150 mg/dL was 4.0 mm (sensitivity, 0.909; specificity, 1.000), and a comparison of the AUC with CG02N showed no significant difference between the two. For the diagnosis of hypofibrinogenemia at ≤200 mg/dL, the A-10 CFF cutoff was 5.0 mm (sensitivity, 0.800; specificity, 1.000), and similarly, there was no significant difference between the two.
Table 5Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of amplitude-10 citrated functional fibrinogen and dry hematology for hypofibrinogenemia measured by the Clauss method
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
Group
Fibrinogen measured by CG02N
A-10 CFF value measured by TEG 6s
P value comparing the AUC of the two
Hypofibrinogenemia (≤150 mg/dL) measured by Clauss method
Cutoff value
148.1 (mg/dL)
4.0 (mm)
—
AUC
0.961
0.961
1.000
Hypofibrinogenemia (≤200 mg/dL) measured by Clauss method
Cutoff value
211.0 (mg/dL)
5.0 (mm)
—
AUC
0.949
0.957
.795
The diagnostic accuracy of dry hematology and A-10 CFF for hypofibrinogenemia by the Clauss method were compared, respectively, in Analysis 3. AUC values in receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for both methods.
A-10 CFF, amplitude-10 citrated functional fibrinogen; AUC, area under the curve.
In this study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia between CG02N using dry hematology and TEG 6s using thromboelastography. The diagnostic accuracies of the 2 devices were equivalent. CG02N showed high diagnostic accuracy compared with CP3000 at fibrinogen levels of approximately 150 mg/dL and a large residual difference in measurements of ≥300 mg/dL. TEG 6s also showed high diagnostic accuracy in MA-CFF, A-10 CRT, and A-10 CFF parameters for hypofibrinogenemia, defined as fibrinogen ≤150 mg/dL and ≤200 mg/dL, respectively, and significant correlation with fibrinogen levels.
Dry hematology provides test results faster than thromboelastography. In the clinical situation of MOH, where immediate response is required, rapid diagnosis of hypofibrinogenemia by dry hematology is extremely important for decision-making in the clinical situation. This study demonstrated the noninferiority of dry hematology compared with thromboelastography, and its faster examination time.
Results
It has been reported that fibrinogen values measured by dry hematology correlate well with fibrinogen values measured by the Clauss method.
This study also revealed good correlation for CG02N with existing fibrinogen values, as in previous literature, but it also examined its diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia and compared it with that of TEG 6s. In this study, the analysis focused on blood fibrinogen level as the final outcome. Fibrinogen levels constitute the most important blood coagulation index in MOH, and although many coagulation factors are required for hemostasis, fibrinogen requires the highest blood concentration.
In MOH, it has been noted that the total dosage of RCC and FFP may be reduced and prognosis improved if hypofibrinogenemia is identified early and fibrinogen concentrate is administered.
Early identification of hypofibrinogenemia using POCT devices and development of transfusion protocols based on the results may improve maternal prognosis in MOH and save medical resources, including transfusion products, as has been mentioned in a few similar reports.
Although the study did not have a protocol in place that dictated the transfusion dose according to the POCT results, it did provide cutoff values for hypofibrinogenemia with CG02N and TEG 6s (especially for A-10 CFF); therefore, prospective studies or randomized controlled studies using POCT instruments will be considered in the future.
As mentioned above, there have been numerous reports on the usefulness of POCT devices in the fields of cardiovascular surgery and emergency medicine; however, reports from the field of obstetrics are scarce. Pregnancy has special hemodynamic and coagulability characteristics that make it difficult to treat hemostatic coagulation in the same manner as in other adults. Compared with nonpregnant women, circulating blood volume increases by up to 50% by approximately 34 weeks of gestation in normal pregnancies,
and all coagulation factor activities are increased in pregnant women, except for factor 13, which is relatively suppressed in the fibrinolytic system.
a certain amount of residuals were observed regardless of fibrinogen level. This may have been because of increased coagulation factor activity in the pregnant women described above. Fibrinogen is also thought to have some effect because obstetrical disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) patients undergo a dramatic change in blood properties from hypercoagulable to impaired coagulation at ≤200 mg/dL.
Although dry hematology is affected by hematocrit values, pregnant women develop pseudoanemia because of hemodilution; therefore, the hematocrit calculation method for the general population may not accurately determine coagulability in pregnant women.
Fibrinogen requires the highest concentration of any coagulation factor during hemostasis
; therefore, when infusion is used to maintain vital signs such as blood pressure in the event of massive bleeding, there is a risk of dilutional coagulopathy.
Furthermore, MOH is associated with the risk of consumptive coagulopathy, in which a large amount of coagulation factor is consumed to stop bleeding from the placental abruption surface, and fibrinogen is also consumed first, resulting in more severe bleeding.
In conclusion, POCT is useful in MOH because it is thought to improve prognosis by recognizing hypofibrinogenemia earlier and helping to provide appropriate transfusion therapy, compared with other forms of massive hemorrhage.
The TEG 6s parameters that showed high diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia with the Clauss method were MA-CFF, A-10 CRT, and A-10 CFF. Figure 6 shows the actual TEG 6s output screen and a description of the parameters. The difference between A-10 CRT and A-10 CFF is that A-10 CRT measures the maximum coagulation capacity, whereas A-10 CFF measures platelet binding to fibrinogen by adding a GIIb/IIIa receptor antagonist that inhibits platelet fibrinogen binding to measure the strength of clots. It has been reported that MA in TEG 6s can be measured within 10 minutes and that MA values (especially MA-CFF) correlate well with fibrinogen values in cardiac bypass surgery,
TEG6s Platelet Mapping assay for the estimation of plasma fibrinogen concentration during cardiovascular surgery: a single-center prospective observational study.
In this study, A-10 was the only factor with strong correlation to fibrinogen values, but A-10 represents the amplitude height 10 minutes after MA, and it takes approximately 15 to 20 minutes to obtain results. The time required to measure fibrinogen by the Clauss method is generally 30 to 50 minutes, depending on the report.
We consider that TEG 6s MA and A-10 are instruments capable of providing results of coagulation capacity that correlate well with fibrinogen levels in the blood, more quickly than conventional testing instruments such as CP3000.
Figure 6Explanation of TEG 6s output screen and each parameter
Nakamura. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care testing devices in massive obstetrical hemorrhage. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022.
Dry hematology and thromboelastography can rapidly diagnose hypofibrinogenemia in patients with MOH, and both have demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy. Early detection of hypofibrinogen may not only reduce mortality and total blood loss, but also be cost-effective in reducing the total amount of blood transfusions required. However, to prove their effectiveness, it is necessary to conduct a randomized study with a POCT-using group and a POCT-nonusing group.
Research implications
Very few studies have demonstrated the usefulness of POCT for MOH. In addition to the need for high-quality studies such as randomized controlled trials in the future, active use of POCT in regions and countries with limited medical resources may be encouraged if cost-effectiveness can be demonstrated.
Strengths and limitations
This study has several limitations. Although it focused solely on blood fibrinogen levels and their correlation, it is important to note that MOH is not only caused by a decrease in blood fibrinogen levels. In particular, MOH with consumptive coagulopathy may present as DIC with severe hyperfibrinolysis, and further research is needed to incorporate the evaluation of the fibrinolytic system, which is possible with TEG 6s, into the management of MOH.
In this study, Group 2 (analyzed only with TEG 6s) had significantly less background bleeding and milder coagulopathy compared with the other groups. This higher prevalence of patients with mild disease in Group 2 indicates selection bias. We consider this to be because of the fact that the proportion of consumptive coagulopathies (placental abruption or amniotic fluid embolization), which tend to cause rapid coagulopathy, was smaller in the MOH group than in the other groups. Although it would have been desirable to unify the backgrounds among the groups, we did not perform background-adjusted matching because the number of cases tested with TEG 6s alone was small (29 in total), and we were concerned that such matching would be highly confounded. However, we did not consider it appropriate to interpret the results only by comparing the diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia between Group 1 (dry hematology only) and Group 2 (thromboelastography only), which were heterogeneous, and thus we added an analysis for Group 3, in which the same patients were measured with 2 point-of-care tests at the same time. This should resolve the difficulty in interpreting the results owing to heterogeneity between groups.
Conclusion
Dry hematology and thromboelastography (especially MA-CFF, A-10 CRT, and A-10 CFF) showed equivalent diagnostic accuracy for hypofibrinogenemia, with results correlating well with fibrinogen measured by the Clauss method.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.com) for the English-language editing.
Effect of thromboelastography (TEG®) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) on diagnosis of coagulopathy, transfusion guidance and mortality in trauma: descriptive systematic review.
TEG6s Platelet Mapping assay for the estimation of plasma fibrinogen concentration during cardiovascular surgery: a single-center prospective observational study.
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Cite this article as: Nakamura E, Matsunaga S, Kikuchi A, et al. Comparative retrospective study on the validity of point-of-care testing device for massive obstetrical hemorrhage: dry hematology vs thromboelastography. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022;XX:x.ex–x.ex.
00208-7&id=gr1.jpg){kind=link}
00208-7&id=gr2.jpg){kind=link}
00208-7&id=gr3.jpg){kind=link}
00208-7&id=gr4.jpg){kind=link}
00208-7&id=gr5.jpg){kind=link}
00208-7&id=gr6.jpg){kind=link}