Abstract

BackgroundHemostasis is the dynamic equilibrium between coagulation and fibrinolysis. During pregnancy, the balance shifts toward a hypercoagulative state; however placental abruption and abnormal placentations may lead to rapidly evolving coagulopathy characterized by the increased activation of procoagulant pathways. These processes can result in hypofibrinogenemia, with fibrinogen levels dropping to 2 g/L or less and an associated increased risk of post-partum hemorrhage.The aim of the present study was to evaluate the concordance between two methods of functional fibrinogen measurement: the Thromboelastography (TEG) method (also known as FLEV) vs. the Clauss method. Three patient groups were considered: healthy volunteers; non-pathological pregnant patients; and pregnant patients who went on to develop postpartum hemorrhage.MethodsA prospective observational study. Inclusion criteria were: healthy volunteer women of childbearing age, non-pathological pregnant women at term, and pregnant hemorrhagic patients subjected to elective or urgent caesarean section (CS), with blood loss exceeding 1000 mL. Exclusion criteria were age < 18 years, a history of coagulopathy, and treatment with contraceptives, anticoagulants, or antiplatelet agents.ResultsBland-Altman plots showed a significant overestimation with the FLEV method in all three patient groups: bias was − 133.36 mg/dL for healthy volunteers (95% IC: − 257.84; − 8.88. Critical difference: 124.48); − 56.30 mg/dL for healthy pregnant patients (95% IC: − 225.53; 112.93. Critical difference: 169.23); and − 159.05 mg/dL for hemorrhagic pregnant patients (95% IC: − 333.24; 15.148. Critical difference: 174.19). Regression analyses detected a linear correlation between FLEV and Clauss for healthy volunteers, healthy pregnant patients, and hemorrhagic pregnant patients (R2 0.27, p value = 0.002; R2 0.31, p value = 0.001; R2 0.35, p value = 0.001, respectively). ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference in fibrinogen concentration between all three patients groups when assayed using the Clauss method (p value < 0.001 for all the comparisons), but no statistically significant difference between the two patients groups of pregnant women when using the FLEV method.ConclusionsThe FLEV method does not provide a valid alternative to the Clauss method due to the problem of fibrinogen overestimation, and for this reason it should not be recommended for the evaluation of patients with an increased risk of hypofibrinogenemia.

Highlights

  • IntroductionThe balance shifts toward a hypercoagulative state; placental abruption and abnormal placentations may lead to rapidly evolving coagulopathy characterized by the increased activation of procoagulant pathways

  • Hemostasis is the dynamic equilibrium between coagulation and fibrinolysis

  • Regression analyses detected a linear correlation between fibrinogen level (FLEV) and Clauss for healthy volunteers, healthy pregnant patients, and hemorrhagic pregnant patients (R2 0.27, p value = 0.002; R2 0.31, p value = 0.001; R2 0.35, p value = 0.001, respectively)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The balance shifts toward a hypercoagulative state; placental abruption and abnormal placentations may lead to rapidly evolving coagulopathy characterized by the increased activation of procoagulant pathways. These processes can result in hypofibrinogenemia, with fibrinogen levels dropping to 2 g/L or less and an associated increased risk of post-partum hemorrhage. The balance shifts to a hypercoagulative state that becomes more pronounced toward the end of the third trimester, returning to normality approximately 4 to 5 weeks after delivery. Hypercoagulability results from an increase in plasma concentrations of coagulation factors VII, VIII, X, XII, von Willebrand factor (vWF), and fibrinogen (which can reach 6 g/L by the end of pregnancy) [1]. It is important to highlight that the coagulation changes occurring during postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) differ from those of polytraumatized or postsurgical patients because of the underlying cause of obstetric bleeding [3]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.