Impact of changes in haematocrit level and platelet count on thromboelastometry parameters.

INTRODUCTION

To what extent haematocrit levels (Hct) and platelet counts (PLT) influence the measurement of parameters of thromboelastometry when assessed with the ROTEM® device is unclear. We investigated to what extent thromboelastometry measurements depend on Hct and PLT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Whole blood samples were taken for in-vitro preparations of mixtures with three different levels of PLT and a varying Hct. Maximum clot firmness (MCF), clotting time (CT), clot formation time (CFT) and alpha angle (α) for INTEM, EXTEM, FIBTEM and APTEM was recorded.

RESULTS

Measurements depended substantially on Hct and PLT. MCF readings were systematically lower with increasing Hct (0.2 vs. 0.4: -7.8 (-8.3 to -7.2); p<0.001, 0.2 vs. 0.55: -14.5 (-17.3 to -14.3); p<0.001) but higher with increasing PLT (50 vs. 125×10(9)/l: 8.2 (4.2 to 12.3); p=0.005, 50 vs. 250×10(9)/l: 12.0 (7.2 to 16.8); p=0.002). CT readings were systematically higher with increasing Hct (0.2 vs. 0.4: 9.2 (6.2 to 12.1); p=0.001, 0.2 vs. 0.55: 38.2 (21.5 to 54.9); p=0.003) while increasing PLT had no influence. CFT readings were also systematically higher with increasing Hct (0.2 vs. 0.4: 83.8 (40.2 to 127.6); p=0.006, 0.2 vs. 0.55: 226.2 (110.7 to 341.7); p=0.006) but systematically lower with increasing PLT (50 vs. 125×10(9)/l: -144.0 (-272.3 to -15.6); p=0.036, 50 vs. 250×10(9)/l: -189.2 (-330.4 to -48.0); p=0.02); readings of the alpha angle showed a similar pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that readings of thromboelastometry parameters need to be adjusted by Hct and PLT to avoid potential confounding and miss-interpretations in clinical practice.