Moore Ernest E, Moore Hunter B, Gonzalez Eduardo, Sauaia Angela, Banerjee Anirban, Silliman Christopher C
Denver Health Medical Center, Bonfils Blood Center, Denver, Colorado.
Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado.
Transfusion. 2016 Apr;56 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S110-4. doi: 10.1111/trf.13486.
Postinjury fibrinolysis can manifest as three distinguishable phenotypes: 1) hyperfibrinolysis, 2) physiologic, and 3) hypofibrinolysis (shutdown). Hyperfibrinolysis is associated with uncontrolled bleeding due to clot dissolution; whereas, fibrinolysis shutdown is associated with organ dysfunction due to microvascular occlusion. The incidence of fibrinolysis phenotypes at hospital arrival in severely injured patients is: 1) hyperfibrinolysis 18%, physiologic 18%, and shutdown 64%. The mechanisms responsible for dysregulated fibrinolysis following injury remain uncertain. Animal work suggests hypoperfusion promotes fibrinolysis, while tissue injury inhibits fibrinolysis. Clinical experience is consistent with these observations. The predominant mediator of postinjury hyperfibrinolysis appears to be tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) released from ischemic endothelium. The effects of tPA are accentuated by impaired hepatic clearance. Fibrinolysis shutdown, on the other hand, may occur from inhibition of circulating tPA, enhanced clot strength impairing the binding of tPA and plasminogen to fibrin, or the inhibition of plasmin. Plasminogen activator inhibitor -1 (PAI-1) binding of circulating tPA appears to be a major mechanism for postinjury shutdown. The sources of PAI-1 include endothelium, platelets, and organ parenchyma. The laboratory identification of fibrinolysis phenotype, at this moment, is best determined with viscoelastic hemostatic assays (TEG, ROTEM). While D-dimer and plasmin antiplasmin (PAP) levels corroborate fibrinolysis, they do not provide real-time assessment of the circulating blood capacity. Our clinical studies indicate that fibrinolysis is a very dynamic process and our experimental work suggests plasma first resuscitation reverses hyperfibrinolysis. Collectively, we believe recent clinical and experimental work suggest antifibrinolytic therapy should be employed selectively in the acutely injured patient, and optimally guided by TEG or ROTEM.
1)高纤溶,2)生理性纤溶,3)低纤溶(纤溶关闭)。高纤溶与因凝块溶解导致的出血失控有关;而纤溶关闭则与因微血管阻塞导致的器官功能障碍有关。重伤患者入院时纤溶表型的发生率为:1)高纤溶18%,生理性纤溶18%,纤溶关闭64%。损伤后纤溶失调的机制仍不确定。动物实验表明,低灌注促进纤溶,而组织损伤抑制纤溶。临床经验与这些观察结果一致。损伤后高纤溶的主要介质似乎是缺血内皮释放的组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(tPA)。肝清除功能受损会加重tPA的作用。另一方面,纤溶关闭可能是由于循环tPA受到抑制、凝块强度增强导致tPA和纤溶酶原与纤维蛋白的结合受损,或纤溶酶受到抑制。循环tPA与纤溶酶原激活物抑制剂-1(PAI-1)结合似乎是损伤后纤溶关闭的主要机制。PAI-1的来源包括内皮、血小板和器官实质。目前,纤溶表型的实验室鉴定最好通过粘弹性止血试验(血栓弹力图、旋转血栓弹力图)来确定。虽然D-二聚体和纤溶酶抗纤溶酶(PAP)水平可证实纤溶情况,但它们无法提供循环血容量的实时评估。我们的临床研究表明,纤溶是一个非常动态的过程,我们的实验工作表明血浆早期复苏可逆转高纤溶。总体而言,我们认为最近的临床和实验工作表明,抗纤溶治疗应在急性受伤患者中选择性使用,并最好由血栓弹力图或旋转血栓弹力图指导。