Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Department of Transfusion Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital-Weill Cornell, New York, New York, USA.
Transfusion. 2020 Oct;60 Suppl 6:S21-S28. doi: 10.1111/trf.16073.
Optimized acute bleeding management requires timely and reliable laboratory testing to detect and diagnose coagulopathies and guide transfusion therapy. Conventional coagulation tests (CCT) are inexpensive with minimal labor requirements, but CCTs may have delayed turnaround times. In addition, abnormal CCT values may not reflect in vivo coagulopathies that require treatment and may lead to overtransfusion. The use of viscoelastic testing (VET) has been rapidly expanding and is recommended by several recent bleeding guidelines. This review is intended to compare CCT to VET, review the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches, and evaluate and summarize the clinical studies that compared CCT-based and VET-based transfusion algorithms. Most studies of CCT vs VET transfusion algorithms favor the use of VET in the management of massively bleeding patients due to reductions in blood product utilization, bleeding, costs, and lengths of stay.
优化急性出血管理需要及时、可靠的实验室检测,以发现和诊断凝血异常,并指导输血治疗。传统凝血检测(CCT)价格低廉,所需劳动力最少,但 CCT 可能有较长的周转时间。此外,异常的 CCT 值可能无法反映需要治疗的体内凝血异常,并且可能导致过度输血。黏弹性检测(VET)的应用正在迅速扩大,并被最近的几项出血指南推荐。本综述旨在比较 CCT 与 VET,回顾两种方法的优缺点,并评估和总结比较基于 CCT 和 VET 的输血算法的临床研究。由于血液制品利用率、出血、成本和住院时间的降低,大多数 CCT 与 VET 输血算法的研究都支持在大量出血患者的管理中使用 VET。