Suppr超能文献

与传统凝血测试相比,黏弹性测试的优势和劣势。

The strengths and weaknesses of viscoelastic testing compared to traditional coagulation testing.

机构信息

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.

出版信息

Transfusion. 2020 Oct;60 Suppl 6:S21-S28. doi: 10.1111/trf.16073.

Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验