Current management of massive hemorrhage in trauma

Interchangeability of rotational elastographic instruments and reagents

BACKGROUND

Viscoelastic measurements are frequently being used in clinical and research settings for a rapid assessment of the hemostatic processes of blood clot formation and degradation. These measurements are being performed on either of two instruments (TEG and ROTEM) using their proprietary reagents. Standardization between the instruments and the reagents has been lacking but is necessary to compare results across instruments. In this study, we perform a crossover analysis between the TEG and ROTEM instruments using proprietary reagents from each manufacturer.

METHODS

We tested three sets of reagents as follows: (1) in-tem and ex-tem (Tem International GmbH); (2) kaolin and RapidTEG (Haemonetics); (3) a well-characterized control recombinant tissue factor-phospholipid reagent. Blood was drawn from six healthy donors, and each reagent was run concurrently in the TEG and ROTEM instruments. The volume of commercial reagent and calcium used was adjusted for crossover measurements to maintain the same concentration of each reagent in the blood. The outputs of clot time, rate of clot formation, and maximum firmness of the clot of the ROTEM and the TEG tracings were evaluated.

RESULTS

The in-tem and RapidTEG reagents showed no disparity between instruments for any parameter. Significant differences between the instruments were found in the α angle and maximum firmness of the clot for ex-tem and kaolin reagents as well as in the clot time and maximum firmness of the clot for the recombinant tissue factor-phospholipid reagent.

CONCLUSION

Although significant differences were observed for some parameters, the magnitudes were small compared with the differences between tests or the normal range variation in parameter values observed for these tests. These findings indicate that the instruments are more interchangeable than previously reported.

Pelvic fractures presenting with haemodynamic instability: treatment options and outcomes

The management of trauma patients with haemodynamic instability and an unstable pelvic fracture is an issue of vivid debate in "trauma community". A multidisciplinary approach needs to be instituted regarding the required diagnostic and therapeutic measures. Control of haemorrhage is the first priority. Arterial embolization and/or preperitoneal pelvic packing follow the provisional skeletal pelvic stabilization. The sequence of these interventions still remains an issue of controversy. It needs to be determined on an institutional basis based on the available local resources such as angiography suite and whole-body CT scan and the expertise of the treating surgical team. Despite the fact that recent advances in diagnostic modalities and trauma care systems have improved the overall outcome of patients with pelvic fractures, the early mortality associated with high-energy pelvic injuries presenting with haemodynamic instability remains high. Any suspected injured person with pelvic ring injury should automatically be taken to a level one-trauma centre where all the facilities required are in place for these patients to survive.

Hypercoagulation Assessed by Thromboelastography is Neither Related to Infarct Size nor to Clinical Outcome After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Objectives:

We investigated the relationship between coagulation assessed by thromboelastography (TEG) and myocardial damage in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

Methods:

We measured platelet activity with TEG-maximum amplitude (TEG-MA) in 233 patients undergoing urgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Infarct size and myocardial salvage index were evaluated using cardiac magnetic resonance, and the relation of these parameters to posttreatment coagulation was examined retrospectively. Adverse events were adjudicated and related to the coagulation status during the index event.

Results:

Hypercoagulation was found in 82 (35.2%) patients and was neither correlated to infarct size nor correlated to myocardial salvage index ( P = .28 and .65, respectively) or clinical adverse events. Patients who experienced an adverse event during follow-up had a slightly higher TEG-MA value than patients with an event-free follow-up, but this was not statistically significant (68.1 vs 67.3, P = .44).

Conclusions:

The TEG-MA does not appear to be a sensitive predictor of reperfusion success and prognosis in urgent PCI for STEMI.