Results of a collaborative study for fibrinogen measurement. Evidence that the use of a common calibrator improves interlaboratory agreement

Fibrinogen Diagnostics in Major Hemorrhage

Fibrinogen is one of the first factors to fall to critically low levels in the blood in many coagulopathic events. Patients with hypofibrinogenemia are at a significantly greater risk of major hemorrhage and death. The rapid replacement of fibrinogen early on in hypofibrinogenemia may significantly improve outcomes for patients. Fibrinogen is present at concentrations between 2 and 4 g/L in the plasma of healthy people. However, hypofibrinogenemia is diagnosed when the fibrinogen level drops below 1.5-2 g/L. This review analyses different types of fibrinogen assays that can be used for diagnosing hypofibrinogenemia. The scientific mechanisms and limitations behind these tests are then presented. Additionally, the current state of clinical major hemorrhage protocols (MHPs) is presented and the structure, function and physiological role of fibrinogen is summarized.

Fibrinogen measurement in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass: Analysis of repeatability and agreement of Clauss method within and between six different laboratories

Plasma fibrinogen concentration is important for coagulopathy assessment, and is most commonly measured using the Clauss method. Several factors, including device type and reagent, have been shown to affect results. The study objective was to evaluate performance and repeatability of the Clauss method and to assess differences between measurements performed during and after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), by testing plasma samples from patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB. Samples were collected from 30 patients before surgery, approximately 20 minutes before weaning from CPB, and 5 minutes after CPB and protamine. Fibrinogen concentration was determined using the Clauss method at six quality-controlled specialised laboratories, according to accredited standard operating procedures. Regarding within-centre agreement for Clauss measurement, mean differences between duplicate measurements were between 0.00 g/l and 0.15 g/l, with intervals for 95% limits of agreement for mean Bland-Altman differences up to 1.3 g/l. Regarding between-centre agreement, some mean differences between pairs of centres were above 0.5 g/l. Differences of up to ∼2 g/l were observed with individual samples. Increased variability was observed between centres, with inter-class correlation values below 0.5 suggesting only fair agreement. There were no significant differences in fibrinogen concentration before weaning from CPB and after CPB for most centres and methods. In conclusion, considerable differences exist between Clauss-based plasma fibrinogen measured using different detection methods. Nevertheless, the similarity between measurements shortly before weaning from CPB and after CPB within centres suggests that on-pump measurements could provide an early estimation of fibrinogen deficit after CPB and thus guidance for haemostatic therapy.

External quality assurance of fibrinogen assays using normal plasma: results of the 2008 College of American Pathologists proficiency testing program in coagulation

CONTEXT

Proper diagnosis and therapy of fibrinogen deficiency requires high-quality fibrinogen assays.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the interlaboratory bias, precision, and grading of fibrinogen assays used by laboratories participating in the United States College of American Pathologists proficiency testing program in coagulation.

DESIGN

Two identical vials of normal plasma were sent to more than 3500 laboratories. Participants measured fibrinogen levels using local methods.

RESULTS

Fifty different fibrinogen methods were evaluated. All-method bias was 8.3% (range of method-specific biases, 0.0%-27.0%) and all-method coefficient of variation was 7.7% (range of method-specific coefficients of variation, 0.7%-25.8%). After controlling for reagent/instrument type, mean fibrinogen levels were 11.6% higher for prothrombin time-based reagents compared to Clauss (P < .001), and coefficient of variation was 46% lower for mechanical endpoint instruments compared to photo-optical. Most testing events (97.4%) could be reliably graded as pass or fail using a target range of ±20% from the method mean (total pass rate, 98.8%). Total fail rate was 3.0-fold lower for mechanical instruments compared to photo-optical (0.5% versus 1.5%, P  =  .001). Nonetheless many photo-optical methods had very high precision and very low fail rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Fibrinogen assays showed highly variable methodology and performance characteristics. Bias, precision, and grading were affected by the type of reagent or instrument used.

Japanese collaborative study for fibrinogen assay: variability of the fibrinogen assay between different laboratories does not improve when a common calibrator is used

Several national and local external quality assurance schemes have been developed to improve the plasma fibrinogen assay in Japan over the past 30 years. Now most commercial calibrant plasma may be calibrated against an International Standard preparation, in order to achieve agreement of results obtained by different laboratories. However, we have never achieved satisfactory results, according to an external quality control survey regarding the fibrinogen assay. Therefore, we distributed two kinds of fibrinogen standards to be used as common calibrators, along with three plasma samples, among 183 general laboratories in Japan. The results of this collaborative study showed that the assigned value for the commercially available calibrators remained problematic. Furthermore, it was concluded that the between-laboratory variability could not be improved beyond a certain degree of standardization, even if a common calibrator was used for the Clauss-derived assay carried out by an automatic coagulometer.