Increased resistance to fibrinolysis activation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a case series

Comparison of two viscoelastic testing devices in a porcine model of surgery, hemorrhage and resuscitation

Introduction

Viscoelastic hemostatic assays (VHA) are integral in contemporary hemostatic resuscitation, offering insights into clot formation, firmness, and lysis for rapid diagnosis and targeted therapy. Large animal models, particularly swine, provide anatomical and physiological analogies for coagulation research. Despite the growing use of VHAs, the ClotPro® device's applicability in porcine models remains unexplored. This study investigates ClotPro® in a porcine model of abdominal surgery, severe hemorrhage, and resuscitation, comparing it with the established ROTEM® delta system.

Methods

Twenty-seven healthy pigs underwent abdominal surgery, hemorrhage and resuscitation. ClotPro® and ROTEM® were used to assess viscoelastic hemostatic properties at baseline, after surgery, 60 min after shock induction, 60 and 120 min after resuscitation.

Results

Clotting times in extrinsically and intrinsically stimulated assays exhibited fair to moderate correlation. Clot firmness in extrinsically stimulated tests could be used interchangeably while fibrin polymerization assays revealed significant differences between the devices. Fibrin polymerization assays in ClotPro® consistently yielded higher values than ROTEM®. Furthermore, the study evaluated the ClotPro® TPA-test's applicability in porcine blood, revealing failure of lysis induction in porcine blood samples.

Conclusion

This research contributes valuable insights into the use of ClotPro® in porcine models of hemorrhage and coagulopathy, highlighting both its applicability and limitations in comparison to ROTEM® delta. The observed differences, especially in fibrin polymerization assays, emphasize the importance of understanding device-specific characteristics when interpreting results. Due to its inapplicability, TPA-test should not be used in porcine blood to evaluate fibrinolytic potential. The study provides a foundation for future investigations into the use of different viscoelastic hemostatic assays in porcine animal models.

Fibrinolytic potential as a risk factor for postpartum hemorrhage

Background

Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is still the leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. While impaired fibrin polymerization plays a crucial role in the development and progress of PPH, recent approaches using viscoelastic measurements have failed to sensitively detect early changes in fibrinolysis in PPH. This study aimed to evaluate whether women experiencing PPH show alterations in POC-VET fibrinolytic potential during childbirth and whether fibrinolytic potential offers benefits in the prediction and treatment of PPH.

Methods

Blood samples were collected at three different timepoints: T0 = hospital admission (19 h ± 18 h prepartum), T1 = 30-60 min after placental separation, and T2 = first day postpartum (19 h ± 6 h postpartum). In addition to standard laboratory tests, whole-blood impedance aggregometry (Multiplate) and viscoelastic testing (VET) were performed using the ClotPro system, which included the TPA-test lysis time, to assess the POC-VET fibrinolytic potential, and selected coagulation factors were measured. The results were correlated with blood loss and clinical outcome markers. Severe PPH was defined as a hemoglobin drop > 4g/dl and/or the occurrence of shock or the need for red blood cell transfusion.

Results

Blood samples of 217 parturient women were analyzed between June 2020 and December 2020 at Heidelberg University Women's Hospital, and 206 measurements were eligible for the final analysis. Women experiencing severe PPH showed increased fibrinolytic potential already at the time of hospital admission. When compared to non-PPH, the difference persisted 30-60 min after placental separation. A higher fibrinolytic potential was accompanied by a greater drop in fibrinogen and higher d-dimer values after placental separation. While 70% of women experiencing severe PPH showed fibrinolytic potential, 54% of those without PPH showed increased fibrinolytic potential as well.

Conclusion

We were able to show that antepartal and peripartal fibrinolytic potential was elevated in women experiencing severe PPH. However, several women showed high fibrinolytic potential but lacked clinical signs of PPH. The findings indicate that high fibrinolytic potential is a risk factor for the development of coagulopathy, but further conditions are required to cause PPH.

Point-of-care diagnosis and monitoring of fibrinolysis resistance in the critically ill: results from a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Fibrinolysisis is essential for vascular blood flow maintenance and is triggered by endothelial and platelet release of tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA). In certain critical conditions, e.g. sepsis, acute respiratory failure (ARF) and trauma, the fibrinolytic response is reduced and may lead to widespread thrombosis and multi-organ failure. The mechanisms underpinning fibrinolysis resistance include reduced t-PA expression and/or release, reduced t-PA and/or plasmin effect due to elevated inhibitor levels, increased consumption and/or clearance. This study in critically ill patients with fibrinolysis resistance aimed to evaluate the ability of t-PA and plasminogen supplementation to restore fibrinolysis with assessment using point-of-care ClotPro viscoelastic testing (VET).

METHODS

In prospective, observational studies, whole-blood ClotPro VET evaluation was carried out in 105 critically ill patients. In 32 of 58 patients identified as fibrinolysis-resistant (clot lysis time > 300 s on the TPA-test: tissue factor activated coagulation with t-PA accelerated fibrinolysis), consecutive experimental whole-blood VET was carried out with repeat TPA-tests spiked with additional t-PA and/or plasminogen and the effect on lysis time determined. In an interventional study in a patient with ARF and fibrinolysis resistance, the impact of a 24 h intravenous low-dose alteplase infusion on coagulation and fibrinolysis was prospectively monitored using standard ClotPro VET.

RESULTS

Distinct response groups emerged in the ex vivo experimental VET, with increased fibrinolysis observed following supplementation with (i) t-PA only or (ii) plasminogen and t-PA. A baseline TPA-test lysis time of > 1000 s was associated with the latter group. In the interventional study, a gradual reduction (25%) in serial TPA-test lysis times was observed during the 24 h low-dose alteplase infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

ClotPro viscoelastic testing, the associated TPA-test and the novel experimental assays may be utilised to (i) investigate the potential mechanisms of fibrinolysis resistance, (ii) guide corrective treatment and (iii) monitor in real-time the treatment effect. Such a precision medicine and personalised treatment approach to the management of fibrinolysis resistance has the potential to increase treatment benefit, while minimising adverse events in critically ill patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

VETtiPAT-ARF, a clinical trial evaluating ClotPro-guided t-PA (alteplase) administration in fibrinolysis-resistant patients with ARF, is ongoing (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05540834 ; retrospectively registered September 15th 2022).

The Choice between Plasma-Based Common Coagulation Tests and Cell-Based Viscoelastic Tests in Monitoring Hemostatic Competence: Not an either-or Proposition

There has been a significant interest in the last decade in the use of viscoelastic tests (VETs) to determine the hemostatic competence of bleeding patients. Previously, common coagulation tests (CCTs) such as the prothrombin time (PT) and partial thromboplastin time (PTT) were used to assist in the guidance of blood component and hemostatic adjunctive therapy for these patients. However, the experience of decades of VET use in liver failure with transplantation, cardiac surgery, and trauma has now spread to obstetrical hemorrhage and congenital and acquired coagulopathies. Since CCTs measure only 5 to 10% of the lifespan of a clot, these assays have been found to be of limited use for acute surgical and medical conditions, whereby rapid results are required. However, there are medical indications for the PT/PTT that cannot be supplanted by VETs. Therefore, the choice of whether to use a CCT or a VET to guide blood component therapy or hemostatic adjunctive therapy may often require consideration of both methodologies. In this review, we provide examples of the relative indications for CCTs and VETs in monitoring hemostatic competence of bleeding patients.

Comparison of the New Viscoelastic Coagulation Analyzer ClotPro® With ROTEM® Delta and Conventional Coagulation Tests in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

Background: Viscoelastic coagulation testing has been suggested to help manage coagulopathy in critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, results from different viscoelastic devices are not readily comparable. ClotPro® is a novel thromboelastometry analyzer offering a wider range of commercially available assays.

Methods: We compared the results from ClotPro with results from the well-established ROTEM® Delta device and conventional coagulation tests in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Results: Viscoelastic parameters indicated the presence of a potentially hypercoagulable state in the majority of patients. In up to 95 paired measurements, we found strong correlations between several parameters routinely used in clinical practice: (i) EX test vs. EXTEM CT, A5, A10, MCF, (ii) IN test vs. INTEM A5, A10, MCF, and (iii) FIB test vs. FIBTEM A5, A10, MCF (all R > 0.7 and p < 0.001). In contrast, IN test CT vs. INTEM CT showed only a moderate correlation (R = 0.53 and p < 0.001). Clot strength parameters of both devices exhibited strong correlations with platelet counts and fibrinogen levels (all R > 0.7 and p < 0.001). Divergent correlations of intrinsically activated assays with aPTT and anti-factor Xa activity were visible. Regarding absolute differences of test results, considerable delta occurred in CT, CFT, and clot strength parameters (all p < 0.001) between both devices.

Conclusions: Several parameters obtained by ClotPro show strong correlations with ROTEM Delta. Due to weak correlations of intrinsically activated clotting times and considerable absolute differences in a number of parameters, our findings underline the need for device-specific algorithms in this patient cohort.