Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26603039›Full record

ArticleBMC anesthesiology2015

Thromboelastometry versus free-oscillation rheometry and enoxaparin versus tinzaparin: an in-vitro study comparing two viscoelastic haemostatic tests' dose-responses to two low molecular weight heparins at the time of withdrawing epidural catheters from ten patients after major surgery.

Owain Thomas, Anna Larsson, Nahreen Tynngård, Ulf Schött

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Self-Reporting Theranostic: Nano Tool for Arterial Thrombosis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Owain ThomasMedical Faculty, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden. odt@cantab.net.
Anna LarssonMedical Faculty, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden.
Nahreen TynngårdDepartment of Clinical Immunology and Transfusion Medicine, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Ulf SchöttMedical Faculty, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden.
Lund University · SELinköping University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMonitoring low molecular weight heparins (LMWH's) in the perioperative period is prudent in patients at high risk of coagulative complications, especially when the patient has an epidural catheter requiring withdrawal, which is associated with the risk of spinal haematoma. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vitro dose-responses of two different LMWH's on two different viscoelastic haemostatic tests, using blood sampled from patients with normal routine coagulation parameters, on the day after major surgery when their epidural catheters were due to be withdrawn.

methodsEnoxaparin or tinzaparin were added in vitro to blood from ten patients who had undergone oesophageal resection, to obtain plasma concentrations of approximately 0, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 IU/mL. Coagulation was monitored using thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) using the InTEM® activating reagent; and free oscillation rheometry (FOR: ReoRox®), activated using thromboplastin. Clot initiation was measured using ROTEM-CT, ReoRox-COT1 and ReoRox-COT2. Clot propagation was measured using ROTEM-CFT, ROTEM-Alpha Angle and ReoRox-Slope. Clot stability was measured using ROTEM-MCF and ReoRox-G'max, and clot lysis was measured using ROTEM-ML and ReoRox-ClotSR.

resultsClot initiation time assessed by thromboelastometry and FOR was prolonged by increasing concentrations of both LMWH's (P < 0.01). Equivalent doses of tinzaparin in international units (anti-FXa units) per millilitre prolonged clot initiation more than enoxaparin (P < 0.05). There was significant inter-individual variation - the ranges of CT and COT1 at LMWH-concentrations of 0 and 1.5 IU/mL overlapped. None of the tests reflecting clot formation rate or stability showed a dose-response to either LMWH but clot lysis showed a tentative negative dose-response to the LMWH's.

conclusionsClot initiation time's dose-dependent prolongation by LMWH's in this study agrees with previous research, as does tinzaparin's stronger anti-coagulative effect than enoxaparin at equivalent levels of anti-FXa activity. This casts doubt on the validity of using anti-FXa assays alone to guide dosage of LMWH's. The significant inter-individual variation in dose-response suggests that the relationship between dose and effect in the postoperative period is complicated. While both ROTEM and FOR may have some role in postoperative monitoring, more research is needed before any conclusion can be made about their clinical usefulness.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, EpiduralBlood CoagulationBlood Coagulation TestsDose-Response Relationship, DrugEnoxaparinEsophagusFibrinolytic AgentsHemostaticsHeparin, Low-Molecular-WeightHumansRheologyThrombelastographyTime FactorsTinzaparinEnoxaparinFibrinolytic AgentsHemostaticsHeparin, Low-Molecular-WeightTinzaparin

Identifiers

PMID26603039
PMCPMC4659161
OpenAlexW2179609365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.