ArticlePloS one2022
Haemostatic differences between SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive and negative patients at the time of hospital admission.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Citrullination of α2-antiplasmin is unlikely to contribute to enhanced plasmin generation in COVID-19 pathophysiology.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023Article
- Sex-dependent balance between thrombin and plasmin generation in the presence of thrombomodulin.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2023Article
- Coagulation parameters predict COVID-19-related thrombosis in a neural network with a positive predictive value of 98.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is associated with thrombosis. We conducted a cohort study of consecutive patients, suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection presented to the emergency department. We investigated haemostatic differences between SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive and negative patients, with dedicated coagulation analysis. The 519 included patients had a median age of 66 years, and 52.5% of the patients were male. Twenty-six percent of the patients were PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2.PCR positive patients had increased levels of fibrinogen and (active) von Willebrand Factor (VWF) and decreased levels of protein C and α2-macroglobulin compared to the PCR negative patients. In addition, we found acquired activated protein C resistance in PCR positive patients. Furthermore, we found that elevated levels of factor VIII and VWF and decreased levels of ADAMTS-13 were associated with an increased incidence of thrombosis in PCR positive patients. In conclusion, we found that PCR positive patients had a pronounced prothrombotic phenotype, mainly due to an increase of endothelial activation upon admission to the hospital. These findings show that coagulation tests may be considered useful to discriminate severe cases of COVID-19 at risk for thrombosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.