ArticleThrombosis journal2022
Haemostasis patterns in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure and acute decompensation of cirrhosis including thromboelastometric tests with and without the addition of Protac: a pilot study.
Article in Thrombosis journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThromboelastometry is considered the best method to assesses hemostasis in liver disease. Diagnostic performance could be improved by adding protein C activators such as thrombomodulin or Protac®. We assessed changes in ROTEM parameters after the addition of Protac® in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), acute decompensation (AD), and healthy individuals (HI) to define different hemostasis patterns, considering standard and velocity ROTEM parameters, and assess whether Protac® can improve the definition of the pattern.
methodsPre-test, we investigated whether diluted EXTEM reagent improved the effect of Protac® on the clotting time (CT)-ratio with and without Protac®. Ten ACLF and 20 AD patients and 21 HI were included in the main study.
resultsStandard EXTEM was used in the main study. INTEM CFT, INTEM A5 (inverse), and INTEM TPI (inverse) were the parameters that best differentiated liver disease from HI (ROC AUC, 0.921, 0.906, and 0.928, respectively; all P-values < 0.001). Combining INTEM CFT with EXTEM LI60-ratio only slightly improved the diagnostic performance (ROC AUC, 0.948; P < 0.001). EXTEM LI60 and INTEM maxV-t were the parameters that best differentiated between ACLF and AD patients (ROC AUC, 0.743, P = 0.033; and 0.723, P = 0.050; respectively). Combining EXTEM LI60 + INTEM maxV-t moderately improved the diagnostic performance (ROC AUC, 0.81, P < 0.001).
conclusionsROTEM velocity, fibrinolysis parameters and the indices calculated improve the diagnosis in combination with standard parameters (e.g., CFT and A5). Ratios calculated with and without Protac® (e.g., EXTEM LI60-ratio) only slightly increased the diagnostic performance in discriminating hemostasis patterns.
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.