ArticleInternational journal of laboratory hematology2025
Thromboelastometry (ROTEM) Assessing Hypercoagulability in Patients Referred for Thrombophilia Screening.
Article in International journal of laboratory hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Viscoelastic testing: Transforming hemostasis management in patients in the medical intensive care unit.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Platelets as Central Modulators of Post-Cardiac Arrest Syndrome: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications.Biomolecules · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThrombophilia, a blood coagulation disorder, poses risks of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Coagulation assays may not be sufficient to assess VTE risk and global assays such as Rotational Thromboelastometry (ROTEM) may add valuable information. We investigated ROTEM's capacity to detect hypercoagulability in patients undergoing thrombophilia screening, its potential impact on patient outcomes, and limitations.
methodsComprehensive clinical, laboratory, genetic tests, and ROTEM (EXTEM and INTEM) were conducted for 356 patients referred for thrombophilia screening at an academic hospital outpatient unit. Hypercoagulability was identified as a shorter clot formation time (CFT), larger alpha angle (AA), and greater maximum clot firmness (MCF), and was compared in patients with and without VTE. Statistically this was analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests with p < 0.05 considered significant.
resultsAmong 356 patients, 64.6% had previous VTE, with 76.9% experiencing one event, 14.3% recurrent (35.6% unprovoked, 64.4% provoked). 22.5% of patients were on anticoagulation. Those with VTE history exhibited significant alterations in EXTEM and INTEM parameters compared to those without (p < 0.001), showing decreased CFT and increased AA and MCF. However, receiver operating characteristic curves for these variables indicated that none were able to discriminate between those individuals with and without thromboembolic complications.
conclusionROTEM does not appear to be a strong discriminatory test. However, it can detect hypercoagulopathy in patients referred for thrombophilia screening. Abnormal ROTEM may indicate a higher risk for recurrence. However, this can only be determined in prospective cohort studies.
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.