Eirini Nikolaidou, Andriana Lazaridou, Christina Iasonidou, Alexandra Tsaroucha, Sophia Papadopoulou, Eleni Kaldoudi, Apostolos Sovatzidis, Despoina Kakagia
{"title":"它写在血块:严重烧伤的凝血评估。","authors":"Eirini Nikolaidou, Andriana Lazaridou, Christina Iasonidou, Alexandra Tsaroucha, Sophia Papadopoulou, Eleni Kaldoudi, Apostolos Sovatzidis, Despoina Kakagia","doi":"10.3390/ebj6030037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coagulopathy in severe burn injury is associated with complications and mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared 3 tests (EXTEM, INTEM, FIBTEM) of rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), a viscoelastic coagulation assay (VCA), with conventional coagulation assays (CCAs), fibrinogen, d-dimers and coagulation factors during the five post-burn days in survivors and non-survivors with severe burn injury, in order to correlate the results with burn coagulopathy and prognosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen survivors and ten non-survivors, with mean total burn surface area of 33.78% were included. CCAs measurements were abnormal, but unable to detect coagulopathy. At day 2, D-dimers and fibrinogen levels were statistically augmented for non-survivors. Regarding VCAs, FIBTEM MCF increased for non-survivors at day 2 and remained increased for the whole post-burn period. Furthermore, FIBTEM A10 and A20 at day 2 and EXTEM A10, EXTEM A20, EXTEM MCF, and EXTEM CFT at day 5 took abnormal values for the same group (<i>p</i> < 0.05). These changes were underlined through abnormal measurements of coagulation factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CCAs are poor indicators of coagulation status in burn injury, whereas VCAs are more sensitive markers, demonstrating coagulopathy and patients at greater risk of mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":72961,"journal":{"name":"European burn journal","volume":"6 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12285928/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It Is Written in the Clot: Coagulation Assessment in Severe Burn Injury.\",\"authors\":\"Eirini Nikolaidou, Andriana Lazaridou, Christina Iasonidou, Alexandra Tsaroucha, Sophia Papadopoulou, Eleni Kaldoudi, Apostolos Sovatzidis, Despoina Kakagia\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/ebj6030037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coagulopathy in severe burn injury is associated with complications and mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared 3 tests (EXTEM, INTEM, FIBTEM) of rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), a viscoelastic coagulation assay (VCA), with conventional coagulation assays (CCAs), fibrinogen, d-dimers and coagulation factors during the five post-burn days in survivors and non-survivors with severe burn injury, in order to correlate the results with burn coagulopathy and prognosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen survivors and ten non-survivors, with mean total burn surface area of 33.78% were included. CCAs measurements were abnormal, but unable to detect coagulopathy. At day 2, D-dimers and fibrinogen levels were statistically augmented for non-survivors. Regarding VCAs, FIBTEM MCF increased for non-survivors at day 2 and remained increased for the whole post-burn period. Furthermore, FIBTEM A10 and A20 at day 2 and EXTEM A10, EXTEM A20, EXTEM MCF, and EXTEM CFT at day 5 took abnormal values for the same group (<i>p</i> < 0.05). These changes were underlined through abnormal measurements of coagulation factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CCAs are poor indicators of coagulation status in burn injury, whereas VCAs are more sensitive markers, demonstrating coagulopathy and patients at greater risk of mortality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72961,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European burn journal\",\"volume\":\"6 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12285928/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European burn journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/ebj6030037\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European burn journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ebj6030037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
It Is Written in the Clot: Coagulation Assessment in Severe Burn Injury.
Background: Coagulopathy in severe burn injury is associated with complications and mortality.
Methods: We compared 3 tests (EXTEM, INTEM, FIBTEM) of rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), a viscoelastic coagulation assay (VCA), with conventional coagulation assays (CCAs), fibrinogen, d-dimers and coagulation factors during the five post-burn days in survivors and non-survivors with severe burn injury, in order to correlate the results with burn coagulopathy and prognosis.
Results: Seventeen survivors and ten non-survivors, with mean total burn surface area of 33.78% were included. CCAs measurements were abnormal, but unable to detect coagulopathy. At day 2, D-dimers and fibrinogen levels were statistically augmented for non-survivors. Regarding VCAs, FIBTEM MCF increased for non-survivors at day 2 and remained increased for the whole post-burn period. Furthermore, FIBTEM A10 and A20 at day 2 and EXTEM A10, EXTEM A20, EXTEM MCF, and EXTEM CFT at day 5 took abnormal values for the same group (p < 0.05). These changes were underlined through abnormal measurements of coagulation factors.
Conclusions: CCAs are poor indicators of coagulation status in burn injury, whereas VCAs are more sensitive markers, demonstrating coagulopathy and patients at greater risk of mortality.