Application of a TEG-Platelet Mapping Algorithm to Guide Reversal of Antiplatelet Agents in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury: An Observational Pilot Study

Are geriatric transfer patients with traumatic brain injury at risk for worse outcomes compared to non-geriatric? Propensity-matched study

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes between geriatric and non-geriatric patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) transferred to trauma center and effects of anticoagulants/antiplatelets (AC/AP) and reversal therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 1,118 patients with TBI transferred from acute care facilities to level 1 trauma center compared in groups: geriatric versus non-geriatric, geriatric with AC/AP therapy versus without, and geriatric AC/AP with AC/AP reversal therapy versus without.

RESULTS

Patients with TBI constituted 54.4% of trauma transfers. Mean transfer time was 3.9 h. Propensity matched by Injury Severity Score and Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS) head geriatric compared to non-geriatric patients had more AC/AP use (53.9% vs 8.8%), repeat head computed tomography (93.7% vs 86.1%), intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (57.4% vs 45.7%) and mortality (9.8% vs 3.2%), all p < 0.004. Patients on AC/AP versus without had more ICU admissions (69.1% vs 51.8%, p < 0.001). Patients with AC/AP reversals compared to without reversals had more AIS head 5 (32.0% vs 13.1%), brain surgeries (17.8% vs 3.5%) and ICU admissions (84.8% vs 57.1%), all p < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

TBI constituted half of trauma transfers and 10% required surgery. Based on higher ICU admissions, mortality, and prevalence of AC/AP therapy requiring reversal, geriatric patients with TBI on anticoagulants/antiplatelets should be considered for direct trauma center admission.

[Update on point-of-care-based coagulation treatment : Systems, reagents, device-specific treatment algorithms]

Viscoelastic test (VET) procedures suitable for point-of-care (POC) testing are in widespread clinical use. Due to the expanded range of available devices and in particular due to the development of new test approaches and methods, the authors believe that an update of the current treatment algorithms is necessary. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the currently available VET devices and the associated reagents. In addition, two treatment algorithms for the VET devices most commonly used in German-speaking countries are presented.

Point-of-care, goal-directed management of bleeding in trauma patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to consider the clinical value of point-of-care (POC) testing in coagulopathic trauma patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC).

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients suffering from severe TBI or TIC are at risk of developing pronounced haemostatic disorders. Standard coagulation tests (SCTs) are insufficient to reflect the complexity of these coagulopathies. Recent evidence has shown that viscoelastic tests (VETs) identify haemostatic disorders more rapidly and in more detail than SCTs. Moreover, VET results can guide coagulation therapy, allowing individualised treatment, which decreases transfusion requirements. However, the impact of VET on mortality remains uncertain. In contrast to VETs, the clinical impact of POC platelet function testing is still unproven.

SUMMARY

POC SCTs are not able to characterise the complexity of trauma-associated coagulopathy. VETs provide a rapid estimation of underlying haemostatic disorders, thereby providing guidance for haemostatic therapy, which impacts allogenic blood transfusion requirements. The value of POC platelet function testing to identify platelet dysfunction and guide platelet transfusion is still uncertain.