Perfil de tromboelastometría rotacional (ROTEM) en una cohorte de asistolia no controlada

SHock-INduced Endotheliopathy (SHINE): A mechanistic justification for viscoelastography-guided resuscitation of traumatic and non-traumatic shock

Irrespective of the reason for hypoperfusion, hypocoagulable and/or hyperfibrinolytic hemostatic aberrancies afflict up to one-quarter of critically ill patients in shock. Intensivists and traumatologists have embraced the concept of SHock-INduced Endotheliopathy (SHINE) as a foundational derangement in progressive shock wherein sympatho-adrenal activation may cause systemic endothelial injury. The pro-thrombotic endothelium lends to micro-thrombosis, enacting a cycle of worsening perfusion and increasing catecholamines, endothelial injury, de-endothelialization, and multiple organ failure. The hypocoagulable/hyperfibrinolytic hemostatic phenotype is thought to be driven by endothelial release of anti-thrombogenic mediators to the bloodstream and perivascular sympathetic nerve release of tissue plasminogen activator directly into the microvasculature. In the shock state, this hemostatic phenotype may be a counterbalancing, yet maladaptive, attempt to restore blood flow against a systemically pro-thrombotic endothelium and increased blood viscosity. We therefore review endothelial physiology with emphasis on glycocalyx function, unique biomarkers, and coagulofibrinolytic mediators, setting the stage for understanding the pathophysiology and hemostatic phenotypes of SHINE in various etiologies of shock. We propose that the hyperfibrinolytic phenotype is exemplified in progressive shock whether related to trauma-induced coagulopathy, sepsis-induced coagulopathy, or post-cardiac arrest syndrome-associated coagulopathy. Regardless of the initial insult, SHINE appears to be a catecholamine-driven entity which early in the disease course may manifest as hyper- or hypocoagulopathic and hyper- or hypofibrinolytic hemostatic imbalance. Moreover, these hemostatic derangements may rapidly evolve along the thrombohemorrhagic spectrum depending on the etiology, timing, and methods of resuscitation. Given the intricate hemochemical makeup and changes during these shock states, macroscopic whole blood tests of coagulative kinetics and clot strength serve as clinically useful and simple means for hemostasis phenotyping. We suggest that viscoelastic hemostatic assays such as thromboelastography (TEG) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) are currently the most applicable clinical tools for assaying global hemostatic function-including fibrinolysis-to enable dynamic resuscitation with blood products and hemostatic adjuncts for those patients with thrombotic and/or hemorrhagic complications in shock states.

A prospective study on the correlation between thromboelastometry and standard laboratory tests - influence of type of surgery and perioperative sampling times

This prospective study aimed at investigating the influence of surgery type and perioperative sampling times on the correlations between rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) parameters and standard laboratory coagulation tests assessing comparable coagulation phases. Patients undergoing glioblastoma multiforme resection (GBR group, n = 60) or laparoscopic colon cancer resection (CCR group, n = 40) were prospectively included. Blood samples for ROTEM and laboratory assessments were consecutively drawn within 24-hours prior to surgery (baseline), and at 2, 24 and 48-hours after surgery. Correlations between perioperative ExTEM clotting-time (CT-exTEM) and prothrombin time (PT), and between FibTEM maximum clot firmness (MCF-fibTEM) with and plasma fibrinogen (pFB) concentration (Clauss method), were evaluated using the Spearman's rho test. The efficiency of recommended cut-offs of CT-exTEM (>75 s) and MCF-fibTEM (<10 mm) for predicting a prolonged PT (>15 s) or a low pFB (<2 g/L), respectively, was assessed using Receiver-Operator Characteristic curves. Correlations between CT-exTEM and PT were weak in GBR (rho = 0.25 [0.12-0.38], p < .01), and very weak in CCR (rho = 0.06 [-0.12-0.27]). Those between MCF-fibTEM and pFB, were strong in both GBR (rho = 0.69 [0.61-0.76], p < .01) and CCR (rho = 0.70 [0.60-0.78], p < .01). These correlations remained largely unchanged over the studied perioperative period in both groups. Recommended CT-exTEM and MCF-fibTEM cut-offs had poor sensitivity for predicting a prolonged PT (17% [8-31]) or a low pFB (46% [32-62]), without group-related differences. Neither the type of surgery nor the perioperative sampling times had a significant influence on the correlations between ROTEM parameters and standard laboratory tests. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02652897.