Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Point-of-care viscoelastic hemostatic testing in cardiac surgery patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Point-of-care viscoelastic hemostatic testing in cardiac surgery patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Point-of-care viscoelastic hemostatic testing in cardiac surgery patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Point-of-care viscoelastic hemostatic testing in cardiac surgery patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
2018
Overview
PurposeThromboelastography and rotational thromboelastometry are point-of-care (POC) viscoelastic tests used to help guide blood product administration. It is unclear whether these tests improve clinical or transfusion-related outcomes. The objective of this study was to appraise data from randomized trials evaluating the benefit of POC testing in cardiac surgery patients. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients transfused with blood products and all-cause mortality.SourceMedline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library-Wiley), Web of Science, Biosis, Scopus, and CINAHL databases, as well as clinical trial registries and conference proceedings were queried from inception to February 2018.Principal findingsWe identified 1,917 records, 11 of which were included in our analysis (8,294 patients). Point-of-care testing was not associated with a difference in the proportion of patients transfused with any blood product (risk ratio [RR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.02; I2 = 51%; four trials, 7,623 patients), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.13; I2 = 5%; six trials, 7,931 patients). Nevertheless, POC testing was weakly associated with a decrease in the proportion of patients receiving red blood cells (RBC) (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85 to 0.96; I2 = 0%; seven trials, 8,029 patients), and heterogeneous reductions in frozen plasma (FP) (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.99; I2 = 87%; six trials, 7,989 patients) and platelets (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.90; I2 = 65%; seven trials, 8,029 patients). Meta-analysis of the number of units of RBCs and FP was not possible due to heterogeneity in reporting, however POC testing significantly reduced the units of platelets transfused (standard mean difference, -0.09; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.00; four trials, 7,643 patients).ConclusionOur review indicates that in cardiac surgery patients, POC viscoelastic hemostatic testing is not associated with a reduction in the proportion of patients receiving any blood product or all-cause mortality. However, viscoelastic testing is weakly associated with a reduction in proportion of patients transfused with specific blood products. Presently, the benefits associated with viscoelastic testing in cardiac surgery patients are insufficiently robust to recommend routine implementation of this technology.Trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD4201706577). Registered 11 May 2017.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
