Cargando…
Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography
Thrombelastography (TEG)/thromboelastometry (ROTEM) devices measure viscoelastic clot strength as clot amplitude (A). Transformation of clot amplitude into clot elasticity (E with TEG; CE with ROTEM) is sometimes necessary (eg, when calculating platelet component of the clot). With TEG, clot amplitu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5349316/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26400661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029615606531 |
_version_ | 1782514452511326208 |
---|---|
author | Hochleitner, Gerald Sutor, Ken Levett, Caroline Leyser, Harald Schlimp, Christoph J. Solomon, Cristina |
author_facet | Hochleitner, Gerald Sutor, Ken Levett, Caroline Leyser, Harald Schlimp, Christoph J. Solomon, Cristina |
author_sort | Hochleitner, Gerald |
collection | PubMed |
description | Thrombelastography (TEG)/thromboelastometry (ROTEM) devices measure viscoelastic clot strength as clot amplitude (A). Transformation of clot amplitude into clot elasticity (E with TEG; CE with ROTEM) is sometimes necessary (eg, when calculating platelet component of the clot). With TEG, clot amplitude is commonly transformed into shear modulus (G; expressed in Pa or dyn/cm(2)) as follows: G = (5000 × A)/(100 – A). Use of the constant “5000” stems from Hartert's 50-year-old calculation of G for a normal blood clot. We question the value of calculating G as follows: (1) It may be questioned whether TEG/ROTEM analysis enable measurement of elasticity because viscosity may also contribute to clot amplitude. (2) It has been suggested that absolute properties of a blood clot cannot be measured with TEG/ROTEM analysis because the strain amplitude applied by the device is uncontrolled and changes during the course of coagulation. (3) A review of the calculation of G using Hartert's methods and some updated assumptions suggests that the value of 5000 is unreliable. (4) Recalculation of G for the ROTEM device yields a different value from that with Hartert TEG, indicating a degree of inaccuracy with the calculations. (5) Shear modulus is simply a multiple of E/CE and, because of the unreliability of G in absolute terms, it provides no additional value versus E/CE. The TEG and ROTEM are valuable coagulation assessment tools that provide an evaluation of the viscoelastic properties of a clot, not through measuring absolute viscoelastic forces but through continuous reading of the clot amplitude relative to an arbitrary, preset scale. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5349316 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53493162017-03-23 Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography Hochleitner, Gerald Sutor, Ken Levett, Caroline Leyser, Harald Schlimp, Christoph J. Solomon, Cristina Clin Appl Thromb Hemost Review Thrombelastography (TEG)/thromboelastometry (ROTEM) devices measure viscoelastic clot strength as clot amplitude (A). Transformation of clot amplitude into clot elasticity (E with TEG; CE with ROTEM) is sometimes necessary (eg, when calculating platelet component of the clot). With TEG, clot amplitude is commonly transformed into shear modulus (G; expressed in Pa or dyn/cm(2)) as follows: G = (5000 × A)/(100 – A). Use of the constant “5000” stems from Hartert's 50-year-old calculation of G for a normal blood clot. We question the value of calculating G as follows: (1) It may be questioned whether TEG/ROTEM analysis enable measurement of elasticity because viscosity may also contribute to clot amplitude. (2) It has been suggested that absolute properties of a blood clot cannot be measured with TEG/ROTEM analysis because the strain amplitude applied by the device is uncontrolled and changes during the course of coagulation. (3) A review of the calculation of G using Hartert's methods and some updated assumptions suggests that the value of 5000 is unreliable. (4) Recalculation of G for the ROTEM device yields a different value from that with Hartert TEG, indicating a degree of inaccuracy with the calculations. (5) Shear modulus is simply a multiple of E/CE and, because of the unreliability of G in absolute terms, it provides no additional value versus E/CE. The TEG and ROTEM are valuable coagulation assessment tools that provide an evaluation of the viscoelastic properties of a clot, not through measuring absolute viscoelastic forces but through continuous reading of the clot amplitude relative to an arbitrary, preset scale. SAGE Publications 2015-01-01 2017-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5349316/ /pubmed/26400661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029615606531 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Review Hochleitner, Gerald Sutor, Ken Levett, Caroline Leyser, Harald Schlimp, Christoph J. Solomon, Cristina Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography |
title | Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography |
title_full | Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography |
title_fullStr | Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography |
title_full_unstemmed | Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography |
title_short | Revisiting Hartert’s 1962 Calculation of the Physical Constants of Thrombelastography |
title_sort | revisiting hartert’s 1962 calculation of the physical constants of thrombelastography |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5349316/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26400661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029615606531 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hochleitnergerald revisitingharterts1962calculationofthephysicalconstantsofthrombelastography AT sutorken revisitingharterts1962calculationofthephysicalconstantsofthrombelastography AT levettcaroline revisitingharterts1962calculationofthephysicalconstantsofthrombelastography AT leyserharald revisitingharterts1962calculationofthephysicalconstantsofthrombelastography AT schlimpchristophj revisitingharterts1962calculationofthephysicalconstantsofthrombelastography AT solomoncristina revisitingharterts1962calculationofthephysicalconstantsofthrombelastography |