Brit Long1, Drew A Long2, Alex Koyfman3. 1. Brooke Army Military Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, 3841 Roger Brooke Dr, Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234, United States. Electronic address: brit.long@yahoo.com. 2. Brooke Army Military Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, 3841 Roger Brooke Dr, Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234, United States. 3. The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75390, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coagulation panels are ordered for a variety of conditions in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: This narrative review evaluates specific conditions for which a coagulation panel is commonly ordered but has limited utility in medical decision-making. DISCUSSION: Coagulation panels consist of partial thromboplastin time (PTT) or activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), prothrombin time (PT), and international normalized ratio (INR). These tests evaluate the coagulation pathway which leads to formation of a fibrin clot. The coagulation panel can monitor warfarin and heparin therapy, evaluate for vitamin K deficiency, evaluate for malnutrition or severe systemic disease, and assess hemostatic function in the setting of bleeding. The utility of coagulation testing in chest pain evaluation, routine perioperative assessment, prior to initiation of anticoagulation, and as screening for admitted patients is low, with little to no change in patient management based on results of these panels. Coagulation testing should be considered in systemically ill patients, those with a prior history of bleeding or family history of bleeding, patients on anticoagulation, or patients with active hemorrhage and signs of bleeding. Thromboelastography and rotational thromboelastometry offer more reliable measures of coagulation function. CONCLUSIONS: Little utility for coagulation assessment is present for the evaluation of chest pain, routine perioperative assessment, initiation of anticoagulation, and screening for admitted patients. However, coagulation panel assessment should be considered in patients with hemorrhage, patients on anticoagulation, and personal history or family history of bleeding. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Coagulation panels are ordered for a variety of conditions in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: This narrative review evaluates specific conditions for which a coagulation panel is commonly ordered but has limited utility in medical decision-making. DISCUSSION: Coagulation panels consist of partial thromboplastin time (PTT) or activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), prothrombin time (PT), and international normalized ratio (INR). These tests evaluate the coagulation pathway which leads to formation of a fibrin clot. The coagulation panel can monitor warfarin and heparin therapy, evaluate for vitamin K deficiency, evaluate for malnutrition or severe systemic disease, and assess hemostatic function in the setting of bleeding. The utility of coagulation testing in chest pain evaluation, routine perioperative assessment, prior to initiation of anticoagulation, and as screening for admitted patients is low, with little to no change in patient management based on results of these panels. Coagulation testing should be considered in systemically ill patients, those with a prior history of bleeding or family history of bleeding, patients on anticoagulation, or patients with active hemorrhage and signs of bleeding. Thromboelastography and rotational thromboelastometry offer more reliable measures of coagulation function. CONCLUSIONS: Little utility for coagulation assessment is present for the evaluation of chest pain, routine perioperative assessment, initiation of anticoagulation, and screening for admitted patients. However, coagulation panel assessment should be considered in patients with hemorrhage, patients on anticoagulation, and personal history or family history of bleeding. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Daniel Katz; Patrick Maher; Chloe Getrajdman; Joshua Hamburger; Shan Zhao; Jonathan Madek; Himani Bhatt; Matthew Levin; Klaus Görlinger Journal: Transfus Med Hemother Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 3.747