Comparison of the Quantra QPlus and ROTEM Goal-Directed Transfusion Protocols in Cardiothoracic Surgery Patients: A Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the designed treatment protocols for the Quantra QPlus and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) with regard to transfusion advice.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

Maastricht University Medical Center, The Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with elective cardiopulmonary bypass surgery with a ROTEM test.

INTERVENTIONS: ROTEM tests were performed postoperatively for standard monitoring of coagulation status and clinical decision making. Simultaneously, a concurrent sample was analyzed for the Quantra QPlus.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

RESULTS

A total of 100 samples were analyzed using both the ROTEM and Quantra QPlus. Agreement between the transfusion advice for the ROTEM and Quantra QPlus protocols were compared using Cohen κ values for i.a. fibrinogen, platelet concentrates, and fresh frozen plasma (FFP). The agreement between ROTEM and Quantra QPlus was poor for overall transfusion (0.174) and fibrinogen transfusion (0.300). The agreement of cutoff values for fibrinogen clot stiffness for the Quantra QPlus and EXTEM A10 for the ROTEM was poor (0.160). The fibrinogen clot stiffness and FIBTEM A10 had a moderate agreement (0.731). A Cohen κ could not be calculated for the agreement of protamine, thrombocytes, FFP or cutoff values for these transfusions since frequencies included zero in these cases. The Quantra QPlus transfusion protocol advises transfusion in many non-bleeders, adjustments appear to be necessary. In a small group of cases in which clinically relevant blood loss was observed, the Quantra QPlus advised administration of transfusion products, whereas the ROTEM tests did not.

CONCLUSION

ROTEM-guided and Quantra-guided transfusion did not correspond in this patient group, and agreement was moderate at best. Specificity and sensitivity for transfusion within protocols were heterogeneous between the methods. More clinical research in high-bleeding risk populations is needed to determine the clinical impact of the different protocols.