Diagnostic performance of thromboelastometry in trauma-induced coagulopathy: a comparison between two level I trauma centres using two different devices

Purpose The implementation of a ROTEM(R)-based algorithm requires reliable thresholds to mirror a prothrombin time (PT) ratio > 1.2 and/or a fibrinogen concentration < 1.5 g l(-1). Our goal was to compare the diagnostic performances of two devices (ROTEM(R) Sigma and Delta, IL Werfen, Munich, Germany) in two level-I trauma centres for the diagnostic of post-traumatic coagulopathy. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of two registries across two periods of time: from September 2014 to December 2015 in Lyon-Sud university trauma centre and from April 2016 to January 2018 in the Grenoble Alps Trauma Centre. Accuracies of EXTEM and FIBTEM assays to detect patients with coagulation disorders were tested for each device using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Results Within the study period, 74 trauma patients in the Grenoble cohort and 75 trauma patients in the Lyon cohort had concomitant ROTEM(R) and standard coagulation testing on admission. No statistically significant difference was found between the two ROC curves for FIBTEM amplitude at 5 min (A5), FIBTEM maximum clot firmness, EXTEM clotting time (CT) and EXTEM A5 for ROTEM(R) Sigma and Delta to diagnose post-traumatic coagulation disorders. The best threshold for FIBTEM A5 to predict low fibrinogen concentration was 7 mm for each device. EXTEM CT thresholds to diagnose PT ratio > 1.2 were 78 s and 74 s for ROTEM(R) Sigma and Delta, respectively. Conclusions These results suggest that ROTEM(R)-based algorithms may be transposed from one trauma centre to another independently of the setting and the ROTEM(R) device in use.