A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Effectiveness of Different Fibrinogen Preparations in Restoring Clot Firmness
- PMID: 39383100
- DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000007201
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Effectiveness of Different Fibrinogen Preparations in Restoring Clot Firmness
Abstract
Background: Different preparations of fibrinogen concentrate are currently available. Two in vitro studies demonstrated the superiority of FibCLOT (LFB) in increasing clot firmness with respect to RiaSTAP (CSL Behring). The present trial involved a clinical model to test the hypothesis of superiority, with the increase in clot firmness as the primary end point.
Methods: Forty cardiac surgery patients were randomly allocated to receive a dose of 30 mg/kg FibCLOT or RiaSTAP after protamine administration in the presence of microvascular bleeding and a FIBTEM maximum clot firmness (MCF) <10 mm. Viscoelastic parameters were measured before and after fibrinogen supplementation: FIBTEM MCF, EXTEM MCF, and EXTEM clotting time (CT).
Results: The mean increase in FIBTEM MCF was 4 ± 1.2 mm (mean and standard deviation) in the FibCLOT group and 4 ± 1.6 mm in the RiaSTAP group ( P = 1.000); the mean decrease in CT was 11. 2 ± 12.2 (mean and standard deviation) seconds in the FibCLOT group and 14. 8 ± 13 seconds in the RiaSTAP group ( P = .372). In both groups, fibrinogen supplementation induced a significant ( P = .001) increase in the FIBTEM MCF and EXTEM CT. The proportions of patients who did not experience an increase of 4 mm in the RiaSTAP group and the FibCLOT group were not statistically significantly higher (35% vs 20%, respectively, relative risk 2.15, 95% confidence interval 0.52-9.00, P = .288).
Conclusions: In contrast to previous in vitro studies, we found that the effect of FibCLOT on MCF and CT was not significantly greater than that of RiaSTAP in cardiac surgery patients. Further studies in other clinical settings are warranted.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05780125.
Copyright © 2025 International Anesthesia Research Society.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest, Funding: Please see DISCLOSURES at the end of this article.
References
-
- Boer C, Meesters MI, Milojevic M, et al. Task Force on Patient Blood Management for Adult Cardiac Surgery of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and the European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology (EACTA). 2017 EACTS/EACTA guidelines on patient blood management for adult cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2018; 32:88–120.
-
- Raphael J, Mazer CD, Subramani S, et al. Society of cardiovascular anesthesiologists clinical practice improvement advisory for management of perioperative bleeding and hemostasis in cardiac surgery patients. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2019;33:2887–2899.
-
- Scolletta S, Simioni P, Campagnolo V, et al.; Granducato Research Group. Patient blood management in cardiac surgery: the “granducato algorithm.” Int J Cardiol. 2019;289:37–42.
-
- Weber CF, Görlinger K, Meininger D, et al. Point-of-care testing: a prospective, randomized clinical trial of efficacy in coagulopathic cardiac surgery patients. Anesthesiology. 2012;117:531–547.
-
- Groene P, Wiederkehr T, Kammerer T, et al. Comparison of two different fibrinogen concentrates in an in vitro model of dilutional coagulopathy. Transfus Med Hemother. 2020;47:167–174.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
