Agreement Between the TEG 6s and TEG 5000 Analyzers in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. Issue 1 (18th February 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Chandel, Abhimanyu; Desai, Mehul; King, Christopher S.; Patolia, Saloni; Raja, Anika I.; Singh, Ramesh; Dalton, Heidi J.
• Is Part Of: ASAIO journal. Volume 68:Issue 1(2022)
• Page Start: 73
• Page End: 78
• Publication Date: 2021-02-18
• Subjects: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation -- thromboelastography -- viscoelastic testing -- hemostasis -- thrombosis; Artificial organs -- Periodicals; 617
• DOI: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000001398
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1058-2916

Abstract

Abstract : Thromboelastography (TEG) evaluates viscoelastic properties of blood clot formation. The TEG 5000 analyzer is commonly used but prone to errors related to vibration or operator error. The TEG 6s was developed to overcome these limitations. Performance of TEG 6s compared with TEG 5000 has not been reported in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We compared the agreement between devices via a single-center prospective observational study in hospitalized adult patients on ECMO. Data for both devices were collected daily for 3 days after ECMO initiation. Standard tests for method comparison were used. Thirty-four matching samples were available for analysis. Minimal bias was noted; however, the limit of agreement was wide for TEG parameters. Visually, agreement was better for values within the reference ranges of the tests. Lin's coefficients demonstrated moderate correlation for reaction time and alpha angle (0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31–0.76 and 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40–0.78, respectively). Excellent correlation was demonstrated for kinetic time and maximum amplitude (0.88; 95% CI, 0.79–0.94 and 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79–0.94). The TEG 6s device may represent an acceptable surrogate for the TEG 5000 in patients on ECMO. However, limitations in reliability were noted, and the devices may not be interchangeable when results fall outside of the reference values.