Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: This research aims to compare fibrinogen results, obtained from the Clauss and PT-derived method on the Cobas t511 analyzer, in patients with specific categories of disease. A second aim was to determine the reference range for these 2 methods. METHODS: We retrospectively compared fibrinogen concentrations of 914 patients obtained by the Clauss and PT-derived methods on the Cobas t511 coagulation analyzer from the laboratory information system. Fibrinogen data was segregated into a healthy outpatient population and those populations with possible fibrinogen abnormalities including pregnancy, chronic illness, liver disease, heart and vascular diseases, and clinical suspicion of COVID-19. All data were analyzed using Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis. Reference ranges were determined from fibrinogen results of the healthy outpatient population who presented for a clinic check-up. RESULTS: All fibrinogen results were grouped and compared according to fibrinogen values (low, normal, and high), international normalized ratio (INR) values (<1.2, 1.2-2.0, and >2.0), and diagnosis. There were statistically significant positive correlations in all groups (P < 0.05), except for low fibrinogen values (P = 0.96). Results with INR value <1.2 had the highest correlation between 2 methods. CONCLUSION: The PT-derived method can be used alone in the Cobas t511 analyzer, especially in patients with an INR <1.2. Reported new reference ranges of the PT-derived method could help to determine and compare the clinical significance of fibrinogen methods. Further studies must be focused on the conditions in which PT-derived fibrinogen results should be directed to the Clauss test.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Güven et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: