Why the study?
Measurement of a single coagulation marker may not provide a complete picture of hemostasis activation and fibrinolysis in patients with chronic cardiovascular diseases.
Observational (n=81)
Yes
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Patients with cardiomyopathy show increased PF1.2 suggesting thrombin generation, whereas patients with cardiac assist devices primarily show elevated D-dimers likely reflecting the intravascular device rather than hemostatic activation.
Measurement of a single marker of coagulation may not provide a complete picture of hemostasis activation and fibrinolysis in patients with chronic cardiovascular diseases. We assessed retrospective orders of a panel which included prothrombin fragment 1.2 (PF1.2), thrombin: antithrombin complexes, fibrin monomers, and D-dimers in patients with heart assist devices, cardiomyopathies, atrial fibrillation and intracardiac thrombosis (based on ordering ICD-10 codes). During 1 year there were 117 panels from 81 patients. Fifty-six (69%) patients had heart assist devices, cardiomyopathy was present in 17 patients (21%) and 29 patients (36%) had more than 1 condition. PF1.2 was most frequently elevated in patients with cardiomyopathy (61.1%) compared to those with cardiac assist devices (15.7%; P = 0.0002). D-dimer elevation was more frequent in patients with cardiac assist devices (98.8%) compared to those patients with cardiomyopathy (83.3%; P = 0.014). Patients with cardiomyopathy show increases of PF1.2 suggesting thrombin generation. In contrast, elevations of D-dimers without increase in other coagulation markers in patients with cardiac assist devices likely reflect the presence of the intravascular device and not necessarily evidence of hemostatic activation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miller et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Chronic cardiovascular disease (n=81). Cardiomyopathy vs. Cardiac assist devices was evaluated on Elevation of prothrombin fragment 1.2 (PF1.2) (p=0.0002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: