Comparison of Protective Effects of Recombinant Antithrombin Gamma and Plasma-Derived Antithrombin on Sepsis-Induced Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation and Multiple Organ Failure

Figures

• 

  Figure 1.. Patient enrollment in this study. AT: antithrombin, AT group: plasma-derived antithrombin group, rAT group: recombinant antithrombin gamma group, DIC: disseminated intravascular coagulation.

• 

  Figure 2.. Changes in plasma antithrombin levels during the observation period. Baseline plasma AT levels were approximately 40% in the 2 groups. However, the increment with supplementation in the rAT group was significantly larger than that in the AT group (P = 0.036), as was the maximum plasma AT level and the area under the curve of plasma AT level from day 0 to day 4 (P = 0.022, P = 0.003, respectively). AT: antithrombin, AT group: plasma-derived antithrombin group, rAT group: recombinant antithrombin gamma group.

• 

  Figure 3.. Changes in mSOFA score (A) and JAAM-DIC score (B). The baseline values of both scores were similar between the AT and rAT groups. However, the rAT group achieved significantly larger decrements in both mSOFA and JAAM-DIC scores than the AT group (P = 0.005 and P = 0.042, respectively). *P < 0.01 versus each score in the rAT group on days 3 and 6. #P < 0.05 versus the mSOFA score in the AT group on day 0. mSOFA: modified sequential organ failure assessment, JAAM-DIC: Japanese Association for Acute Medicine-disseminated intravascular coagulation, AT group: plasma-derived antithrombin group, rAT group: recombinant antithrombin gamma group.

• 

  Figure 4.. DIC recovery rate. Although the difference between the 2 groups was not statistically significant, the recovery rate in the rAT group was almost twice that in the AT group on each day. The results are presented as the DIC recovery rate. AT group: plasma-derived antithrombin group, rAT group: recombinant antithrombin gamma group.