Evidence Hub

Endotheliopathy is Associated with a 24-hour Fibrinolysis Phenotype Described by Low TEG Lysis and High D-Dimer after Trauma: a Secondary Analysis of the PROPPR Study

R. Richter, Danielle Joiner, R. Griffin, J. Jansen, J. Kerby, C. Wade, J. Holcomb, J. Cardenas et al.

Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2022

168 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

Objectives: Determine associations between biomarkers of endotheliopathy, 24-hour fibrinolysis phenotypes and clinical outcomes after trauma. Background: The vascular endothelium is a critical regulator of hemostasis and organ function. The relationship between markers of endotheliopathy and fibrinolysis following trauma has not been evaluated. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of prospectively collected biomarker data in the Pragmatic Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) randomized controlled trial. We stratified subjects by 24-hour thromboelastography (TEG) percent clot lysis (LY30) and plasma D-dimer (DD) levels and evaluated differences in endotheliopathy biomarkers and clinical outcomes between subjects with one of four 24-hour fibrinolysis phenotypes: LY30 0.9–2.9% (LY30norm), LY30 >2.9% (LY30high), LY30 9.5 ng/mL and angiopoietin-2 level >3.6 ng/mL accounted for 64% of subjects who developed MOF. Conclusions: In a multicenter trauma cohort, subjects with a fibrinolysis phenotype characterized by low TEG lysis and elevated DD 24 hours after injury have significantly worse endotheliopathy and clinical outcomes. Our findings support mechanistic evaluations of the role of the endothelium in fibrinolysis dysregulation that may drive late-stage organ injury.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 168 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free