Practice Trends of Fibrinogen Monitoring in Thrombolysis
AbstractThere is a lack of evidence or societal guidelines regarding the utility of fibrinogen monitoring during thrombolysis. The purpose of our study was to investigate the current use of monitoring fibrinogen levels during thrombolysis. A voluntary, anonymous online survey was sent to all physician members of the Society of Interventional Radiology, consisting of 23 questions related to practitioner demographics, thrombolysis protocol, and fibrinogen monitoring. There were 455 physician responses; 82% of respondents monitored fibrinogen levels during thrombolysis, of which 97% decreased or stopped tissue plasminogen activator based on the level. Self-reported estimates of significant bleeding events during thrombolysis were 1.86% in those who monitored fibrinogen and 1.93% in those who did not. Only 34% of all respondents report, in their clinical experience, having found low fibrinogen level to be correlated with bleeding events. There was no significant difference in self-reported major bleeding rates between practitioners who monitor and those who do not monitor fibrinogen. This high variability of clinical use of fibrinogen monitoring during catheter-directed thrombolysis is secondary to the paucity of scientific studies demonstrating its utility; further scientific investigation is needed to define the true utility of fibrinogen monitoring. View Full-Text
Share & Cite This Article
Kaufman, C.; Kinney, T.; Quencer, K. Practice Trends of Fibrinogen Monitoring in Thrombolysis. J. Clin. Med. 2018, 7, 111.
Kaufman C, Kinney T, Quencer K. Practice Trends of Fibrinogen Monitoring in Thrombolysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2018; 7(5):111.Chicago/Turabian Style
Kaufman, Claire; Kinney, Thomas; Quencer, Keith. 2018. "Practice Trends of Fibrinogen Monitoring in Thrombolysis." J. Clin. Med. 7, no. 5: 111.
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.