Comparison of the resonance sonorheometry based Quantra® system with rotational thromboelastometry ROTEM® sigma in cardiac surgery – a prospective observational study

Table 5 Spearman’s rank-order correlation between ROTEM and Quantra

Comparison	r (95% CI) sample 1 (n = 37)	r (95% CI) sample 2 (n = 35)	r diff sample 1 to sample 2 (95% CI)	r diff p-value*
EXTEM A10 (hPa) vs Quantra CS (hPa)	0.93 (0.86 to 0.96)	0.94 (0.88 to 097)	− 0.01 (− 0.08 to 0.05)	1.00
FIBTEM A10 (hPa) vs Quantra FCS (hPa)	0.92 (0.85 to 0.96)	0.96 (0.92 to 0.98)	− 0.04 (− 0.11 to 0.01)	0.60
INTEM CT (sec) vs Quantra CT (sec)	0.71 (0.51 to 0.84)	0.75 (0.55 to 0.86)	−0.03 (− 0.28 to 0.20)	1.00
HEPTEM CT (sec) vs Quantra CTH (sec)	0.59 (0.33 to 0.77)	0.77 (0.59 to 0.88)	−0.18 (− 0.47 to 0.08)	0.68
(EXTEM A10 – FIBTEM A10) (hPa) vs Quantra PCS (hPa)	0.15 (−0.18 to 0.45)	0.80 (0.64 to 0.90)	−0.65 (− 0.99 to − 0.33)	0.0002
Platelet count (×1000/μL) vs (EXTEM A10 – FIBTEM A10) (hPa)	0.70 (0.48 to 0.83)	0.69 (0.46 to 0.83)	0.01 (−0.23 to 0.25)	1.00
Platelet count (×1000/μL) vs Quantra PCS (hPa)	0.37 (0.05 to 0.62)	0.69 (0.46 to 0.83)	−0.32 (− 0.65 to − 0.01)	0.28

95% CI, 95% confidence interval, r diff; difference between regression coefficient of sample 1 and 2
For ROTEM parameters EXTEM and FIBTEM, A10 refers to amplitude at 10 min
Quantra parameters: CS, clot stiffness; FCS, fibrinogen contribution to clot stiffness; PCS, platelet contribution to clot stiffness; CT, clot time; CTH, clot time with heparinase
* P-values for the comparison of correlations between samples were calculated according to Zou and Silver et al. [16] and adjusted for multiple testing by the Holm-Bonferroni method [17]

ISSN: 1471-2253