| Comparison between the automated TEG®6s and viscoelastic analyzer Haema T4 |
|
Nikolaus F. Hofmann1,2, Herbert Schöchl2,3, Johannes Zipperle2, Daniel Oberladstätter2,3, Felix Schmitt4, Gerhard Fritsch2,3, Johannes Gratz1,5 |
1Department of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Medicine, Division of General Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Experimental and Clinical Traumatology, AUVA Trauma Research Center, Vienna, Austria
3Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine AUVA Trauma Center Salzburg, Academic Teaching Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Austria
4Department of Anesthesiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
5Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany |
Corresponding author:
Johannes Gratz, Tel: +49 30 450 551 654,
Email: johannes.gratz@charite.de
|
|
Received: 20 October 2025 • Revised: 29 April 2026 • Accepted: 29 April 2026 |
|
|
| Abstract |
Background
Viscoelastic testing is increasingly being used for point-of-care coagulation management. This study compared the Haema T4 (HT4, Medcaptain®), a novel viscoelastic analyzer, with the TEG®6s (Haemonetics®), as they use similar assays but different measurement technologies.
Methods
Combined extrinsic–intrinsic activation (CRT), intrinsic activation (CK/kaolin), and fibrinogen polymerization (CFF/FIB) assays were performed using both devices. Activated clotting time (ACT), reaction time (r-time), kinetic time (k-time), and maximum amplitude (MA) were assessed under various experimental conditions.
Results
The TEG®6s delivered higher absolute values for ACT, r-time, and k-time but lower MA values than the HT4. A weak correlation for ACT was demonstrated between the devices for the CRT assay (r = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.08–0.59, P = 0.011), with wide limits of agreement (−23.4 to 146.6 s) and substantial bias (61.6 ± 43.4 s). In contrast, strong correlations for MA were demonstrated for the CRT (r = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.84–0.95) and CK/kaolin assays (r = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.91–0.97), with minimal bias (−1.2 ± 5.6 mm and −4.8 ± 2.3 mm, respectively). For the CFF/FIB assays, MA displayed a strong correlation (r = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.75–0.92) with a bias of −5.9 ± 8.6 mm.
Conclusions
Although several parameters showed a strong correlation, agreement between the HT4 and TEG®6s was limited, indicating that results between the devices are not interchangeable. Device-specific reference ranges must be determined and clinical outcome studies are required before incorporating the HT4 into clinical practice. |
| Key Words:
Bleeding management; Coagulation factor concentrates; Haema T4; TEG®6s; Thrombelastography; Viscoelastic testing |
|
PDF Links
Full text via DOI
Download Citation
