No abstract

Background:The assessment of clinical history is crucial before referring a patient for further laboratory testing. Bleeding assessment tools (BAT) are developed to standardize clinical evaluation. A small number of patients with congenital fibrinogen deficiencies (CFDs) have been evaluated with these tools without definitive results. Aims:We compared the adequacy of the ISTH-BAT and the European network of rare bleeding disorders bleeding score system (EN-RBD-BSS) to identify patients with CFDs. The correlation between the two BATs and fibrinogen levels and patient clinical grade severity was further analyzed. Methods: We included 100 Iranian patients with CFDs. Routine coagulation and fibrinogen-specific tests (fibrinogen antigen [Fg:Ag] and activity [Fg:C]) were performed. The ISTH-BAT and EN-RBD-BSS were used to assess the bleeding score (BS) of all patients. Results:The ISTH-BAT and EN-RBD-BSS median (range) were 4 (0-16) and 2.21 (−1.49 to 6.71), with a statistically significant moderate correlation between the two systems (r = .597, P < .001). In patients with quantitative deficiencies (afibrinogenemia and hypofibrinogenemia), the correlation between Fg:C and the ISTH-BAT was moderately negative (r = −.4, P < .001), while the correlation between Fg:C and the EN-RBD-BSS was weakly negative (r = −.38, P < .001). Overall, 70% and 72% of patients with fibrinogen deficiencies were correctly identified by both the ISTH-BAT and EN-RBD-BSS, respectively. Conclusion:These results suggest that in addition to the ISTH-BAT, the EN-RBD-BSS may also be useful in identifying CFD patients. We found a significant level of sensitivity for detecting fibrinogen deficiency in the two BATs, and bleeding severity classification correctly identified severity grades in almost two-thirds of patients.