Task: Question Generation
Input (English): Fibrinogen concentrate is increasingly considered as a hemostatic agent for trauma patients experiencing bleeding. Placing a venous access is sometimes challenging during severe hemorrhage. Intraosseous access may be considered instead. Studies of intraosseous infusion of coagulation factor concentrates are limited. We investigated in vivo recovery following intraosseous administration of fibrinogen concentrate and compared the results with intravenous administration.', 'This study was performed on 12 pigs (mean [SD] body weight, 34.1 [2.8] kg). Following controlled blood loss (35 mL/kg) and fluid replacement with balanced crystalloid solution, intraosseous (n = 6) administration of fibrinogen concentrate (80 mg per kilogram of bodyweight) in the proximal tibia was compared with intravenous (n = 6) administration of the same dose (fibrinogen infusion time approximately 5 minutes in both groups). The following laboratory parameters were assessed: blood cell count, prothrombin time index, activated partial thromboplastin time, and plasma fibrinogen concentration (Clauss assay). Coagulation status was also assessed by thromboelastometry.', 'All tested laboratory parameters were comparable between the intraosseous and intravenous groups at baseline, hemodilution, and 30 minutes after fibrinogen concentrate administration. In vivo recovery of fibrinogen was also similar in the two groups (89% [23%] and 91% [22%], respectively). There were no significant between-group differences in any of the thromboelastometric parameters. Histologic examination indicated no adverse effects on the tissue surrounding the intraosseous administration site.
Output (English): Is recovery of fibrinogen concentrate after intraosseous application equivalent to the intravenous route in a porcine model of hemodilution?