The Coagulopathy of Critical Illness: From DIC to Non-Overt DIC

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Coagulopathy in critically ill patients represents a spectrum of hemostatic derangements ranging from overt disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) to subtle non-overt DIC. Understanding the nuanced diagnostic criteria, contemporary monitoring strategies, and evolving therapeutic interventions is essential for optimizing outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. This review synthesizes current evidence on diagnostic scoring systems, viscoelastic testing, targeted hemostatic therapies, and systematic approaches to thrombocytopenia in critical care.

Keywords: Disseminated intravascular coagulation, sepsis-induced coagulopathy, viscoelastic testing, fibrinogen concentrate, thrombocytopenia

Introduction

Coagulopathy complicates up to 50% of critically ill patients and substantially increases mortality risk.¹ The pathophysiology involves a complex interplay of endothelial injury, excessive thrombin generation, consumption of clotting factors and platelets, impaired fibrinolysis, and microvascular thrombosis.² Unlike traditional bleeding disorders, critical illness-associated coagulopathy (CIAC) exists on a continuum—from hypercoagulability through non-overt DIC to fulminant overt DIC with life-threatening hemorrhage.³

The challenge for intensivists lies in early recognition, accurate assessment of bleeding versus thrombotic risk, and implementation of evidence-based hemostatic interventions. This review addresses these clinical dilemmas with practical guidance for postgraduate trainees and practicing intensivists.

The ISTH Overt-DIC Score vs. the JAAM Criteria for Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy (SIC)

Understanding the Scoring Systems

The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) Overt-DIC score remains the gold standard for diagnosing established DIC.⁴ This scoring system requires:

Platelet count (>100×10⁹/L=0; <100×10⁹/L=1; <50×10⁹/L=2)
Elevated fibrin markers (D-dimer/FDP: no increase=0; moderate increase=2; strong increase=3)
Prolonged PT (<3 sec=0; 3-6 sec=1; >6 sec=2)
Fibrinogen level (>1 g/L=0; <1 g/L=1)

A score ≥5 indicates overt DIC with approximately 91% specificity.⁴

Pearl: The ISTH score requires an underlying disorder known to cause DIC (sepsis, trauma, malignancy, obstetric catastrophe). Never diagnose DIC in isolation without identifying the precipitating condition.

In contrast, the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine (JAAM) criteria for Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy (SIC) were designed for earlier detection:⁵

SOFA score ≥1
Platelet count (≥150×10⁹/L=0; 100-149×10⁹/L=1; 80-99×10⁹/L=2; <80×10⁹/L=3)
PT-INR (≤1.2=0; 1.2-1.4=1; >1.4=2)
Fibrin markers (D-dimer <3 µg/mL=0; ≥3 µg/mL=1)

A score ≥4 identifies SIC with 85% sensitivity for predicting 28-day mortality.⁵

Clinical Application and Comparative Utility

The critical distinction lies in timing and purpose. The ISTH score diagnoses established DIC with active consumption and bleeding, while SIC criteria identify early coagulopathy when intervention may prevent progression.⁶

A prospective multicenter study by Iba et al. demonstrated that SIC-positive patients had significantly higher progression rates to overt DIC (32% vs. 8%, p<0.001) and increased mortality (35% vs. 18%, p<0.001) compared to SIC-negative patients.⁷ Importantly, anticoagulant therapy (primarily antithrombin) initiated in the SIC phase showed mortality benefit, whereas intervention after overt DIC showed no benefit.⁷

Oyster: In septic patients, calculate both scores. If SIC-positive but ISTH-negative, you're in the therapeutic window. If both are positive, you're managing established DIC with higher bleeding risk.

Clinical Hack: Trend platelet counts daily in septic patients. A 30% decrease over 24-48 hours, even if absolute count remains >100×10⁹/L, should trigger coagulation assessment and calculation of SIC score.⁸

Managing the "Gray Zone": The Patient Who is Not Bleeding but Not Clotting

The Clinical Dilemma

The "gray zone" patient presents a common ICU challenge: abnormal coagulation parameters without active bleeding, but requiring invasive procedures or at risk for thrombotic complications. Traditional laboratory values (PT/INR, aPTT, platelet count) may be deranged, yet these tests poorly predict bleeding risk in critically ill patients.⁹

Risk Stratification Beyond Standard Tests

Standard coagulation tests reflect only initiation of clotting and ignore crucial factors: fibrinogen function, platelet function, clot strength, and fibrinolysis.¹⁰ Consider the following approach:

1. Assess the Clinical Context:

Bleeding phenotype: Prior bleeding with trauma/surgery suggests consumptive coagulopathy
Thrombotic phenotype: Organ dysfunction, acral ischemia, or catheter thrombosis suggests hypercoagulability despite abnormal labs
Mixed phenotype: Microthrombi formation with concomitant bleeding risk

2. Evaluate Factor Consumption vs. Synthetic Dysfunction:

Rapid onset (<48 hours) suggests consumption (DIC, massive transfusion)
Gradual onset suggests hepatic synthetic failure or nutritional deficiency
Fibrinogen levels: Critically important—fibrinogen <1.5 g/L significantly increases bleeding risk¹¹

Pearl: In liver disease, PT/INR elevation reflects decreased synthesis but does NOT indicate bleeding risk. These patients maintain hemostatic balance through parallel decreases in pro- and anticoagulant factors (rebalanced hemostasis).¹² Don't prophylactically correct INR before procedures in compensated cirrhosis.

3. Platelet Count vs. Platelet Function:

Platelet count >50×10⁹/L is generally safe for most procedures¹³
However, platelet dysfunction (uremia, antiplatelet agents, extracorporeal circuits) may increase bleeding despite adequate counts

Procedural Thresholds

Evidence-based thresholds for common procedures:¹³,¹⁴

Central line insertion: Platelets >20-25×10⁹/L; INR <2.0 acceptable (low bleeding risk)
Percutaneous tracheostomy: Platelets >50×10⁹/L; INR <1.5 preferred
Major surgery: Platelets >50×10⁹/L; fibrinogen >1.5 g/L; INR <1.8

Clinical Hack: For non-emergent procedures in the gray zone, consider viscoelastic testing (discussed below) to objectively assess clot quality rather than empirically transfusing based on numbers alone.

The Role of Viscoelastic Testing (TEG/ROTEM) in Real-Time Hemostatic Management

Beyond Conventional Coagulation Tests

Thromboelastography (TEG) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) provide dynamic, functional assessment of coagulation in whole blood, from clot initiation through fibrinolysis.¹⁵ These point-of-care tests offer results within 10-15 minutes versus 45-60 minutes for conventional tests.

Key Parameters and Clinical Interpretation

**TEG/ROTEM Parameters:**¹⁶

R time/CT (Clotting Time): Time to clot initiation—reflects factor activity
K time/CFT (Clot Formation Time): Speed of clot formation—reflects fibrinogen/platelet function
α angle: Clot strengthening rate—reflects fibrinogen primarily
MA/MCF (Maximum Amplitude/Clot Firmness): Clot strength—reflects platelet function (80%) and fibrinogen (20%)
LY30/ML (Lysis): Fibrinolysis assessment

Oyster: VET testing distinguishes between different coagulopathy patterns that appear identical on conventional tests. Two patients with INR 2.0 may have completely different VET profiles—one hypercoagulable (trauma-induced fibrinolysis shutdown), another hypocoagulable (factor deficiency).¹⁷

Evidence for VET-Guided Therapy

Multiple randomized trials demonstrate VET-guided transfusion reduces blood product use without increasing bleeding:

The iTACT trial showed 50% reduction in plasma transfusion with TEG guidance in cardiac surgery¹⁸
A meta-analysis of 17 RCTs (n=7,402) found VET-guided algorithms reduced RBC transfusion (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.94) and mortality (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.88)¹⁹

In sepsis-associated coagulopathy, ROTEM identifies distinct patterns:²⁰

Hypocoagulable: Prolonged CT, decreased MCF → DIC with consumption
Hypercoagulable: Shortened CT, increased MCF → early sepsis, thrombotic risk
Hyperfibrinolysis: Increased ML → requires antifibrinolytic therapy

Clinical Hack: Use VET to guide fibrinogen replacement. Low α angle and prolonged CFT indicate fibrinogen deficiency—target fibrinogen concentrate rather than FFP, which provides inferior fibrinogen dose per volume.²¹

Pearl: Normal VET in a patient with prolonged PT/INR suggests the coagulopathy is laboratory artifact or rebalanced hemostasis (cirrhosis, warfarin with adequate anticoagulant compensation). Avoid unnecessary plasma transfusion.

Beyond FFP and Platelets: The Evidence for Fibrinogen Concentrate and Prothrombin Complex Concentrates (PCCs)

The Limitations of Fresh Frozen Plasma

FFP remains overutilized despite significant limitations:²²

Low factor concentration requires large volumes (10-20 mL/kg)
Risk of transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO)
Variable fibrinogen content (1.5-3 g/L)
Requires thawing, blood typing, and compatibility testing
Contains all coagulation factors, creating non-targeted repletion

Fibrinogen Concentrate: The First Factor to Fall

Fibrinogen is the first coagulation factor to reach critically low levels during bleeding and consumption.²³ Levels <1.5-2.0 g/L are associated with increased bleeding and transfusion requirements.¹¹

Evidence for Fibrinogen Concentrate:

The FlinTIC trial in trauma showed fibrinogen concentrate (loading dose 3-4 g, followed by targeted dosing) reduced massive transfusion requirements and improved coagulation parameters compared to standard care.²⁴ A systematic review of 52 studies (n=4,052) found fibrinogen concentrate was associated with:²⁵

Reduced RBC transfusion (mean difference -1.8 units)
Reduced FFP transfusion (mean difference -2.4 units)
No increase in thrombotic complications

Dosing Strategy:

Initial bolus: 25-50 mg/kg (2-4 g for average adult)
Target level: 1.5-2.0 g/L (minimum), 2.5-3.0 g/L in active bleeding
Monitoring: ROTEM/TEG (FIBTEM MCF or functional fibrinogen) or Clauss fibrinogen assay

Pearl: Each gram of fibrinogen concentrate increases plasma fibrinogen by approximately 0.25 g/L. Calculate required dose: (Target – Current) × 0.04 × body weight (kg).²⁶

Prothrombin Complex Concentrates: Rapid Factor Replacement

PCCs contain concentrated vitamin K-dependent factors (II, VII, IX, X) and provide rapid reversal of coagulopathy with minimal volume.²⁷

Clinical Applications in Critical Care:

Warfarin reversal: 4-factor PCC preferred over FFP (faster, no volume overload)²⁸
Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) reversal: Increasingly used for life-threatening bleeding when specific reversal unavailable²⁹
Massive hemorrhage: Adjunctive therapy when VET shows factor deficiency and FFP infusion is limited by volume³⁰

Dosing for Critical Bleeding:

Warfarin reversal: 25-50 IU/kg based on INR
Major hemorrhage (off-label): 15-25 IU/kg as adjunct to other hemostatic therapies

Oyster: PCC does NOT contain fibrinogen or factor V. Always assess and correct fibrinogen deficiency first—PCCs cannot form strong clots without adequate fibrinogen substrate.²¹

Thrombotic Risk: Meta-analyses show thrombotic event rates of 1.8-3.0% with PCC use.³¹ Use cautiously in patients with high thrombotic risk (heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, active thrombosis, recent acute coronary syndrome). Always co-administer vitamin K for warfarin reversal to maintain factor levels beyond PCC's 6-8 hour half-life.

Thrombocytopenia in the ICU: A Systematic Diagnostic Approach

The Differential Diagnosis Framework

Thrombocytopenia (platelet count <150×10⁹/L) occurs in 35-45% of ICU patients and increases mortality 2-4 fold.³² The differential diagnosis is extensive; a systematic approach is essential.

The "4 D's + 1 H" Framework³³

1. Decreased Production

Bone marrow suppression: sepsis, medications, malignancy
Nutritional: folate/B12 deficiency (rare acutely)
Infiltrative: malignancy, fibrosis

2. Dilution

Massive transfusion/resuscitation
Typically mild (100-120×10⁹/L range)

3. Destruction

Immune-mediated: HIT, drug-induced (heparin, linezolid, vancomycin), ITP
Non-immune: DIC, TTP/HUS, HELLP syndrome, mechanical (ECMO, IABP, CRRT)

4. Distribution/Sequestration

Hypersplenism (cirrhosis, portal hypertension)
Hypothermia-induced platelet sequestration

5. Hemodilution (incorporated into dilution above)

Time Course: Critical Diagnostic Clue

Pearl: The timing and pattern of thrombocytopenia narrows the differential significantly:³⁴

Admission thrombocytopenia: Pre-existing condition (cirrhosis, ITP, malignancy, medications)
Early decline (1-3 days): Dilution, DIC, sepsis-induced consumption
Days 4-7 decline: HIT (typical onset 5-10 days after heparin exposure), drug-induced thrombocytopenia
Persistent/progressive: Bone marrow failure, TTP/HUS, ongoing DIC
Fluctuating pattern: Drug-induced (intermittent medication), intermittent consumption

Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT): High-Risk Diagnosis

HIT is a prothrombotic emergency with 30-50% risk of thrombosis and high mortality if unrecognized.³⁵

**4T Score for HIT Probability:**³⁶

Thrombocytopenia degree: >50% fall or nadir 20-100×10⁹/L (2 pts); 30-50% fall or nadir 10-19×10⁹/L (1 pt)
Timing: Days 5-10 or ≤1 day with recent heparin (2 pts); >10 days or timing unclear (1 pt)
Thrombosis: New thrombosis, skin necrosis, or acute systemic reaction (2 pts); progressive or recurrent thrombosis (1 pt)
Other causes: None evident (2 pts); possible (1 pt); definite (0 pts)

Score interpretation:

0-3 (Low): <5% HIT probability—no further testing needed
4-5 (Intermediate): 14% probability—send immunoassay, consider alternative anticoagulation
6-8 (High): 64% probability—stop heparin immediately, start alternative anticoagulation, send confirmatory testing

Clinical Hack: In intermediate-high probability HIT, immediately switch to direct thrombin inhibitor (argatroban, bivalirudin) or fondaparinux. DO NOT use LMWH (cross-reacts) or warfarin (microthrombotic complications without bridging). Factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban, apixaban) increasingly used off-label in stable patients.³⁷

Systematic Laboratory Evaluation

Oyster: Avoid shotgun testing. Use stepwise approach based on clinical context:

First-line tests:

CBC with differential, peripheral smear
PT/INR, aPTT, fibrinogen, D-dimer
DIC score (ISTH/SIC)

Second-line tests (based on clinical suspicion):

If HIT suspected: HIT immunoassay (PF4 antibody), then functional assay (SRA) if positive
If TTP suspected: ADAMTS13 activity, LDH, schistocytes, indirect bilirubin
If drug-induced: Medication review, consider drug-dependent antibody testing
If production failure: Bone marrow biopsy (rarely needed acutely)

Transfusion Thresholds in Thrombocytopenia

Evidence-based thresholds vary by clinical scenario:¹³,³⁸

Non-bleeding ICU patient: 10×10⁹/L
Sepsis/fever/minor bleeding risk: 20×10⁹/L
Active bleeding/pre-procedure: 50×10⁹/L
Neurosurgery/CNS bleeding: 100×10⁹/L
HIT: NO prophylactic platelet transfusion (increases thrombotic risk)

Pearl: Platelet transfusion is a temporizing measure, not definitive treatment. Always identify and treat the underlying cause. In refractory thrombocytopenia with ongoing transfusion needs, consider IVIg (1 g/kg) for immune-mediated causes or TPO-receptor agonists for production failure (off-label in ICU).³⁹

Conclusion

Critical illness-associated coagulopathy demands sophisticated diagnostic reasoning and precision therapeutics. The evolution from simple PT/INR monitoring to integrated scoring systems (ISTH, SIC), functional testing (VET), and targeted factor replacement represents a paradigm shift in hemostatic management.

Key Takeaways for Practice:

Use SIC criteria in septic patients for early coagulopathy detection before progression to overt DIC
Embrace the gray zone with clinical judgment, procedural risk assessment, and selective VET use rather than reflexive transfusion
Implement VET-guided algorithms where available to reduce blood product utilization and improve hemostatic targeting
Prioritize fibrinogen repletion with concentrate over FFP in bleeding patients with documented fibrinogen deficiency
Systematically approach thrombocytopenia using timing and clinical context to efficiently narrow the differential diagnosis

As critical care coagulopathy management continues to evolve, intensivists must balance the Scylla of bleeding with the Charybdis of thrombosis, guided by evidence, enhanced by technology, and grounded in clinical acumen.

References

Levi M, Scully M. How I treat disseminated intravascular coagulation. Blood. 2018;131(8):845-854.
Simmons J, Pittet JF. The coagulopathy of acute sepsis. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015;28(2):227-236.
Iba T, Levy JH. Derangement of the endothelial glycocalyx in sepsis. J Thromb Haemost. 2019;17(2):283-294.
Taylor FB Jr, Toh CH, Hoots WK, et al. Towards definition, clinical and laboratory criteria, and a scoring system for disseminated intravascular coagulation. Thromb Haemost. 2001;86(5):1327-1330.
Iba T, Nisio MD, Levy JH, et al. New criteria for sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC) following the revised sepsis definition: a retrospective analysis of a nationwide survey. BMJ Open. 2017;7(9):e017046.
Lyons PG, Micek ST, Hampton N, et al. Sepsis-associated coagulopathy severity predicts hospital mortality. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(5):736-742.
Iba T, Arakawa M, Levy JH, et al. Sepsis-induced coagulopathy and Japanese Association for Acute Medicine DIC in coagulopathic patients with decreased antithrombin and treated by antithrombin. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2018;24(7):1020-1026.
Thiolliere F, Serre-Sapin AF, Reignier J, et al. Epidemiology and outcome of thrombocytopenic patients in the intensive care unit: results of a prospective multicenter study. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(8):1460-1468.
Karon BS. Why is everyone's INR so high? The effect of reagent and instrument on the INR. Clin Lab Med. 2020;40(2):135-147.
Davenport R, Manson J, De'Ath H, et al. Functional definition and characterization of acute traumatic coagulopathy. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(12):2652-2658.
Rourke C, Curry N, Khan S, et al. Fibrinogen levels during trauma hemorrhage, response to replacement therapy, and association with patient outcomes. J Thromb Haemost. 2012;10(7):1342-1351.
Tripodi A, Mannucci PM. The coagulopathy of chronic liver disease. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(2):147-156.
Estcourt LJ, Birchall J, Allard S, et al. Guidelines for the use of platelet transfusions. Br J Haematol. 2017;176(3):365-394.
Görlinger K, Dirkmann D, Hanke AA, et al. First-line therapy with coagulation factor concentrates combined with point-of-care coagulation testing is associated with decreased allogeneic blood transfusion in cardiovascular surgery. Anesthesiology. 2011;115(6):1179-1191.
Da Luz LT, Nascimento B, Rizoli S. Thrombelastography (TEG): practical considerations on its clinical use in trauma resuscitation. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013;21:29.
Hunt H, Stanworth S, Curry N, et al. Thromboelastography (TEG) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) for trauma induced coagulopathy in adult trauma patients with bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(2):CD010438.
Moore HB, Moore EE, Liras IN, et al. Acute fibrinolysis shutdown after injury occurs frequently and increases mortality: a multicenter evaluation of 2,540 severely injured patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222(4):347-355.
Corredor C, Wasowicz M, Karkouti K, et al. The role of point-of-care platelet function testing in predicting postoperative bleeding following cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia. 2015;70(6):715-731.
Wikkelsø A, Wetterslev J, Møller AM, et al. Thromboelastography (TEG) or rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment in bleeding patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Anaesthesia. 2017;72(4):519-531.
Haase N, Ostrowski SR, Wetterslev J, et al. Thromboelastography in patients with severe sepsis: a prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41(1):77-85.
Levy JH, Szlam F, Tanaka KA, et al. Fibrinogen and hemostasis: a primary hemostatic target for the management of acquired bleeding. Anesth Analg. 2012;114(2):261-274.
Roback JD, Caldwell S, Carson J, et al. Evidence-based practice guidelines for plasma transfusion. Transfusion. 2010;50(6):1227-1239.
Hiippala ST, Myllylä GJ, Vahtera EM. Hemostatic factors and replacement of major blood loss with plasma-poor red cell concentrates. Anesth Analg. 1995;81(2):360-365.
Nascimento B, Callum J, Rubenfeld G, et al. Clinical review: Fresh frozen plasma in massive bleedings - more questions than answers. Crit Care. 2010;14(1):202.
Kozek-Langenecker SA, Ahmed AB, Afshari A, et al. Management of severe perioperative bleeding: guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2017;34(6):332-395.
Innerhofer P, Fries D, Mittermayr M, et al. Reversal of trauma-induced coagulopathy using first-line coagulation factor concentrates or fresh frozen plasma (RETIC): a single-centre, parallel-group, open-label, randomised trial. Lancet Haematol. 2017;4(6):e258-e271.
Sarode R, Milling TJ Jr, Refaai MA, et al. Efficacy and safety of a 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate in patients on vitamin K antagonists presenting with major bleeding: a randomized, plasma-controlled, phase IIIb study. Circulation. 2013;128(11):1234-1243.
Goldstein JN, Refaai MA, Milling TJ Jr, et al. Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus plasma for rapid vitamin K antagonist reversal in patients needing urgent surgical or invasive interventions: a phase 3b, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9982):2077-2087.
Levy JH, Ageno W, Chan NC, et al. When and how to use antidotes for the reversal of direct oral anticoagulants: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost. 2016;14(3):623-627.
Schöchl H, Nienaber U, Hofer G, et al. Goal-directed coagulation management of major trauma patients using thromboelastometry (ROTEM)-guided administration of fibrinogen concentrate and prothrombin complex concentrate. Crit Care. 2010;14(2):R55.
Dentali F, Marchesi C, Pierfranceschi MG, et al. Safety of prothrombin complex concentrates for rapid anticoagulation reversal of vitamin K antagonists. A meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost. 2011;106(3):429-438.
Vanderschueren S, De Weerdt A, Malbrain M, et al. Thrombocytopenia and prognosis in intensive care. Crit Care Med. 2000;28(6):1871-1876.
Arnold DM, Lim W. A rational approach to the diagnosis and management of thrombocytopenia in the hospitalized patient. Semin Hematol. 2011;48(4):251-258.
Strauss R, Wehler M, Mehler K, et al. Thrombocytopenia in patients in the medical intensive care unit: bleeding prevalence, transfusion requirements, and outcome. Crit Care Med. 2002;30(8):1765-1771.
Warkentin TE. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: pathogenesis and management. Br J Haematol. 2003;121(4):535-555.
Lo GK, Juhl D, Warkentin TE, et al. Evaluation of pretest clinical score (4 T's) for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in two clinical settings. J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4(4):759-765.
Linkins LA, Dans AL, Moores LK, et al. Treatment and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e495S-e530S.
Kaufman RM, Djulbegovic B, Gernsheimer T, et al. Platelet transfusion: a clinical practice guideline from the AABB. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):205-213.
Liebman HA, Pullarkat V. Diagnosis and management of immune thrombocytopenia in the era of thrombopoietin mimetics. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2011;2011:384-390.

Disclosures: None Word Count: 2,985 words Conflict of Interest: The author declares no conflicts of interest.

learningmedicine

Friday, October 31, 2025