3-Factor Vs. 4-Factor PCC in Coagulopathy of Trauma: Four is Better Than Three

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid



Coagulopathy of trauma(COT) is common and highly lethal. Prothrombin complex concentrate(PCC) has been advocated for correction of COT. However, the difference in efficacy between 3-factor PCC(3-PCC) vs. 4-factor PCC(4-PCC) remains unclear. The aim of our study was to compare efficacy of 3-PCC vs. 4-PCC in COT.


5-year(2013-2017) review of coagulopathic trauma patients at our Level-I trauma center who received 3- or 4-PCC. Patients were divided into two groups(4-PCC and 3-PCC) and matched in 1:1 ratio using propensity-score-matching for demographics, injury parameters, admission vitals and hematological parameters. Primary outcomes were time to correction of INR, blood products transfusion, thromboembolic complications, and mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital-LOS, ICU-LOS, cost of therapy, and total hospital cost.


657 patients met inclusion criteria of which 250 patients(4-PCC:125; 3-PCC:125) were matched. The mean age was 50 ± 19.4y, 64% were male, and median-ISS was 24[15-33]. 4-PCC was associated with accelerated correction of INR(365mins vs. 428mins,p  =  0.01), decrease in pRBC(7units vs. 10units,p  =  0.04) and FFP(6units vs. 8units,p  =  0.03) transfused. There was no difference in platelet transfusion, thromboembolic complications, mortality, hospital and ICU-LOS. 4-PCC was associated with higher cost of PCC therapy, and lower cost of transfusion. There was no difference regarding the total hospital cost between the two groups.


Compared to 3-factor PCC, the use of 4-factor PCC is associated with a rapid reversal of INR and reduction in transfusion requirement without increasing the overall hospital cost or the risk of thromboembolic events. 4-PCC may be preferred as an adjunct for the resuscitation of coagulopathic trauma patients.

Level of Evidence:

Level III, Therapeutic studies.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles