• Thrombosis research · Apr 2016

    Comparative Study

    Accuracy of point of care coagulometers compared to reference laboratory measurements in patients on oral anticoagulation therapy.

    • Jean-Guillaume Dillinger, Thiziri Si Moussi, Natacha Berge, Claire Bal Dit Sollier, Patrick Henry, and Ludovic Drouet.
    • Department of Cardiology, Inserm U942, Lariboisiere Hospital, AP-HP, Paris Diderot University, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; Thrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Unit, Vessels and Blood Institute (IVS), Anticoagulation Clinic (CREATIF), Lariboisiere Hospital, Paris VII University, EA 7334 REMES, Paris, France. Electronic address: jean-guillaume.dillinger@aphp.fr.
    • Thromb. Res. 2016 Apr 1; 140: 66-72.

    BackgroundVitamin K antagonists (VKA) are widely prescribed throughout the world. Patients on VKA therapy require international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring of venous blood to ensure the response remains within the therapeutic window. Point-of-care devices (POC-INR) can safely and easily monitor VKA efficacy but need to be evaluated in practice. The aim of this study was to assess the precision and accuracy of a new POC-INR (Qlab) compared to the laboratory plasma technique and the CoaguChek-XS system.MethodsConsecutive patients on VKA referred to our institution were included. The study was designed to analyze 75 patients divided equally in the following subgroups: INR<2; INR=2-3; INR>3. INR was measured with an established laboratory method (INRREF) with an international sensitivity index of 1.0 and by two different POC-INRs: the Qlab (INRQlab) and the CoaguChek-XS systems (INRXS).Results82 patients treated mainly for atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism disease were included. Precision in therapeutic range (INR=2-3) of both POC-INRs was satisfactory with a coefficient of variation of 4.6% for the Qlab and 4.3% for the CoaguChek-XS. INRRef was 2.70 ± 1.36, INRQlab 2.59 ± 1.25 and INRXS 2.89 ± 1.37. Accuracy was low with the Qlab (R(2)=0.64) and higher with the CoaguChek-XS (R(2)=0.94). The mean relative difference from the INRRef was higher for the Qlab (18.4%) than for the CoaguChek-XS (12.9%). Clinical concordance was lower with the Qlab (78.2%) than with the CoaguChek-XS (90.0%).ConclusionThis study suggests that the Qlab has accuracy limitations with clinical consequences. New POC-INR devices require careful evaluation prior to clinical implementation.Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…