Oklahoma City VA Medical Center, 921 13th St., Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
Am J Clin Pathol. 2011 Jun;135(6):870-6. doi: 10.1309/AJCP60ZGXCJKRMJO.
Our purpose was to determine whether the in vitro (or "spiked curve") method for the therapeutic heparin range is an accurate and valid method for heparin monitoring. Many laboratories use the in vitro method for determining the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT)-based unfractionated heparin (UFH) therapeutic range as a more practical method to determine the therapeutic heparin range. Is this a valid method compared with the recommended ex vivo method? Plasma samples from patients receiving UFH and a normal plasma pool spiked with UFH were compared for 8 APTT reagents (18 lots). The in vitro curve has significantly increased lower limit and upper limit values and has a significantly widened range compared with the ex vivo method. When APTT values are compared with both methods, more samples are underheparinized with the in vitro curve method. The in vitro method is not a valid method to determine an accurate therapeutic heparin range.
我们的目的是确定治疗性肝素范围的体外(或“加标曲线”)方法是否是肝素监测的准确和有效的方法。许多实验室使用体外方法来确定基于活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)的未分级肝素(UFH)治疗范围,因为这是一种更实用的方法来确定治疗性肝素范围。与推荐的离体方法相比,这是一种有效的方法吗?比较了接受 UFH 的患者的血浆样本和用 UFH 加标的正常血浆池,用于 8 种 APTT 试剂(18 个批次)。与离体方法相比,体外曲线的下限值和上限值显著增加,范围显著加宽。当将 APTT 值与两种方法进行比较时,更多的样品在用体外曲线方法进行肝素化时不足。体外方法不是确定准确治疗性肝素范围的有效方法。