Zanke B, Shojania A M
Department of Hematology, St. Boniface General Hospital, Winnipeg, Canada.
Am J Clin Pathol. 1990 May;93(5):684-9. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/93.5.684.
The sensitivity of the reagents for activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) test varies greatly. Consequently the physicians who prescribe heparin based on certain APTT ratios may order different doses of heparin and produce different levels of anticoagulation in their patients, depending on the sensitivity of APTT reagent used by the laboratory. The authors have been recommending that physicians in their hospital use a therapeutic range for heparinization based on the sensitivity of the APTT reagent and keep the APTT of patients within the range of APTT of pooled normal plasma containing 0.2-0.4 units of heparin per milliliter. Because the patient's response to heparin in vivo may be different from that of pooled normal plasma, the authors planned to compare the effect of these two methods of heparin monitoring on heparin usage and complications of heparin therapy. In a retrospective study, the authors reviewed the hospital records of patients treated with continuous intravenous heparin for the management of thromboembolic disorders during two periods: one period in which the laboratory used an APTT reagent with low in vitro sensitivity to heparin (LSH) and another period in which the authors used an APTT reagent with high sensitivity to heparin (HSH). The authors found that there were no significant differences between the incidence of bleeding or thrombotic complication in the two periods. Furthermore, they found that in both periods, the patients had received similar total doses of heparin during the first 72 hours of therapy. However, as was expected from in vitro sensitivity, the APTT of patients during the LSH period was significantly lower than those during the HSH period. More heparin would have been used during the LSH period compared to the HSH period of physicians were to use the APTT ratio method for monitoring the therapy. The authors conclude that using the therapeutic range for monitoring heparin therapy based on the heparin response of pooled normal plasma will result in a more comparable level of heparinization from year to year and from center to center than by using the APTT ratio method.
活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)检测试剂的灵敏度差异很大。因此,根据特定APTT比值开具肝素处方的医生可能会开出不同剂量的肝素,并且根据实验室所用APTT试剂的灵敏度,患者体内的抗凝水平也会不同。作者一直建议其所在医院的医生根据APTT试剂的灵敏度确定肝素化的治疗范围,并将患者的APTT保持在每毫升含0.2 - 0.4单位肝素的混合正常血浆的APTT范围内。由于患者体内对肝素的反应可能与混合正常血浆不同,作者计划比较这两种肝素监测方法对肝素使用情况及肝素治疗并发症的影响。在一项回顾性研究中,作者查阅了两个时期接受持续静脉输注肝素治疗血栓栓塞性疾病患者的医院记录:一个时期实验室使用对肝素体外灵敏度低(LSH)的APTT试剂,另一个时期作者使用对肝素灵敏度高(HSH)的APTT试剂。作者发现两个时期出血或血栓形成并发症的发生率没有显著差异。此外,他们发现两个时期患者在治疗的前72小时内接受的肝素总剂量相似。然而,正如体外灵敏度所预期的,LSH时期患者的APTT显著低于HSH时期。如果医生使用APTT比值法监测治疗,LSH时期相比HSH时期会使用更多的肝素。作者得出结论,与使用APTT比值法相比,根据混合正常血浆的肝素反应确定治疗范围来监测肝素治疗,每年不同中心之间的肝素化水平会更具可比性。