Seidel Holger, Kolde Hans-Jürgen
1 Centrum für Blutgerinnungsstörungen und Transfusionsmedizin (CBT), Bonn, Germany.
2 Department of Experimental and Clinical Hemostasis, Hemotherapy and Transfusion Medicine, Heinrich Heine University Medical Center, Dusseldorf, Germany.
Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2018 Mar;24(2):287-294. doi: 10.1177/1076029617699087. Epub 2017 Mar 21.
Monitoring of direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is primarily performed using the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). This assay is poorly standardized, reagent dependent, and not DTI specific. We compared aPTT, thrombin time (TT), and prothrombin time (PT) to drug levels obtained by the ecarin chromogenic assay (ECA). We analyzed 495 samples of patients with confirmed or suspected HIT on treatment with either argatroban (n = 37) or lepirudin (n = 80). Mean DTI levels ± standard deviation (SD) were 0.41 ± 0.36 µg/mL for argatroban and 0.20 ± 0.21 µg/mL for lepirudin. Results of aPTT were highly variable: 67 ± 22 seconds for argatroban and 55 ± 20 seconds for lepirudin. Significant correlations ( P < .01) were found between ECA-based DTI level and TT (argatroban, r = .820 and lepirudin, r = .830), PT (argatroban, r = -.544), and aPTT (lepirudin, r = .572). However, there was no correlation of aPTT with argatroban or PT with lepirudin concentration. Multiple regression analyses revealed that the TT predicted 54% of argatroban and 42% of lepirudin levels, but no significant impact was seen for PT or aPTT. The aPTT-guided monitoring of DTI therapy leads to a high percentage of patients with inaccurate plasma levels, hence resulting to either undertreatment or overtreatment. Knowledge of baseline values prior to DTI therapy and inclusion of clinical settings are essential for dosing DTIs when using aPTT. However, due to several limitations of aPTT, monitoring according to exact plasma concentrations as obtained by specific tests such as ECA may be more appropriate.
在肝素诱导的血小板减少症(HIT)患者中,直接凝血酶抑制剂(DTI)的监测主要使用活化部分凝血活酶时间(aPTT)进行。该检测方法标准化程度低、依赖试剂且不具有DTI特异性。我们将aPTT、凝血酶时间(TT)和凝血酶原时间(PT)与通过蛇毒凝血酶显色法(ECA)获得的药物水平进行了比较。我们分析了495例确诊或疑似HIT且正在接受阿加曲班(n = 37)或比伐卢定(n = 80)治疗的患者的样本。阿加曲班的平均DTI水平±标准差(SD)为0.41±0.36μg/mL,比伐卢定的平均DTI水平±标准差为0.20±0.21μg/mL。aPTT结果差异很大:阿加曲班为67±22秒,比伐卢定为55±20秒。基于ECA的DTI水平与TT(阿加曲班,r = 0.820;比伐卢定,r = 0.830)、PT(阿加曲班,r = -0.544)和aPTT(比伐卢定,r = 0.572)之间存在显著相关性(P <.01)。然而,aPTT与阿加曲班浓度或PT与比伐卢定浓度之间没有相关性。多元回归分析显示,TT可预测54%的阿加曲班水平和42%的比伐卢定水平,但PT或aPTT未显示出显著影响。aPTT指导下的DTI治疗监测导致很大比例的患者血浆水平不准确,从而导致治疗不足或过度治疗。在使用aPTT进行DTI给药时,了解DTI治疗前的基线值并纳入临床情况至关重要。然而,由于aPTT存在多种局限性,根据特定检测(如ECA)获得的精确血浆浓度进行监测可能更为合适。