Lardinois Benjamin, Hardy Michaël, Michaux Isabelle, Horlait Geoffrey, Rotens Thomas, Jacqmin Hugues, Lessire Sarah, Bulpa Pierre, Dive Alain, Mullier François
Hematology Laboratory, CHU UCL Namur, Université Catholique de Louvain, 5530 Yvoir, Belgium.
Anesthesiology Department, CHU UCL Namur, Université Catholique de Louvain, 5530 Yvoir, Belgium.
J Clin Med. 2022 Feb 28;11(5):1338. doi: 10.3390/jcm11051338.
Continuous intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) is administered routinely in the intensive care unit (ICU) for the anticoagulation of patients, and monitoring is performed by the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) or anti-Xa activity. However, these strategies are associated with potentially large time intervals before dose adjustments, which could be detrimental to the patient. The aim of the study was to compare a point-of-care (POCT) version of the APTT to (i) laboratory-based APTT and (ii) measurements of anti-Xa activity in terms of correlation, agreement and turnaround time (TAT). Thirty-five ICU patients requiring UFH therapy were prospectively included and followed longitudinally for a maximum duration of 15 days. UFH was administered according to a local adaptation of Raschke and Amanzadeh’s aPTT nomograms. Simultaneous measurements of POCT-APTT (CoaguCheck® aPTT Test, Roche Diagnostics) on a drop of fresh whole blood, laboratory-based APTT (C.K. Prest®, Stago) and anti-Xa activity (STA®Liquid anti-Xa, Stago) were systematically performed two to six times a day. Antithrombin, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, factor VIII and lupus anticoagulant were measured. The time tracking of sampling and analysis was recorded. The overall correlation between POCT-APTT and laboratory APTT (n = 795 pairs) was strongly positive (rs = 0.77, p < 0.0001), and between POCT-APTT and anti-Xa activity (n = 729 pairs) was weakly positive (rs = 0.46, p < 0.0001). Inter-method agreement (Cohen’s kappa (k)) between POCT and laboratory APTT was 0.27, and between POCT and anti-Xa activity was 0.30. The median TATs from sample collection to the lab delivery of results for lab-APTT and anti-Xa were 50.9 min (interquartile range (IQR), 38.4−69.1) and 66.3 min (IQR, 49.0−91.8), respectively, while the POCT delivered results in less than 5 min (p < 0.0001). Although the use of the POCT-APTT device significantly reduced the time to results, the results obtained were poorly consistent with those obtained by lab-APTT or anti-Xa activity, and therefore it should not be used with the nomograms developed for lab-APTT.
在重症监护病房(ICU)中,常规给予患者持续静脉注射普通肝素(UFH)进行抗凝,通过活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)或抗Xa活性进行监测。然而,这些策略在剂量调整前可能存在较长的时间间隔,这可能对患者不利。本研究的目的是比较即时检验(POCT)版APTT与(i)基于实验室的APTT以及(ii)抗Xa活性测定在相关性、一致性和周转时间(TAT)方面的差异。前瞻性纳入35例需要UFH治疗的ICU患者,并进行最长15天的纵向随访。UFH根据Raschke和Amanzadeh的aPTT列线图进行局部调整给药。每天系统地进行2至6次同时测量一滴新鲜全血的POCT-APTT(CoaguCheck® aPTT检测,罗氏诊断)、基于实验室的APTT(C.K. Prest®,思塔高)和抗Xa活性(STA®Liquid抗Xa,思塔高)。检测抗凝血酶、C反应蛋白、纤维蛋白原、凝血因子VIII和狼疮抗凝物。记录采样和分析的时间跟踪情况。POCT-APTT与实验室APTT(n = 795对)之间的总体相关性呈强正相关(rs = 0.77,p < 0.0001),POCT-APTT与抗Xa活性(n = 729对)之间呈弱正相关(rs = 0.46,p < 0.0001)。POCT与实验室APTT之间的方法间一致性(Cohen's kappa(k))为0.27,POCT与抗Xa活性之间为0.30。基于实验室的APTT和抗Xa从样本采集到实验室结果报告的中位TAT分别为50.9分钟(四分位间距(IQR),38.4 - 69.1)和66.3分钟(IQR,49.0 - 91.8),而POCT在不到5分钟内即可出结果(p < 0.0001)。尽管使用POCT-APTT设备显著缩短了出结果时间,但所获得的结果与基于实验室的APTT或抗Xa活性所获得的结果一致性较差,因此不应将其与为基于实验室的APTT开发的列线图一起使用。