Lämmle B, Eichlisberger R, Hänni L, Bounameaux H, Marbet G A, Duckert F
Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1979 Aug 7;109(30):1115-9.
Since monitoring of oral anticoagulation (OA) by prothrombin time (PT) is a source of standardization difficulties, the authors have tested another approach. 107 patients under long term OA were monitored by both PT and a colorimetric factor X assay (in vitro activation of factor X with RVV and assessment of amidolytic activity towards S-2222). The PT values were between 10 and 34% (therapeutic range 15--25%), and factor X levels were between 10 and 44% (therapeutic range 16--24%). The correlation between the two methods was highly significant (r = 0.65, p less than 0.001). In 68% of the patients the two tests gave the same information (55 subjects were adequately, 16 insufficiently and 2 over-anticoagulated). For a slightly broader therapeutic range (PT 15--30%, corresponding to 16--28% factor X) concordant information was obtained in 82% of the patients. During stable OA, PT and factor X assay gave very similar information. An advantage of the latter method is the possibility of automation, while a disadvantage is its insensitivity to factor VII.
由于通过凝血酶原时间(PT)监测口服抗凝治疗(OA)存在标准化困难,作者测试了另一种方法。对107例长期接受OA治疗的患者同时进行了PT和比色法X因子检测(用蛇毒凝血活酶体外激活X因子并评估对S-2222的酰胺水解活性)。PT值在10%至34%之间(治疗范围为15%至25%),X因子水平在10%至44%之间(治疗范围为16%至24%)。两种方法之间的相关性非常显著(r = 0.65,p < 0.001)。在68%的患者中,两项检测给出了相同的信息(55例抗凝充分,16例不足,2例抗凝过度)。对于稍宽的治疗范围(PT为15%至30%,对应X因子为16%至28%),82%的患者获得了一致的信息。在稳定的OA治疗期间,PT和X因子检测给出了非常相似的信息。后一种方法的一个优点是可以实现自动化,而缺点是对VII因子不敏感。