Estudio comparativo de equipos INR capilar “point of care” versus INR venoso, en pacientes en tratamiento con antagonistas de vitamina K
Background: INR is used to monitor the treatment with vitamin K antagonists. A strategy to reduce waiting times for sampling is to measure INR in a capillary sample using a portable point of care (POC) type coagulometer. Aim: To evaluate the correlation of CoaguChek Pro II™, Xprecia™ and microINR™ with venous INR measured at the clinical laboratory and their ease of use. Materials and Methods: Patients provided capillary and venous blood samples for parallel tests comparing Xprecia™ Stride with CoaguChek Pro II™ and with venous INR, microINR™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM and with venous INR. The devices’ ease of use was assessed surveying the sampling staff. Results: The three tested devices had good correlation coefficients with venous INR: CoaguChek Pro IITM 0.953 and 0.962; Xprecia™ of 0.912 and microINR™ of 0.932. The correlation coefficient of Xprecia™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM was 0.937 and microINR™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM was 0.976. Conclusions: CoaguChek Pro IITM, Xprecia™ and microINR™ results had a good correlation coefficient with INR measured at the laboratory. Our results indicate that, in the hands of trained users, POC-type coagulometers are reliable and acceptable for routine use in anticoagulant treatment control.
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Digital revista |
| Language: | Spanish / Castilian |
| Published: |
Sociedad Médica de Santiago
2019
|
| Online Access: | http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-98872019001001273 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background: INR is used to monitor the treatment with vitamin K antagonists. A strategy to reduce waiting times for sampling is to measure INR in a capillary sample using a portable point of care (POC) type coagulometer. Aim: To evaluate the correlation of CoaguChek Pro II™, Xprecia™ and microINR™ with venous INR measured at the clinical laboratory and their ease of use. Materials and Methods: Patients provided capillary and venous blood samples for parallel tests comparing Xprecia™ Stride with CoaguChek Pro II™ and with venous INR, microINR™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM and with venous INR. The devices’ ease of use was assessed surveying the sampling staff. Results: The three tested devices had good correlation coefficients with venous INR: CoaguChek Pro IITM 0.953 and 0.962; Xprecia™ of 0.912 and microINR™ of 0.932. The correlation coefficient of Xprecia™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM was 0.937 and microINR™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM was 0.976. Conclusions: CoaguChek Pro IITM, Xprecia™ and microINR™ results had a good correlation coefficient with INR measured at the laboratory. Our results indicate that, in the hands of trained users, POC-type coagulometers are reliable and acceptable for routine use in anticoagulant treatment control. |
|---|