Key result
Anti-factor Xa monitoring achieved a significantly faster time to therapeutic range (P<0.01) and required fewer dose adjustments per 24-hour period (P=0.01) compared to aPTT monitoring.
Why the study?
Does anti-factor Xa monitoring improve time to therapeutic range compared to aPTT monitoring in patients receiving intravenous heparin?
Cohort (n=201)
No
Does anti-factor Xa monitoring improve time to therapeutic range compared to aPTT monitoring in patients receiving intravenous heparin?
Anti-factor Xa monitoring for intravenous heparin achieves faster therapeutic anticoagulation and requires fewer dose adjustments than aPTT monitoring.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Anti-Xa monitoring was associated with faster time to therapeutic range and fewer adjustments in cardiology patients; leaves open whether clinical outcomes differ.
The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of anti-factor Xa concentration versus activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) monitoring with multiple indication-specific heparin nomograms. This was a prospective, nonrandomized study with historical control at a large academic medical center. A total of 201 patients who received intravenous heparin in the cardiology units were included. The prospective cohort included patients (n = 101) with anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) monitoring, and the historical control group included patients (n = 100) who had aPTT monitoring. Patients in the prospective group had both anti-Xa and aPTT samples drawn, but anti-Xa was used for dosing adjustment. The anti-Xa cohort achieved a significantly faster time to therapeutic range ( P < .01) and required fewer dose adjustments per 24-hour period compared to the aPTT control ( P = .01). Results were consistent across heparin nomograms. The overall discordance rate between the 2 tests was 49%. No significant differences in clinical outcomes were observed. In summary, anti-Xa monitoring improved the time to therapeutic anticoagulation and led to fewer dose adjustments compared to the aPTT with multiple indication-based heparin nomograms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Whitman-Purves et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in Patients receiving intravenous heparin (n=201). Anti-factor Xa monitoring vs. Activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) monitoring was evaluated on Time to therapeutic range (p=<.01). Anti-factor Xa monitoring achieved a significantly faster time to therapeutic range (P<0.01) and required fewer dose adjustments per 24-hour period (P=0.01) compared to aPTT monitoring.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: