Key result
The HMS Plus ACT monitor significantly overestimated activated clotting time compared to the i-STAT device during cardiopulmonary bypass, with a bias of 105 seconds and wide limits of agreement (±235 seconds).
Why the study?
Heparin sensitivity during CPB is assessed by activated clotting time (ACT), prompting an evaluation of reliability measures between two different ACT monitors and their relation to plasma heparin concentration.
Are ACT monitors reliable and accurate for measuring heparin anticoagulation during cardiopulmonary bypass?
Observational (n=20)
No
Are ACT monitors reliable and accurate for measuring heparin anticoagulation during cardiopulmonary bypass?
Mean Difference: 105
p-value: p=<0.001
ACT monitors demonstrate unacceptable bias differences and correlate with hematocrit rather than actual heparin concentration during cardiopulmonary bypass, questioning their reliability for anticoagulation monitoring.
Questions ACT reliability for CPB anticoagulation; leaves open need for validated heparin-concentration metrics in cardiac surgery.
The sensitivity to heparin during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is determined by patient-specific characteristics and is assessed by the whole blood activated clotting time (ACT). We aimed to examine reliability measures between two different ACT monitors using Bland–Altman analysis: bias should not exceed 50 ± 50 seconds for measurements performed during CPB or 10 ± 10 seconds before and after CPB. The ACT response should be linear in relation to the concentration of heparin in plasma. Twenty patients (n = 20) aged 20–80 years and admitted for coronary artery bypass surgery were enrolled to this clinical observational study . ACT values and antifactor Xa were sampled: 1) before induction of anesthesia, 2) after heparin bolus, 3) during CPB at the start of rewarming, 4) at weaning from CPB, and 5) after heparin reversal . The evaluation comprised the Hemostasis Management System Plus™ (HMS, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN) and i-STAT™ (Abbott, Point of Care Inc., Princeton, NJ). Bias for the HMS Plus™ vs. i-STAT™ was +105 ± 119 seconds for measurements during CPB and +2.8 ± 11.7 seconds before and after CPB. Associated limits of agreement for the observed bias were ±235 and ±23 seconds, respectively. Inter-device correlation of ACT values was .46 ( p < .001) during CPB; otherwise .48 ( p = .02). Both devices produced ACT values unrelated (<10%) to the measured heparin concentration. The use of multivariable regression analysis demonstrated an independent association between the ACT measurement and hematocrit, however, not with the plasma concentration of heparin. ACT monitors demonstrate unacceptable bias differences, combined with wide limits of agreement. The ACT response correlated with hematocrit, but not with the actual heparin concentration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nilsson et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Coronary artery bypass surgery (n=20). HMS Plus ACT monitor vs. i-STAT ACT monitor was evaluated on Bias between HMS Plus and i-STAT ACT measurements during cardiopulmonary bypass (MD 105 seconds, 95% CI ±235, p=<0.001). The HMS Plus ACT monitor significantly overestimated activated clotting time compared to the i-STAT device during cardiopulmonary bypass, with a bias of 105 seconds and wide limits of agreement (±235 seconds).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: