Key result
Hemoclot Thrombin Inhibitor (HTI) assays correlated well with LC-MS/MS for measuring dabigatran concentrations (r²=0.97), whereas aPTT methods showed poor correlation (r²=0.50-0.59).
Why the study?
Do functional assays (aPTT and HTI) accurately estimate dabigatran concentrations compared to LC-MS/MS in patients treated with dabigatran etexilate?
Observational (n=71)
Do functional assays (aPTT and HTI) accurately estimate dabigatran concentrations compared to LC-MS/MS in patients treated with dabigatran etexilate?
Effect estimate: r²=0.97
HTI assays accurately estimate dabigatran concentrations >50 ng/ml, whereas aPTT is unreliable and LC-MS/MS is required for lower concentrations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
HTI assays may support dabigatran monitoring above 50 ng/ml; leaves open LC-MS/MS need for lower levels or clinical decisions.
Dogné et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Dabigatran etexilate therapy (n=71). Hemoclot Thrombin Inhibitor (HTI) and aPTT assays vs. LC-MS/MS was evaluated on Correlation of dabigatran concentrations with LC-MS/MS (r²=0.97). Hemoclot Thrombin Inhibitor (HTI) assays correlated well with LC-MS/MS for measuring dabigatran concentrations (r²=0.97), whereas aPTT methods showed poor correlation (r²=0.50-0.59).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: