Why the study?
Does aPTT monitoring accurately reflect heparin concentration for guiding dosage adjustment decisions?
Does aPTT monitoring accurately reflect heparin concentration for guiding dosage adjustment decisions?
The correlation between aPTT and heparin concentration varies significantly by instrument, and laboratory versus bedside aPTT results often lead to discordant dosing decisions.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
aPTT monitoring yields inconsistent heparin dosing decisions; leaves open whether concentration-guided therapy improves outcomes.
The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the relationship between heparin concentration and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) results, define a heparin concentration-derived therapeutic range for each aPTT instrument, compare aPTT- and heparin concentration-guided dosage adjustment decisions, and compare laboratory- and bedside aPTT-guided decisions. In phase 1, 102 blood samples were analyzed for bedside and laboratory aPTTs and heparin concentration (used to establish aPTT therapeutic range). In phase 2, 100 samples were analyzed in the same manner. Correlations for aPTT compared with heparin ranged from 0.36 to 0.82. Dosage adjustment decisions guided by the aPTT agreed with those based on heparin concentration 63% to 80% of the time. Laboratory and bedside aPTT dosage adjustment decisions agreed 59% to 68% of the time. The correlation of aPTT with heparin concentration and agreement between aPTT- and heparin-guided decisions vary with the aPTT instrument. Decisions guided by laboratory aPTT results often disagree with decisions guided by bedside aPTT results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smythe et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: