Key result
Point-of-care capillary INR shows a strong negative correlation with endogenous thrombin potential in VKA patients.
Why the study?
Different INR assays may vary in their results during Vitamin K antagonist treatment, necessitating assessment of their agreement with thrombin generation.
Do different INR testing methods, including point-of-care devices, accurately correlate with thrombin generation in patients on Vitamin K antagonists?
Comparison
Three INR methods (POC CoaguChek XS Plus capillary and venous, photo-optical Sysmex, mechanical Thrombolyzer) vs thrombin generation
Design
Cross-sectional study
Authors
Loading...
May support POC INR as thrombin generation surrogate in VKA patients; leaves open outcome validation before practice change.
Cross-Sectional (n=60)
No
Do different INR testing methods, including point-of-care devices, accurately correlate with thrombin generation in patients on Vitamin K antagonists?
Effect estimate: r = -0.80
p-value: p=<0.001
Point-of-care INR devices show high correlation with thrombin generation, confirming their validity as an accurate alternative to laboratory INR testing for patients on Vitamin K antagonists.
Riva et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional in Vitamin K antagonist treatment (n=60). Point-of-care INR testing (CoaguChek XS Plus) vs. Laboratory INR and Thrombin generation was evaluated on Correlation between Endogenous Thrombin Potential and CoaguChek XS Plus INR on capillary blood (r = -0.80, p=<0.001). Point-of-care INR testing using CoaguChek XS Plus on capillary blood showed a strong negative curvilinear correlation with Endogenous Thrombin Potential (r = -0.80, p<0.001) in patients on VKA therapy.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: