PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
November 29, 2017Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis378 citationsOpen Access

Laboratory testing in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants: a practical guide for clinicians

View Full Paper
JDJonathan DouxfilsWAWalter AgenoCSCharles Marc Samama

Structured PICO

P
Population
Patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)
I
Intervention
Laboratory testing for DOAC exposure and anticoagulant effects (anti-Xa or anti-IIa activity assays)

This review provides practical guidance on selecting and interpreting laboratory tests for patients on DOACs, highlighting anti-Xa and anti-IIa assays as preferred methods for quantitative assessment.

Limitations

  • Lack of prospective clinical trials to validate the safety and efficacy of proposed laboratory thresholds in relation to clinical decisions

Abstract

Click to hear Dr Baglin's perspective on the role of the laboratory in treatment with new oral anticoagulants SUMMARY: One of the key benefits of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is that they do not require routine laboratory monitoring. Nevertheless, assessment of DOAC exposure and anticoagulant effects may become useful in various clinical scenarios. The five approved DOACs (apixaban, betrixaban, dabigatran etexilate, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) have different characteristics impacting assay selection and the interpretation of results. This article provides an updated overview on (i) which test to use (and their advantages and limitations), (ii) when to assay DOAC levels, (iii) how to interpret the results relating to bleeding risk, emergency situations and perioperative management, and (iv) what is the impact of DOACs on routine and specialized coagulation assays. Assays for anti-Xa or anti-IIa activity are the preferred methods when quantitative information is useful, although the situations in which to test for DOAC levels are still debated. Different reagent sensitivities and variabilities in laboratory calibrations impact assay results. International calibration standards for all specific tests for each DOAC are needed to reduce the inter-laboratory variability and allow inter-study comparisons. The impact of the DOACs on hemostasis testing may cause false-positive or false-negative results; however, these can be minimized by using specific assays and collecting blood samples at trough concentrations. Finally, prospective clinical trials are needed to validate the safety and efficacy of proposed laboratory thresholds in relation to clinical decisions. We offer recommendations on the tests to use for measuring DOACs and practical guidance on laboratory testing to help patient management and avoid diagnostic errors.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Douxfils et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a6f9e5af44fa9f079dd1511https://doi.org/10.1111/jth.13912
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Urgent Need to Measure Effects of Direct Oral Anticoagulants2016 · 63 citations
  2. 2An optimised, rapid chromogenic assay, specific for measuring direct factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban) in plasma2010 · 116 citations
  3. 3The laboratory's 2015 perspective on direct oral anticoagulant testing2016 · 54 citations
  4. 4Recent guidelines and recommendations for laboratory assessment of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs): is there consensus?2014 · 113 citations
  5. 5Laboratory Testing in the Era of Direct or Non–Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants: A Practical Guide to Measuring Their Activity and Avoiding Diagnostic Errors2015 · 107 citations