Cargando…

A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy

Prothrombin time (PT) is the leading test for monitoring oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT). According to the World Health Organization recommendation, International Normalized Ratio (INR) results obtained from the same patient samples with the major PT methods (Quick and Owren) should be the same w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Horsti, Juha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PAGEPress Publications 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3222250/
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/hr.2009.e15
_version_ 1782217190475300864
author Horsti, Juha
author_facet Horsti, Juha
author_sort Horsti, Juha
collection PubMed
description Prothrombin time (PT) is the leading test for monitoring oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT). According to the World Health Organization recommendation, International Normalized Ratio (INR) results obtained from the same patient samples with the major PT methods (Quick and Owren) should be the same when the therapeutic range is the same. In our study blood samples were obtained from 207 OAT patients. We analyzed the samples using two Quick and two Owren PT (combined thromboplastin) reagents for INR and assessed the sensitivity and true coagulation activity using a new-generation PT method. The INR values with the Quick PT and Owren PT methods were very similar around the normal range, while unacceptable differences were seen within the therapeutic range and at higher INR values. The Quick PT results as INR are clearly lower than those given by Owren PT and the difference increases toward higher INR. The new PT method functions well with both Owren PT reagents, and we can calculate the true active INR. The Quick PT methods show no sensitivity to coagulation inhibition measurement. The harmonization of the INR is an important goal for the safety of OAT patients. More accurate INR results reduce morbidity and mortality, and the therapeutic ranges should be similar worldwide. In this study we found unacceptable differences in INR results produced by the two PT methods. The new method showed a lack of sensitivity to Quick PT. For the global harmonization of OAT therapy and for INR accuracy only the more sensitive Owren PT method should be used.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3222250
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher PAGEPress Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32222502011-12-19 A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy Horsti, Juha Hematol Rev Article Prothrombin time (PT) is the leading test for monitoring oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT). According to the World Health Organization recommendation, International Normalized Ratio (INR) results obtained from the same patient samples with the major PT methods (Quick and Owren) should be the same when the therapeutic range is the same. In our study blood samples were obtained from 207 OAT patients. We analyzed the samples using two Quick and two Owren PT (combined thromboplastin) reagents for INR and assessed the sensitivity and true coagulation activity using a new-generation PT method. The INR values with the Quick PT and Owren PT methods were very similar around the normal range, while unacceptable differences were seen within the therapeutic range and at higher INR values. The Quick PT results as INR are clearly lower than those given by Owren PT and the difference increases toward higher INR. The new PT method functions well with both Owren PT reagents, and we can calculate the true active INR. The Quick PT methods show no sensitivity to coagulation inhibition measurement. The harmonization of the INR is an important goal for the safety of OAT patients. More accurate INR results reduce morbidity and mortality, and the therapeutic ranges should be similar worldwide. In this study we found unacceptable differences in INR results produced by the two PT methods. The new method showed a lack of sensitivity to Quick PT. For the global harmonization of OAT therapy and for INR accuracy only the more sensitive Owren PT method should be used. PAGEPress Publications 2009-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3222250/ http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/hr.2009.e15 Text en ©Copyright J. Horsti 2009 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (by-nc 3.0). Licensee PAGE Press, Italy
spellingShingle Article
Horsti, Juha
A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy
title A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy
title_full A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy
title_fullStr A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy
title_full_unstemmed A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy
title_short A sensitivity comparison of the Quick and Owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy
title_sort sensitivity comparison of the quick and owren prothrombin time methods in oral anticoagulant therapy
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3222250/
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/hr.2009.e15
work_keys_str_mv AT horstijuha asensitivitycomparisonofthequickandowrenprothrombintimemethodsinoralanticoagulanttherapy
AT horstijuha sensitivitycomparisonofthequickandowrenprothrombintimemethodsinoralanticoagulanttherapy