Estudio comparativo de equipos INR capilar “point of care” versus INR venoso, en pacientes en tratamiento con antagonistas de vitamina K

Estudio comparativo de equipos INR capilar “point of care” versus INR venoso, en pacientes en tratamiento con antagonistas de vitamina K

Background: INR is used to monitor the treatment with vitamin K antagonists. A strategy to reduce waiting times for sampling is to measure INR in a capillary sample using a portable point of care (POC) type coagulometer. Aim: To evaluate the correlation of CoaguChek Pro II™, Xprecia&...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roco,Ángela, Nieto,Elena, Quintana,Marianela, Muñoz,Jessica, Ortíz,Víctor, Moreno,Marcelo, Mejías,Fanny, Godoy,Gerald, Zambrano,Johana, Bruna,Stephanie, Bravo,Gabriela, Cabrera,Claudia, Salas,Patricio, Moena,Valeria, Leal,Bryan, Suárez,Marcelo, Quiñones,Luis A.
Lenguaje:Spanish / Castilian
Publicado: Sociedad Médica de Santiago 2019
Materias:
Acenocoumarol
Anticoagulants
International Normalized Ratio
Acceso en línea:http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-98872019001001273
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Background: INR is used to monitor the treatment with vitamin K antagonists. A strategy to reduce waiting times for sampling is to measure INR in a capillary sample using a portable point of care (POC) type coagulometer. Aim: To evaluate the correlation of CoaguChek Pro II™, Xprecia™ and microINR™ with venous INR measured at the clinical laboratory and their ease of use. Materials and Methods: Patients provided capillary and venous blood samples for parallel tests comparing Xprecia™ Stride with CoaguChek Pro II™ and with venous INR, microINR™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM and with venous INR. The devices’ ease of use was assessed surveying the sampling staff. Results: The three tested devices had good correlation coefficients with venous INR: CoaguChek Pro IITM 0.953 and 0.962; Xprecia™ of 0.912 and microINR™ of 0.932. The correlation coefficient of Xprecia™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM was 0.937 and microINR™ with CoaguChek Pro IITM was 0.976. Conclusions: CoaguChek Pro IITM, Xprecia™ and microINR™ results had a good correlation coefficient with INR measured at the laboratory. Our results indicate that, in the hands of trained users, POC-type coagulometers are reliable and acceptable for routine use in anticoagulant treatment control.

Ejemplares similares