Download PDF
Thromb Haemost 2009; 102(04): 779-786
DOI: 10.1160/TH09-03-0157
New Technologies, Diagnostic Tools and Drugs
Schattauer GmbH

Is perioperative point-of-care prothrombin time testing accurate compared to the standard laboratory test?

Natalie Urwyler
1   University Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
,
Lukas P. Staub
2   NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
,
Dominik Beran
1   University Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
,
Marcus Deplazes
1   University Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
,
Sarah J. Lord
2   NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
3   Screening and Test Evaluation Program, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
,
Lorenzo Alberio
4   University Department of Hematology, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
,
Lorenz Theiler
1   University Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
,
Robert Greif
1   University Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 09 March 2009

Accepted after major revision: 22 July 2009

Publication Date:
24 November 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

There is no accepted way of measuring prothrombin time without time loss for patients undergoing major surgery who are at risk of intraoperative dilution and consumption coagulopathy due to bleeding and volume replacement with crystalloids or colloids. Decisions to transfuse fresh frozen plasma and procoagulatory drugs have to rely on clinical judgment in these situations. Point-of-care devices are considerably faster than the standard laboratory methods. In this study we assessed the accuracy of a Point-of-care (PoC) device measuring prothrombin time compared to the standard laboratory method. Patients undergoing major surgery and intensive care unit patients were included. PoC prothrombin time was measured by CoaguChek® XS Plus (Roche Diagnostics, Switzerland). PoC and reference tests were performed independently and interpreted under blinded conditions. Using a cut-off prothrombin time of 50%, we calculated diagnostic accuracy measures, plotted a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and tested for equivalence between the two methods. PoC sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI 77%, 100%) and 95% (95% CI 91%, 98%) respectively. The negative likelihood ratio was 0.05 (95% CI 0.01, 0.32). The positive likelihood ratio was 19.57 (95% CI 10.62, 36.06). The area under the ROC curve was 0.988. Equivalence between the two methods was confirmed. CoaguChek® XS Plus is a rapid and highly accurate test compared with the reference test. These findings suggest that PoC testing will be useful for monitoring intraoperative prothrombin time when coagulopathy is suspected. It could lead to a more rational use of expensive and limited blood bank resources.

Keywords

Point-of-care - prothrombin time - coagulation - anaesthesiology - blood loss

Footnote: Received from the University Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Bern, Switzerland.


 

  • References

  • 1 Practice guidelines for perioperative blood transfusion and adjuvant therapies: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on perioperative blood transfusion and adjuvant therapies. Anesthesiology 2006; 105: 198-208.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Shaz BH, Dente CJ, Harris RS. et al. Transfusion management of trauma patients. Anesth Analg 2009; 108: 1760-1768.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 O’Shaughnessy DF, Atterbury C, Bolton PMaggs. et al. Guidelines for the use of fresh-frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate and cryosupernatant. Br J Haematol 2004; 126: 11-28.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bundesaerztekammer. Cross-sectional Guidelines for Therapy with Blood Components and Plasma Derivatives [document on the internet]. Available at: www.bundesaerztekammer.de/downloads/LeitCrossBloodComponents4ed.pdf Accessed: May 5 2009.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ruhl H, Bein G, Sachs UJ. Transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease. Transfus Med Rev 2009; 23: 62-71.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Marik PE, Corwin HL. Acute lung injury following blood transfusion: expanding the definition. Crit Care Med 2008; 36: 3080-3084.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Edgren G, Hjalgrim H, Reilly M. et al. Risk of cancer after blood transfusion from donors with subclinical cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2007; 369: 1724-1730.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Stroncek DF, Rebulla P. Platelet transfusions. Lancet 2007; 370: 427-438.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Brander L, Reil A, Bux J. et al. Severe transfusionrelated acute lung injury. Anesth Analg 2005; 101: 499-501.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Norda R, Tynell E, Akerblom O. Cumulative risks of early fresh frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate and platelet transfusion in Europe. J Trauma 2006; 60 (Suppl. 06) S41-S45.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 MacLennan S, Williamson LM. Risks of fresh frozen plasma and platelets. J Trauma 2006; 60 (Suppl. 06) S46-S50.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Jones J. Abuse of fresh frozen plasma. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1987; 295: 287.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Spence RK. Surgical red blood cell transfusion practice policies. Blood Management Practice Guidelines Conference. Am J Surg 1995; 170 (6A Suppl): 3S-15S.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Practice Guidelines for blood component therapy: A report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Blood Component Therapy. Anesthesiology 1996; 84: 732-747.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Spahn DR, Moch H, Hofmann A. et al. Patient blood management: the pragmatic solution for the problems with blood transfusions. Anesthesiology 2008; 109: 951-953.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kawai A, Kadota H, Yamaguchi U. et al. Blood loss and transfusion associated with musculoskeletal tumor surgery. J Surg Oncol 2005; 92: 52-58.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Gottfried ON, Schmidt MH, Stevens EA. Embolization of sacral tumors. Neurosurg Focus 2003; 15: E4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Owen RJ. Embolization of musculoskeletal tumors. Radiol Clin North Am 2008; 46: 535-543 vi.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Lier H, Krep H, Schroeder S. et al. Preconditions of hemostasis in trauma: a review. The influence of acidosis, hypocalcemia, anemia, and hypothermia on functional hemostasis in trauma. J Trauma 2008; 65: 951-960.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Duke University Regional Referral Laboratory Services. Clinical Coagulation laboratory. Available at: www.pathology.mc.duke.edu/coag/TAT.htm Accessed July 4 2009.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Ketchum L, Hess JR, Hiippala S. Indications for early fresh frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate, and platelet transfusion in trauma. J Trauma 2006; 60 (Suppl. 06) S51-S58.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Toulon P, Ozier Y, Ankri A. et al. Point-of-care versus central laboratory coagulation testing during haemorrhagic surgery. A multicenter study. Thromb Haemost 2009; 101: 394-401.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kozek-Langenecker S. Management of massive operative blood loss. Minerva Anestesiol 2007; 73: 401-415.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Poller L, Keown M, Ibrahim SA. et al. Quality assessment of CoaguChek point-of-care prothrombin time monitors: comparison of the European community-approved procedure and conventional external quality assessment. Clin Chem 2006; 52: 1843-1847.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Wong J, El Beheiry H, Rampersaud YR. et al. Tranexamic Acid reduces perioperative blood loss in adult patients having spinal fusion surgery. Anesth Analg 2008; 107: 1479-1486.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Moore FA, Nelson T, McKinley BA. et al. Is there a role for aggressive use of fresh frozen plasma in massive transfusion of civilian trauma patients?. Am J Surg 2008; 196: 948-960.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Stravitz RT. Critical management decisions in patients with acute liver failure. Chest 2008; 134: 1092-1102.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Plesch W, Wolf T, Breitenbeck N. et al. Results of the performance verification of the CoaguChek XS system. Thromb Res 2008; 123: 381-389.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Gibbs NM. The effect of anaesthetic agents on platelet function. Anaesth Intensive Care 1991; 19: 495-505.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Niccolai I, Barontini L, Paolini P. et al. Long-term sedation with propofol in ICU: hemocoagulation problems. Minerva Anestesiol 1992; 58: 375-379.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Fleisher LA, Beckman JA, Brown KA. et al. ACC/ AHA 2007 guidelines on perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and care for noncardiac surgery: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation for Noncardiac Surgery): developed in collaboration with the American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology, and Society for Vascular Surgery. Circulation 2007; 116: e418-499.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Taborski U, Braun SL, Voller H. Analytical performance of the new coagulation monitoring system INRatio for the determination of INR compared with the coagulation monitor Coaguchek S and an established laboratory method. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2004; 18: 103-107.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Bauman ME, Black KL, Massicotte MP. et al. Accuracy of the CoaguChek XS for point-of-care international normalized ratio (INR) measurement in children requiring warfarin. Thromb Haemost 2008; 99: 1097-1103.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 University Hospital of Bern, Laboratory of Haematology. Available at: www.hzl.insel.ch/1145.html Accessed July 4 2009.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Leichsenring I, Plesch W, Unkrig V. et al. Multicentre ISI assignment and calibration of the INR measuring range of a new point-of-care system designed for home monitoring of oral anticoagulation therapy. Thromb Haemost 2007; 97: 856-861.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Plesch W, van den Besselaar AM. Validation of the international normalized ratio (INR) in a new point-ofcare system designed for home monitoring of oral anticoagulation therapy. Int J Lab Hematol 2009; 31: 20-25.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Thuerlemann C, Haeberli A, Alberio L. Monitoring thrombin generation by electrochemistry: development of an amperometric biosensor screening test for plasma and whole blood. Clin Chem 2009; 55: 505-512.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Deom A, Reber G, Tsakiris DA. et al. Evaluation of the CoaguChek XS Plus system in a Swiss community setting. Thromb Haemost 2009; 101: 988-990.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Poller L. International Normalized Ratios (INR): the first 20 years. J Thromb Haemost 2004; 02: 849-860.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Favaloro EJ, Hamdam S, McDonald J. et al. Time to think outside the box? Prothrombin time, international normalised ratio, international sensitivity index, mean normal prothrombin time and measurement of uncertainty: a novel approach to standardisation. Pathology 2008; 40: 277-287.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Preston FE. Quality control and oral anticoagulation. Thromb Haemost 1995; 74: 515-520.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet 1995; 346: 1085-1087.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. Users’ guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. J Am Med Assoc 1994; 271: 703-707.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Schuirmann DJ. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1987; 15: 657-680.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Plesch W, Klimpel P. Performance evaluation of the CoaguChek S system. Haematologica 2002; 87: 557-559.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Horlocker TT, Nuttall GA, Dekutoski MB. et al. The accuracy of coagulation tests during spinal fusion and instrumentation. Anesth Analg 2001; 93: 33-38.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Inaba K, Teixeira PG, Shulman I. et al. The impact of uncross-matched blood transfusion on the need for massive transfusion and mortality: analysis of 5,166 uncross-matched units. J Trauma 2008; 65: 1222-1226.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar