Agreement between Coaguchek XS and STA-R Evolution (Hepato Quick) INR results depends on the level of INR

Defining a metrologically traceable and sustainable calibration hierarchy of international normalized ratio for monitoring of vitamin K antagonist treatment in accordance with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 17511:2020 standard: communication from the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine-SSC/ISTH working group on prothrombin time/international normalized ratio standardization

Calibration of prothrombin time (PT) in terms of international normalized ratio (INR) has been outlined in "Guidelines for thromboplastins and plasmas used to control oral anticoagulant therapy" (World Health Organization, 2013). The international standard ISO 17511:2020 presents requirements for manufacturers of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical devices (MDs) for documenting the calibration hierarchy for a measured quantity in human samples using a specified IVD MD. The objective of this article is to define an unequivocal, metrologically traceable calibration hierarchy for the INR measured in plasma as well as in whole blood samples. Calibration of PT and INR for IVD MDs according to World Health Organization guidelines is similar to that in cases where there is a reference measurement procedure that defines the measurand for value assignment as described in ISO 17511:2020. We conclude that, for PT/INR standardization, the optimal calibration hierarchy includes a primary process to prepare an international reference reagent and measurement procedure that defines the measurand by a value assignment protocol conforming to clause 5.3 of ISO 17511:2020. A panel of freshly prepared human plasma samples from healthy adult individuals and patients on vitamin K antagonists is used as a commutable secondary calibrator as described in ISO 17511:2020. A sustainable metrologically traceable calibration hierarchy for INR should be based on an international protocol for value assignment with a single primary reference thromboplastin and the harmonized manual tilt tube technique for clotting time determination. The primary international reference thromboplastin reagent should be used only for calibration of successive batches of the secondary reference thromboplastin reagent.

Comparison of the International Normalized Ratio Between a Point-of-Care Test and a Conventional Laboratory Test: the Latter Performs Better in Assessing Warfarin-induced Changes in Coagulation Factors

Background

Point-of-care testing (POCT) coagulometers are increasingly used for monitoring warfarin therapy. However, in high international normalized ratio (INR) ranges, significant discrepancy in the INR between POCT and conventional laboratory tests occurs. We compared the INR of POCT (CoaguChek XS Plus; Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany) with that of a conventional laboratory test (ACL TOP 750; Instrumentation Laboratory SpA, Milan, Italy) and explored possible reasons for discrepancy.

Methods

Paired POCT and conventional laboratory test INRs were analyzed in 400 samples from 126 patients undergoing warfarin therapy after cardiac surgery. Coagulation factor and thrombin generation tests were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Correlations between coagulation factors and INRs were determined using Pearson correlation coefficients.

Results

The mean difference in the INR between the tests increased at high INR ranges. Endogenous thrombin potential levels were decreased at INR <2.0 for CoaguChek XS Plus and 2.0< INR <3.0 for ACL TOP 750 compared with those at INR <2.0 for both tests, indicating a better performance of ACL TOP 750 in assessing thrombin changes. The correlation coefficients of coagulation factors were stronger for ACL TOP 750 INR than for CoaguChek XS Plus INR. Vitamin K-dependent coagulation factors were found to contribute to the INR discrepancy.

Conclusions

Decreases in vitamin K-dependent coagulation and anticoagulation factors can explain the significant discrepancy between the two tests in high INR ranges. Since conventional laboratory test INR values are more reliable than POCT INR values, a confirmatory conventional laboratory test is required for high INR ranges.

CoaguChek® XS versus standard laboratory prothrombin time for anticoagulant monitoring in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome

INTRODUCTION

The standard of care for thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Prothrombin time, and its corresponding international normalized ratio (INR), is the laboratory test routinely performed to assess anticoagulation. Self-management of VKA therapy using point-of-care (POC) devices seems to be an attractive option.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy of a POC device (CoaguChek XS) in APS patients by comparing it with venous laboratory INR. Furthermore, we analyzed whether other clinical and laboratory features could interfere with the CoaguChek XS results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a single-center cross-sectional study with 94 APS patients from a tertiary rheumatology clinic performed from August 2014 to March 2015. The comparison between CoaguChek XS and venous laboratory INR results was evaluated using the coefficient of determination (r) followed by the Bland-Altman test. A paired t-test was also applied. A difference of up to ±0.5 INR unit between the two systems was considered clinically acceptable.

RESULTS

The mean CoaguChek-INR was 2.94 ± 1.41 and venous laboratory INR was 2.43±0.86, with a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.95. Categorizing INR values in ranges (INR <2, INR 2-3, INR 3-4, and INR >4), we found that the INR >4 group presented a lower correlation (r = 0.64) compared to the other ranges (p < 0.05). Although both methods were highly correlated, CoaguChek XS showed higher values than the venous laboratory INR, with an increased average of 0.42 ± 0.54. Therefore, we proposed a simple linear regression model to predict the venous laboratory INR values, using results obtained from CoaguChek XS. A difference ≤0.5 INR unit between the two systems was observed in 57.4% of patients, and the aPL profile did not influence the results.

CONCLUSION

Although CoaguChek XS and venous laboratory INR demonstrated a good linear correlation in the group of INR ≤4, extra caution should be taken in APS patients, since a reasonable proportion of patients can present differences in INR results that are not acceptable. We do not recommend routine POC in APS patients.

Performance evaluation of coaguchek pro II in comparison with coaguchek XS plus and sta-r Max using a sta-neoplastine CI plus

INTRODUCTION

We evaluated the analytical performance of CoaguChek Pro II (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany), a new point-of-care device measuring the international normalized ratio (INR) values, in comparison with CoaguChek XS Plus (Roche Diagnostics GmbH) and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus (Diagnostica Stago SAS, Asnières-sur-Seine, France).

METHODS

The precision of Pro II was analyzed, according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (CLSI POCT14-A2 and EP15-A3). In 105 clinical samples, the Pro II INR values were compared with those of XS Plus and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus (CLSI EP09-A3 and EP35). We also compared the Pro II INR values between capillary blood (CB) and venous blood (VB; CLSI EP35).

RESULTS

The precision of Pro II was acceptable (within-run and between-run CV%: 2.71% and 3.28% at normal level; 1.52% and 4.47% at abnormal level, respectively). The Pro II INR values showed very high correlation and almost perfect agreement with those of XS Plus and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus (r = .97 and κ = .94; r = .95 and κ = .91). The mean difference between Pro II and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus increased as INR values increased, with 60% of samples showing differences >0.5 in the supratherapeutic range. The Pro II INR values showed very high correlation between CB and VB (r = .98).

CONCLUSION

Pro II INR values are accurate and reliable using both CB and VB; however, they should be confirmed by laboratory analyzers in the supratherapeutic range.

Development of Multidisciplinary Anticoagulation Management Guidelines for Patients Receiving Durable Mechanical Circulatory Support

Patients receiving durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) require life-long anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA). Due to alternations in hemostasis, concomitant therapy with antiplatelet agents and critical illness, they are at increased risk of thromboembolic and bleeding complications compared with the general population managed on VKAs. To prevent thrombotic events, current guidelines recommend that patients with MCS receive long-term anticoagulation with a VKA to maintain a target international normalized ratio (INR) as specified by device manufacturers, but limited data exist regarding specific routine management of anticoagulation therapy and its potential complications. To optimize anticoagulation management and minimize risk in these patients, we have centralized anticoagulation management in a collaborative approach between the inpatient hemostatic and antithrombotic (HAT) stewardship service and between ambulatory anticoagulation management service (AMS) and the advanced heart disease team. Patients are followed by these three services beginning when the device is implanted and extending the duration that patients have the device. The teams include multiple clinicians from cardiac surgery, cardiology, hematology, pharmacy, nursing, case management, nutrition, and psychiatry, therefore, in order to standardize practice among clinicians without compromising patient centered decision making, we assembled an interdisciplinary team to create multiple treatment guidelines. In addition to a centralized and collaborative approach, our guidelines ensure seamless transitions of care between the inpatient and outpatient settings. We believe our approach has demontrated a positive improvement in the care of these challenging patients. In this article, we present our comprehensive centralized anticoagulation management approach for patients with left ventricular assist systems (LVAS).

Benefits and Pitfalls of Point-of-Care Coagulation Testing for Anticoagulation Management: An ACLPS Critical Review

Objectives

Point-of-care (POC) testing is generally less precise and has higher reagent costs per test than laboratory-based assays. However, POC hemostasis testing can offer significant advantages in particular situations: patient-managed warfarin therapy as well as rapid turnaround time heparin management for intraoperative patients. Of note, POC hemostasis testing is generally approved for the purposes of anticoagulation monitoring and is inferior to laboratory coagulation testing for the diagnosis of congenital or acquired coagulopathy.

Methods

The frequently used POC coagulation instruments for POC international normalized ratio and activated clotting time are reviewed, as well as their typical performance relative to central laboratory testing (where available).

Results

Several cases are discussed that highlight the benefits, as well as pitfalls, of POC coagulation testing.

Conclusions

POC coagulation testing for anticoagulation monitoring offers advantages in particular situations. Clear policies and protocols must be developed to guide proper use of POC versus central laboratory hemostasis testing.

Use of a capillary specimen in the laboratory to verify a point-of-care international normalized ratio: Avoidance of a venipuncture in a pediatric setting

INTRODUCTION

Point-of-care (POC) international normalized ratio (INR) values above an institutional cutoff are confirmed in the laboratory using a gold standard venous specimen. This can be problematic in a pediatric setting.

METHOD

In this study, 449 consecutive POC INR results were compared to an INR performed in the laboratory on a capillary citrate specimen collected from the same finger-stick. The results were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean INR values from the CoaguChek XS and laboratory were 2.85 ± 1.19 and 2.63 ± 1.11, respectively. There was a good correlation between the methods with r = 0.97. Bland-Altman analysis indicated a bias of 0.22 favoring the CoaguChek XS, with 95% limits of agreement -0.29 to 0.72. Passing and Bablok method comparison resulted in a slope of 0.91 (y = 0.91x + 0.02). An INR of ≤0.5 was found between the methods in 89% of cases and 84% agreement was noted (κ = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

Comparing the capillary INR laboratory results to studies involving a venous specimen, the capillary specimen performed with equivalence. Thus, a capillary citrate specimen can be collected from the same finger-stick used to perform the POC INR for confirmation in the laboratory. This avoids the trauma of a venous collection in such a situation.

Effects of home prothrombin international ratio (PT-INR) management in children with mechanical prosthetic valves - Importance of individual correlations between laboratory and CoaguChek device PT-INRs

BACKGROUND

Warfarin administration is essential but requires difficult management and frequent clinic visits in patients with mechanical prosthetic atrioventricular valve replacement (MPAVVR). This study investigated how home prothrombin international ratio (PT-INR) monitoring with CoaguChek^® (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland) safely reduced clinic visits in children with MPAVVR. We also compared individual correlations between the CoaguChek and laboratory PT-INR.

METHODS

This study included four pediatric patients who started frequent warfarin home-monitoring after MPAVVR (three mitral valves and one tricuspid valve). We collected information regarding the number of outpatient clinic visits and measurements of PT-INR before and after starting home CoaguChek monitoring (each one year) from medical records. We also compared individual correlations between laboratory and CoaguChek PT-INR in three patients.

RESULTS

No major clinical events were encountered during the study period. The ratio of outpatient clinic visits in the second year to those in the first year was decreased in all patients (0.30-0.66). The ratio of the numbers of home measurements to all PT-INR measurements in the second year ranged from 0.55 to 0.64 indicating that CoaguChek home monitoring approximately halved the number of outpatient clinic visits. CoaguChek measurements tended to be slightly overestimated in two patients but were greatly underestimated in one patient.

CONCLUSIONS

CoaguChek home monitoring in children with MPAVVR reduced the number of their clinic visits without compromising the safety of warfarin management. Given considerable individual differences in correlations between CoaguChek and laboratory PT-INR, individual correlation needs to be identified to fairly interpret the CoaguChek PT-INR values.

Monitoring of treatment with vitamin K antagonists: recombinant thromboplastins are more sensitive to factor VII than tissue-extract thromboplastins

Essentials Differences in sensitivity to factor VII (FVII) have been suggested between thromboplastins. FVII-induced International Normalized Ratio (INR) changes differ between commercial reagents. Recombinant human thromboplastins are more sensitive to FVII than tissue-extract thromboplastins. Thromboplastin choice may affect FVII-mediated INR stability.

SUMMARY

Background Differences regarding sensitivity to factor VII have been suggested for recombinant human and tissue-extract thromboplastins used for International Normalized Ratio (INR) measurement, but the evidence is scarce. Differences in FVII sensitivity are clinically relevant, as they can affect INR stability during treatment with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Objectives To determine whether commercial thromboplastins react differently to changes in FVII. Methods We studied the effect of addition of FVII on the INR in plasma by using three tissue-extract (Neoplastin C1+, Hepato Quick, and Thromborel S) and three recombinant human (Recombiplastin 2G, Innovin, and CoaguChek XS) thromboplastins. Three different concentrations of purified human FVII (0.006, 0.012 and 0.062 μg mL-1 plasma), or buffer, were added to five certified pooled plasmas of patients using VKAs (INR of 1.5-3.5). Changes in FVII activity were measured with two bioassays (Neoplastin and Recombiplastin), and relative INR changes were compared between reagents. Results After addition of 0.062 μg mL-1 FVII, FVII activity in the pooled plasmas increased by approximately 20% (Neoplastin) or 32% (Recombiplastin) relative to the activity in pooled normal plasma. All thromboplastins showed dose-dependent INR decreases. The relative INR change in the pooled plasmas significantly differed between the six thromboplastins. No differences were observed among recombinant or tissue-extract thromboplastins. Pooled results indicated that the FVII-induced INR change was greater for recombinant than for tissue-extract thromboplastins. Conclusions Differences regarding FVII sensitivity exist between various thromboplastins used for VKA monitoring. Recombinant human thromboplastins are more sensitive to FVII than tissue-extract thromboplastins. Therefore, thromboplastin choice may affect FVII-mediated INR stability.

Point-of-care testing for coagulation function: CoaguChek® XS System versus standard laboratory testing in pediatric patients with normal and abnormal coagulation function

PURPOSE

Intraoperative abnormalities of coagulation function may occur for various reasons. In most scenarios, treatment is directed by laboratory parameters. Unfortunately, standard laboratory testing may take 1-2 h. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate a point-of-care testing device (CoaguChek^® XS System) in pediatric patients.

METHODS

Patients ranging in age from 2 to 18 years, undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) or cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) were eligible for inclusion. After CPB and/or the surgical procedure, 2.8 ml of blood was obtained and simultaneously tested on both the standard laboratory apparatus and the CoaguChek^® XS System.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 100 patients (50 PSF and 50 cardiac cases) with 13 cases excluded, leaving 87 patients (49 PSF and 38 cardiac cases) for analysis. In PSF cases, reference laboratory international normalized ratio (INR) ranged from 0.98 to 1.77 while CoaguChek^® XS INR ranged from 1.0 to 1.3. The correlation coefficient was 0.69. The results of the Bland-Altman analysis showed a bias of 0.09, precision of 0.1, and 95% limits of agreement ranging from -0.11 to 0.28. In cardiac cases, reference INR ranged from 1.68 to 14.19, while CoaguChek^® XS INR ranged from 1.4 to 7.9. The correlation coefficient was 0.35. The results of the Bland-Altman analysis showed a bias of -1.8, precision of 2.1, and 95% limits of agreement ranging from -6.0 to 2.4.

CONCLUSIONS

INR values obtained from CoaguChek^® XS showed a moderate correlation with reference laboratory values within the normal range. However, in the presence of coagulopathy, the discrepancy was significantly greater, thereby making the CoaguChek^® XS clinically unreliable.

Impact of point-of-care international normalized ratio monitoring on quality of treatment with vitamin K antagonists in non-self-monitoring patients: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care (POC) international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring by healthcare professionals could eliminate the need for venous blood sampling in non-self-monitoring (NSM) patients on vitamin K antagonists (VKA). However, few studies have investigated the impact of POC INR monitoring on the quality of treatment in these patients and real-world data on this issue are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the safety, efficacy and quality of anticoagulant control during POC INR monitoring as compared with laboratory INR monitoring in NSM patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the anticoagulation clinic of the Star-Medical Diagnostic Center (Rotterdam, the Netherlands). Patients who received treatment with VKA between 29 May 2012 and 29 May 2014 were eligible. Percentage of time in therapeutic range (TTR) and incidence rates of major clinical events (all-cause mortality, hospitalization, major bleeding and ischemic stroke) were compared for the year before and year after introduction of POC monitoring. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for major clinical events between exposure groups.

RESULTS

In total, 1973 patients during the 1-year laboratory-monitoring observation period and 1959 patients during the 1-year POC-monitoring observation period were included. Median TTR was significantly lower during POC monitoring (77.9%; 95% CI, 67.2-87.4) than during laboratory INR monitoring (81.0%; 95% CI, 71.1-90.5). Adjusted hazard ratios for major clinical events were all around unity.

CONCLUSIONS

Although associated with lower TTR, POC INR monitoring is a safe and effective alternative to laboratory INR monitoring in NSM patients on VKA.