4.4 Review

Global assays and the management of oral anticoagulation

期刊

THROMBOSIS JOURNAL
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12959-015-0037-1

关键词

PT; APTT; Thrombin generation; Thromboelastography; Apixaban; Rivaroxaban; Dabigatran; Vitamin K antagonists; Prothrombin complex concentrate; Anticoagulation reversal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Coagulation tests range from global or overall tests to assays specific to individual clotting factors and their inhibitors. Whether a particular test is influenced by an oral anticoagulant depends on the principle of the test and the type of oral anticoagulant. Knowledge on coagulation tests applicable in monitoring status and reversal of oral anticoagulation is a prerequisite when studying potential reversal agents or when managing anticoagulation in a clinical setting. Specialty tests based on the measurement of residual activated factor X (Xa) or thrombin activity, e.g., are highly effective for determining the concentration of the new generation direct factor Xa- and thrombin inhibitors, but these tests are unsuitable for the assessment of anticoagulation reversal by non-specific prohemostatic agents like prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) and recombinant factor VIIa (FVIIa). Global coagulation assays, in this respect, seem more appropriate. This review evaluates the current status on the applicability of the global coagulation assays PT, APTT, thrombin generation and thromboelastog raphy in the management of oral anticoagulation by vitamin K antagonists and the direct factor Xa and thrombin inhibitors. Although all global tests are influenced by both types of anticoagulants, not all tests are useful for monitoring anticoagulation and reversal thereof. Many (pre) analytical conditions are of influence on the assay readout, including the oral anticoagulant itself, the concentration of assay reagents and the presence of other elements like platelets and blood cells. Assay standardization, therefore, remains an issue of importance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据