The clinical significance of differences between point-of-care and laboratory INR methods in over-anticoagulated patients

Abstract

IntroductionPatients receiving warfarin are at increased risk of bleeding when their International Normalised Ratio (INR) >4.5. Although not standardised above 4.5 the INR is measured in over-anticoagulated patients, consequently we have examined the reliability of INR results ≥4.5. We assessed: the relationship between different prothrombin time systems for INRs >4.5; the relationships between the INR and levels of vitamin K-dependent coagulation factors (VKD-CF) and thrombin generation test (TGT) parameters; and the impact that variation in results would have on warfarin dosing. MethodsINRs were performed using a CoaguChek XS Plus point-of-care (POC) device (measuring range 0.6-8.0). For POC INRs ≥4.5, laboratory INRs were also measured using a recombinant tissue factor (rTF) and a rabbit brain (RBT) thromboplastin. ResultsThere was good correlation between POC (INR ≥4.5, <8.0) and Lab INRs (rTF n=154, rs=0.87, p<0.0001; RBT n=102, rs=0.76, p<0.0001); and significant correlations between each of the VKD-CF and the INR, the strongest being with FVII (POC INR rs=-0.53 p<0.0001; Lab rTF-INR rs=-0.70 p<0.0001). TGT peak thrombin and ETP also showed good correlations with INR values (R2>0.71). Using POC and Lab rTF-INR, 109/154 (71%), or POC and Lab RBT-INR 75/102 (74%) results exhibited dosage concordance and/or were within 0.5 INR units. In the remaining patients variation in warfarin dosing was generally slight. ConclusionsOur data suggest that CoaguChek XS Plus INRs >4.5 and <8.0 are comparable to laboratory INRs (both methods) and it is probably unnecessary to perform laboratory INRs for clinical management of patients with INRs >4.5 including those >8.0.