Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative evaluation of Point Of Care coagulation monitoring by coaguchek XS-comparison with standard laboratory method

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Point Of Care (POC) meters are a relatively less invasive and rapid method for monitoring of Prothrombin Time/Interational Normalized Ratio (PT/INR) in patients on anticoagulant therapy. The reliability of results obtained with meters, however, needs to be affirmed and their accuracy needs to be assessed by comparing with standard laboratory analysis. We assessed the Coaguchek XS (Roche) PT/INR meter for accuracy and reliability by comparing with the results obtained with standard laboratory analysis on Stago Coagulometer.

Methods

INR values of 42 patients were measured by standard laboratory method using thromboplastin, Neoplastin CI (Diagnostical Stago, France) with ISI of 1.7 on Coagulometer (Stago) in plasma. Simultaneously a drop of blood was taken on the strip for Coagulochek XS and the INR read by the meter. Correlation between INR values obtained by the two methods was assessed by computing the correlation coefficient and the intra class correlation coefficient. Agreement between the INR values was assessed by Bland Altman plots.

Results

An excellent correlation was observed between INR values obtained by coaguchek XS and the values obtained in the laboratory by standard method for a range of values. Bland Altman plots showed good agreement between values obtained by the two methods with only three values falling beyond 2SD limits.

Conclusion

In conclusion Coaguchek XS INR meters are reliable and accurate and can be used by patients for monitoring of anticoagulation therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Machin SJ, Mackie IJ, Chitolie A, et al. Near patient testing (NPT) in haemostasis: a synoptic review. Clin Lab Haematol. 1996;18:69–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mcbane RD, Felty CD, Hartgers ML, Chaudhary R, Beyer LK, Santrach PJ. Importance of device evaluation for point of care prothrombin time international normalized ration testing programs. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005;80:181–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bland M, Altman G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bauman ME, Black KL, Massicotte MP, Bauman ML, Kuhle S, Howlett-Clyne S, et al. Accuracy of the CoaguChek XS for point-of-care international normalized ratio (INR) measurement in children requiring warfarin. Thromb Haemost. 2008;99:1097–103.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gardiner C, Longair I, Hills J, Cohen H, Mackie IJ, Machin SJ. Performance evaluation of a new small-volume coagulation monitor the SmartCheck INR system. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;129:500–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sunderji R, Gin K, Shalansky K, Carter C, Chambers K, Davies C, et al. Clinical impact of point of care vs laboratory measurement of anticoagulation. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;123:184–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rigelsky JM, Choe HM, Curtis DM, Brosnan MJ, Mitrovich S, Streetman DS. Accuracy of the avosure PT pro system compared with a hospital laboratory standard. Ann Pharmacother. 2002;36:380–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dorfman DM, Goonan EM, Boutilier MK, Jarolim P, Tanasijevica M, Goldhaber SZ. Point-of-care (POC) versus central laboratory instrumentation for monitoring oral anticoagulation. Vasc Med. 2005;10:23–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gosselin R, Owings JT, White RH, Hutchinson R, Branch J, Mahackian K, et al. A comparison of point-of-care instruments designed for monitoring oral anticoagulation with standard laboratory methods. Thromb Haemost. 2000;83:698–703.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sobieraj-Teague M, Daniel D, Farrelly B, Coghlan D, Gallus A. Accuracy and clinical usefulness of the CoaguChek S and XS Point of Care devices when starting warfarin in a hospital outreach setting. Thromb Res. 2009;123:909–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bereznicki LR, Jackson SL, Peterson GM, Jeffrey EC, Marsden KA, Jupe DM. Accuracy and clinical utility of the CoaguChek XS portable international normalised ratio monitor in a pilot study of warfarin home-monitoring. J Clin Pathol. 2007;60:311–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cardiothoracic Center, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

    Ramakrishnan Lakshmy & A. Sampath Kumar

  2. Department of Cardiac Biochemistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India

    Ramakrishnan Lakshmy

Authors
  1. Ramakrishnan Lakshmy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Sampath Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramakrishnan Lakshmy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lakshmy, R., Kumar, A.S. Comparative evaluation of Point Of Care coagulation monitoring by coaguchek XS-comparison with standard laboratory method. Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 26, 125–128 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-010-0028-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-010-0028-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation