Intraindividual variation of the International Normalized Ratio in patients monitored with a recombinant human thromboplastin
J. H. V. van Geest-Daalderop,R. Kraaijenhagen,F. V. D. van der Meer,A. van den Besselaar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2010.03881.x
2010-07-01
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Abstract:Treatment with vitamin K antagonists is associated with variability of the effect of these drugs on the hemostatic system [1]. Patients may require very different doses to reach the same INR, and the INR as well as the required dose may also vary over time in an individual patient. In a previous paper we investigated the intraindividual variation of the INR in stabilized patients monitored with Hepato Quick, which is a combined rabbit thromboplastin [2]. This reagent, containing adsorbed bovine plasma as a source of factor (F) V and fibrinogen, has been designed to respond to factors VII, X and II only. We found that patients treated with the short-acting acenocoumarol had a greater mean intraindividual CV of the INR than patients treated with the long-acting phenprocoumon. This observation might be explained by a greater variation of the concentration of FVII in patients treated with acenocoumarol in comparison to that in patients treated with phenprocoumon [3]. If all thromboplastin reagents have the same response to variation of the concentration of the vitamin K-dependent coagulation factors, the INR intraindividual variation may be expected to be independent of the thromboplastin used for monitoring of the patients. The total intraindividual variation is determined by preanalytical, analytical and biological variation. The purpose of the present communication is to assess the total intraindividual variation of the INR in stabilized patients monitored with Innovin (SiemensHealthcareDiagnostics Products,Marburg, Germany), which is a recombinant human thromboplastin. Using the total and analytical variation we could calculate the biological variation. For this purpose we performed a retrospective analysis of INRs determined in outpatients treated with phenprocoumon or acenocoumarol under the supervision of the Thrombosis Service of Amersfoort, the Netherlands. The design of the study and the method of selection of patients was exactly the same as that of our previous study using Hepato Quick. Two different therapeutic ranges were applied (i.e. INR 2.0–3.5 (low intensity) and INR 2.5–4.0 (high intensity)). Patients were included in our analysis if they fulfilled the following criteria: treatment period was 6 months or longer; the dose of VKA drug was not changed; at least six consecutive INRs were within the patient s therapeutic range; the interval between consecutive INR measurements was 2 weeks or longer; and there were no changes in conditions that may influence the INR, such as intercurrent diseases, invasive procedures, or starting or stopping drugs interacting with phenprocoumon or acenocoumarol. Each selected patient was included for a single period of stable anticoagulation. If there were multiple stable periods in the same patient, the most recent one was chosen. Patients files were viewed in alphabetical order of their surnames and patients meeting the abovementioned criteria were included until the required number of 75 patients in each of four groups was achieved. All prothrombin times were measured by one laboratory using the reagent Innovin and a Sysmex CA-7000 coagulation instrument (Sysmex Corporation, Kobe, Japan). Prothrombin times were converted to INRs using the International Sensitivity Index (ISI) provided by the manufacturer. Between-day analytical imprecision of the INR was determined using the results of the laboratory s participation in a national external quality assessment scheme organized by the Netherlands Foundation for Quality Control of Medical Laboratory Diagnostics (SKML). In this scheme, lyophilized plasmas obtained from patients on VKA-therapy were provided to the participants for INR determination. Because each external control plasma was analyzed in multiple surveys, we could calculate the between-day imprecision (CVI) for our laboratory. The CVI of the INR in our laboratory was approximately 1.7%. For each selected patient the total coefficient of variation (CVT) was calculated for the consecutive INRmeasurements as described above. The biological intraindividual variation of the Correspondence: Anton M. H. P. van den Besselaar, Department of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, C2-R, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, the Netherlands. Tel.: +31 71 526 1894; fax: +31 71 526 6755. E-mail: a.m.h.p.van_den_besselaar@lumc.nl