MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Retrospective Analysis of the Effect of Argatroban and Coumadin on INR Values in Heparin Induced Thrombocytopenia.

2006· article· en· W2980033596 on OpenAlexaff
Maxine Lau, Jin‐Hyeun Huh

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgatrobanMedicineConcomitantDirect thrombin inhibitorWarfarinHeparinHeparin-induced thrombocytopeniaAnticoagulantClinical endpointCombination therapyDiscovery and development of direct thrombin inhibitorsRetrospective cohort studySurgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicineClinical trialAtrial fibrillationThrombinDabigatran

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Patients who develop Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia(HIT) are at an increased risk for thrombosis. They may require long term anticoagulant therapy and are often stepped down from either argatroba, lepirudinn or danaparoid to oral warfarin therapy. Step down of anticoagulation therapy is complicated by falsely elevated PT/INR which can cause difficultly in assessing the appropriate time to discontinue Argatroban therapy. Patients may be increased risk of bleeding due to receiving combined therapy. Previous studies analyzing this effect of combined therapy were observed in healthy individuals. The experience at this institution is complicated utilization of abnormally low rates of argatroban to achieve therapeutic aPTT levels. Method: This is a retrospective chart review study analyzing the trends of INRs with argatroban and warfarin concomitant therapy. All patients during the period of January 2002 to December 2005 receiving argatroban were identified from pharmacy records. Only patients with argatroban and warfarin stepdown therapy were considered for this analysis. The only exclusion criteria was documented end stage liver failure. ANOVA analysis was deemed appropriate and SPSS program was utilized. Direct thrombin Inhibitor (DTI) levels was utilized for argatroban monitoring starting in 2005. The primary endpoint was to determine the effect Argatroban has on INR by analyzing the INR with concomitant argatroban and coumadin therapy, argatroban alone and evaluating the true INR with coumadin alone. The secondary endpoint was to observe any adverse effects and complications from concomitant therapy mainly bleeding and mortality. Results: The primary endpoints are displayed in table 1. Ninety-three percent of patients required a maintenance argartroban rate of less than 1.0 mcg/kg/min with 68 % requiring less than 0.5 mcg/kg/min. There was a stronger correlation when argatroban rates were less than 0.25 mcg/kg/min and the associated twofold increase previously noted in other trials with combined therapy was not observed. The secondary endpoints are shown in table 2. Less than 50% of the patients in both major and minor bleeding episodes and 33% of mortality had documented INRs > 4.0. Conclusions: The argatroban rates documented in this study are 50–75% less than 2–4 mcg/kg/min usually reported in literature. In addition, the conversion from aPTT to DTI monitoring resulted in a greater than 60% reduction in argatroban rates. However the correlation was also stronger at these lower rates. Although there was not a high percentage of bleeds with INR’s greater than 4.0, the relationship between DTI and INR suggest that a lower combined INR could be targeted for therapeutic efficacy. A warfarin dosing nomogram based on these finding will be developed and tested. Information regarding ISI was not available at the time of this abstract. Primary Endpoints Argatroban Rate(mcg/kg/min) N INR on warfarin alone INR on warfarin and argatroban ANOVA < 0.05 13 3.17 ± 1.37 4.01 ± 2.90 0.734 0.06–0.25 32 3.68 ± 1.06 4.19 ± 1.17 0.704 0.26–0.5 14 2.71 ± 1.12 3.38 ± 1.69 0.22 0.5–1.0 13 3.10 ±0.79 5.00 ± 0.54 0.54 >1.0 6 2.74 ± 1.47 5.13 ± 3.69 0.162 Secondary Endpoints -Complications n (%) outcomes with INR > 4.0 on both agents * all INRs >5.5 Total Bleeding 11 (13%) 5 (45%) Major 7 (8%) 3 (43%) Minor 4 (5%) 2 (50%) High requiring PRBC with no bleeding* 5 (6%) 5 (100%) Mortality 15 (17%) 5 (33%)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHeparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and ThrombosisFrench-language works237,207