Scholarlink

<p>Reagent sensitivity to coagulation factors is variable and could influence PT and APTT testing. In this study, we have compared PT and APTT values when estimated by four different reagents. This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted over a period of one and a half years in 50 patients. PT and APTT were estimated using a semi-automated coagulometer (Hemostar - XF 1.0). Four different reagents for PT estimation were used: Uniplastin, RecombiPlasTin 2G, STA-NeoPTimal and Thromborel S. The reagents used for APTT were: Liquicelin-E, SynthASil, C.K. Prest and ACTIN FSL. PT/INR and APTT result comparison for different reagents was done by repeated measures ANOVA with Greenhouse-Geisser correction if the sphericity condition was violated. Post hoc analysis with Bonferroni adjustment was also done when applicable. The study included 50 patients with mean age of 43 ± 15.7 years. Mean PT and INR values showed significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.005 and <i>p</i> = 0.001 respectively) when tested by four different thromboplastins. The mean difference for APTT among all four reagents was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.380). Inter-reagent comparison for 3 of the 6 possible reagent combinations for PT/INR showed significant difference (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). Inter-reagent APTT comparison for all 6 reagent combinations did not show any significant difference (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). PT/INR result variation due to different reagents was minimal in the healthy population. Clinically significant variation was seen in patients with liver disease and those on oral anticoagulant therapy. The effect of different reagents on APTT was not significant in both normal and abnormal samples.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of Prothrombin Time (PT), International Normalized Ratio (INR) and Activated Partial Thromboplastin time (APTT) Using Four Different Reagents

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月7日

查看全文
  • Jyoti Devi,
  • Naveen Kakkar,
  • Anuj Sharma

摘要

Reagent sensitivity to coagulation factors is variable and could influence PT and APTT testing. In this study, we have compared PT and APTT values when estimated by four different reagents. This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted over a period of one and a half years in 50 patients. PT and APTT were estimated using a semi-automated coagulometer (Hemostar - XF 1.0). Four different reagents for PT estimation were used: Uniplastin, RecombiPlasTin 2G, STA-NeoPTimal and Thromborel S. The reagents used for APTT were: Liquicelin-E, SynthASil, C.K. Prest and ACTIN FSL. PT/INR and APTT result comparison for different reagents was done by repeated measures ANOVA with Greenhouse-Geisser correction if the sphericity condition was violated. Post hoc analysis with Bonferroni adjustment was also done when applicable. The study included 50 patients with mean age of 43 ± 15.7 years. Mean PT and INR values showed significant difference (p = 0.005 and p = 0.001 respectively) when tested by four different thromboplastins. The mean difference for APTT among all four reagents was not statistically significant (p = 0.380). Inter-reagent comparison for 3 of the 6 possible reagent combinations for PT/INR showed significant difference (p < 0.05). Inter-reagent APTT comparison for all 6 reagent combinations did not show any significant difference (p > 0.05). PT/INR result variation due to different reagents was minimal in the healthy population. Clinically significant variation was seen in patients with liver disease and those on oral anticoagulant therapy. The effect of different reagents on APTT was not significant in both normal and abnormal samples.