Download PDF
Thromb Haemost 2006; 96(05): 688-689
DOI: 10.1160/TH06-08-0448
Case Report
Schattauer GmbH

Discrepancy between capillary and venous International Normalised Ratio (INR) in a patient on vitamin-K antagonist: Potentially serious clinical consequences

Sophie Waldvogel Abramowski
1   Haemostasis Unit, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
,
Françoise Boehlen
1   Haemostasis Unit, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
,
Guido Reber
1   Haemostasis Unit, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
,
Philippe de Moerloose
1   Haemostasis Unit, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received 15 August 2006

Accepted after revision 09 October 2006

Publication Date:
01 December 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

 

 

  • References

  • 1 Singer DE, Albers GW, Dalen JE. et al. Antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest 2004; 126 (Suppl. 03) Suppl 429S-456S.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Tripodi A, Chantarangkul V, Mannucci O. Near-patient testing devices to monitor oral anticoagulant therapy. Br J Haematol 2001; 113: 847-52.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Cosmi B, Palareti G, Moia M. et al. Accuracy of a portable prothrombin time monitor (Coagucheck) in patients on chronic oral anticoagulant therapy: a prospective multicenter study. Thromb Res 2000; 100: 279-86.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tripodi A. Prothrombin time international normalized ratio monitoring by self-testing. Curr Opin Hematol 2004; 11: 141-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Sawicki PT. A structured teaching and self-management program for patients receiving oral anticoagulation: a randomized controlled trial. Working Group for the Study of Patient Self-Management of Oral Anticoagulation. J Am Med Assoc 1999; 281: 145-50.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Cromheecke ME, Levi M, Colly LP. et al. Oral anticoagulation self-management and management by a specialist anticoagulation clinic: a randomised crossover comparison. Lancet 2000; 356: 97-102.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Lizotte A, Quessy I, Vanier MC. et al. Reliability, validity and ease of use of a portable point-of-care coagulation device in a pharmacist-managed anticoagulation clinic. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2002; 14: 247-54.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Palka DHentrich, Fritschi J, Raddatz PMüller. et al. INR comparison between the CoaguChek S and a standard laboratory method among patients with self-management of oral anticoagulation. Thromb Res. 2006 (prepublished online).
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hasenkam JM, Kimose HH, Knudsen L. et al. Self management of oral anticoagulant therapy after heart valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1997; 11: 935-42.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet 1995; 346: 1085-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Douketis JD, Lane A, Milne J. et al. Accuracy ofa portable International Normalization Ratio monitor in outpatients receiving long-term oral anticoagulant therapy: comparison with a laboratory reference standard using clinically relevant criteria for agreement. Thromb Res 1988; 92: 11-7.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bereznicki L, Jackson S, Peterson G. et al. Accuracy and clinical utility of the CoaguChek XS portable international normalised ratio monitor in a pilot study of warfarin home-monitoring. J Clin Pathol. 2006 (prepublished online).
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hylek EM, Skates SJ, Sheehan MA. et al. An analysis of the lowest effective intensity of prophylactic anticoagulation for patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 540-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar