Clinical Evaluation of the i-STAT Kaolin Activated Clotting Time (ACT) Test in Different Clinical Settings in a Large Academic Urban Medical Center Comparison With the Medtronic ACT Plus

Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, USA.
American Journal of Clinical Pathology (Impact Factor: 2.51). 05/2011; 135(5):741-8. DOI: 10.1309/AJCPSF8ASGONNQM6
Source: PubMed


Historically, it has been difficult for hospitals to change methods for activated clotting time (ACT) testing because of differences in ACT values obtained with different instruments, wide differences in target ranges used in different procedures, and the difficulty of performing crossover studies at the bedside in critical care situations. There are limited published data comparing the i-STAT (Abbott Point of Care, Princeton, NJ) kaolin ACT with the Medtronic ACT Plus (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN). The i-STAT system can perform ACT testing in addition to testing of a number of critical care analytes and may offer potential advantages over other ACT analyzers. Comparison of ACT values on 121 simultaneous split-sample tests yielded an R(2) of 0.88 with i-STAT = 0.79 Medtronic + 72.0. The Pearson correlation was R = 0.94, indicating statistically significant correlation between the 2 methods. Based on this comparison, we were able to implement the i-STAT ACT throughout our institution without changing target ranges for any individual procedure.

16 Reads

  • Point of Care The Journal of Near-Patient Testing & Technology 12/2011; 10(4):153-156. DOI:10.1097/POC.0b013e318238cbb2

  • DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 01/2014; 139(S 01):S27-S30. DOI:10.1055/s-0033-1359975 · 0.54 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To assess the performance of a portable prothrombin time (PT) analyzer (CoaguChek-XS) in dogs.AnimalsNinety-seven dogs composed of 20 healthy dogs, 45 ill dogs, and 32 ill dogs with altered coagulation.ProceduresSamples were concurrently obtained and PT was measured using the CoaguChek-XS and an automated coagulation analyzer. Agreement between methods was assessed using Spearman's correlation and Bland–Altman analysis.ResultsThe reference interval for PT using the CoaguChek-XS was 9.6–11.5 s. The CoaguChek-XS was easy to use, required a small volume of whole blood, and gave results within 1 min. The mean difference in PT between the 2 methods was 2.58 s (SD 3.10), and 94% of the samples fell within limits of agreement. The correlation was moderate, but significant (r = 0.35, P < 0.001). Sensitivity and specificity of the CoaguCheck-XS PT compared to analyzer PT were 92% and 56%, respectively, and increased to 95% and 77% on intent to treat basis. The coefficient of variance was 0.72%.The CoaguChek-XS identified all 8 dogs with anticoagulant rodenticide intoxication, although a discrepancy was noted from the analyzer results. In anemic dogs (PCV≤25%), the CoaguChek-XS did not display accurate results.Conclusions The CoaguChek-XS is a simple, user-friendly, highly precise PT analyzer. Results had moderate correlation and good agreement with a standard method. It can be used reliably for screening dogs when the PT is normal. However, when the CoaguChek-XS PT is prolonged or when the PCV is ≤25%, results should be confirmed using a standard method.
    07/2014; 24(4). DOI:10.1111/vec.12200

Similar Publications