ArticleThrombosis journal2015
Supporting the use of a coagulometric method for rivaroxaban control: a hypothesis-generating study to define the safety cut-offs.
Article in Thrombosis journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clot time ratio (CTR) and relation to treatment outcome in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with Rivaroxaban.Thrombosis journal · 2024Article
- Perioperative management of patients on direct oral anticoagulants.Thrombosis journal · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsAlthough quantitative anti-FXa assays can be used to measure rivaroxaban plasma levels, they are not widely performed or available. We aimed to tentatively determine the cut-off for thromboembolism and bleeding prevention based on the clotting effect of non-rivaroxaban conjugate-activated FX plasma levels in patients with rivaroxaban using a coagulometric method. METHODS AND
resultsRivaroxaban was added in vitro to normal plasma at a range of 0 to 241 μg/L to cover expected peak and trough levels. Rivaroxaban chromogenic (μg/L) and RVV-confirm as a ratio were determined. Patient plasma samples were assayed with the RVV-confirm reagent. The appropriate rivaroxaban plasma concentration to inhibit clotting mechanisms was based on the remaining FXa in plasma, which was expressed as the ratio of patients/normal, R-C. There is a high correlation between R-C in vitro and spiked normal plasma rivaroxaban concentration (R-Square 0.910, linear equation; 0.971 quadratic equation, p < 0.0001 for both) but not with plasma rivaroxaban chromogenic assays. We propose a cut-off R-C value of 1.65 and 4.5 for safety. Based on the proposed therapeutic range, in 158 assays performed in 58 patients, 6.3 % assays were above the level of bleeding tendency at the peak (R-C 5.39 ± 1.01, median 5.13) and 42 % assays were below the prevention cut-off at the trough (R-C 1.31 ± 0.18, median 1.35).
conclusionsRVVconfirm® is fast and sensitive to measure the effect of rivaroxaban. Clinical studies are needed to establish whether this cut-off is useful for identifying patients at increased risk of hemorrhage or those who exhibit a low level of anticoagulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.