Observational studyThe journal of trauma and acute care surgery2020
Detecting direct oral anticoagulants in trauma patients using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry: A novel approach to medication reconciliation.
Observational study in The journal of trauma and acute care surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate medication reconciliation in trauma patients is essential but difficult. Currently, there is no established clinical method of detecting direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in trauma patients. We hypothesized that a liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LCMS)-based assay can be used to accurately detect DOACs in trauma patients upon hospital arrival.
methodsPlasma samples were collected from 356 patients who provided informed consent including 10 healthy controls, 19 known positive or negative controls, and 327 trauma patients older than 65 years who were evaluated at our large, urban level 1 trauma center. The assay methodology was developed in healthy and known controls to detect apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran using LCMS and then applied to 327 samples from trauma patients. Standard medication reconciliation processes in the electronic medical record documenting DOAC usage were compared with LCMS results to determine overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) of the assay.
resultsOf 356 patients, 39 (10.96%) were on DOACs: 21 were on apixaban, 14 on rivaroxaban, and 4 on dabigatran. The overall accuracy of the assay for detecting any DOAC was 98.60%, with a sensitivity of 94.87% and specificity of 99.05% (PPV, 92.50%; NPV, 99.37%). The assay detected apixaban with a sensitivity of 90.48% and specificity of 99.10% (PPV, 86.36%; NPV 99.40%). There were three false-positive results and two false-negative LCMS results for apixaban. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban were detected with 100% sensitivity and specificity.
conclusionThis LCMS-based assay was highly accurate in detecting DOACs in trauma patients. Further studies need to confirm the clinical efficacy of this LCMS assay and its value for medication reconciliation in trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test, level III.
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.