ArticleClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
Outcomes Associated with Time in Therapeutic Range for Patients Receiving Intravenous Unfractionated Heparin.
Article in Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Time in therapeutic range (TTR) with intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) and its association with outcomes is poorly explored. UFH can be monitored with anti-Xa or aPTT, however, evidence indicates anti-Xa monitoring of UFH improves time to therapeutic anticoagulation. The objective of this study was to determine if TTR correlates with thrombotic and safety outcomes for patients receiving UFH, and if differences exist between these methods of monitoring. This retrospective, single center, cohort study stratified patient admissions based on the laboratory monitoring technique used (aPTT vs anti-Xa). The primary outcome was the presence of a new thrombotic event (TE) during the index visit. The secondary outcome was major bleeding during the index visit. Clinical outcomes were each assessed for their association with TTR. TTR was defined as the percentage of time in therapeutic range for each patient, as determined via the linear interpolation method. Of 4773 patient admissions (aPTT, n = 2,939, anti-Xa, n = 1834), TE occurred in 6.5% and 4.6% of visits in the aPTT and the anti-Xa cohort, respectively (p = .006). Bleeding events occurred in 33.3% and 31.6% of visits in the aPTT and the anti-Xa cohort, respectively (p = .204). TTR was 41.6% [IQR 23.3-57.7%] in the aPTT cohort compared to 56.1% [IQR 33.5-75.2%] in the anti-Xa cohort (p < .001). The monitoring of IV UFH with anti-Xa was associated with significantly fewer TEs and greater overall TTR when compared to those monitored with aPTT.
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.