| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
Measurement of the activated clotting time during cardiopulmonary bypass: differences between Hemotec® ACT and Hemochron® Jr apparatusDepartment of Surgical and Perioperative Science, University Hospital of Umeå, Umeå, Sweden, staffan.svenmarker.us{at}vll.se
Department of Surgical and Perioperative Science, University Hospital of Umeå, Umeå, Sweden
Department of Surgical and Perioperative Science, University Hospital of Umeå, Umeå, Sweden
Department of Surgical and Perioperative Science, University Hospital of Umeå, Umeå, Sweden Background: Measurement of the activated clotting time (ACT) represents a standard method for coagulatory assessments. The test employs specific agents to trigger the coagulation process. The present study aimed to compare kaolin (Hemotec®) versus a combination of silica, kaolin and phospholipid (Hemochron® Jr) ACTs. Methods: Hemotec® and Hemochron® Jr ACT monitors were compared by simultaneous measurement of paired arterial blood samples (n-114) with respect to precision and bias during clinical conditions of cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB). The influence of haemodilution on the ACT was tested in an ex-vivo model. Results: The precision of Hemotec® and Hemochron®Jr ACT measurements attained 21±2.6 s versus 27.0±2.6 s(p= 0.126) during CPB and 2.5±2.2 s versus 9.4±6.9 s (p= 0.000) after protamine administration, respectively. The Hemochron® Jr monitor was associated with a bias of 102±13.7 s compared to the Hemotec® ACT monitor (p= 0.000) during CPB and 6.9±2.9 s after protamine (p= 0.025). Linear regression analysis of ACT readings between monitors reached r- 0.526 (p= 0.000). Hemochron® Jr ACT values correlated with the erythrocyte volume fraction r- 0.379 (p= 0.000). Ex-vivo data indicated that the Hemotec® ACT monitor was associated with relatively higher ACT readings after haemodilution. Conclusion: The ACT is not a standardized measure. Test results are strongly associated with the specific compounds used to initiate the coagulation process.
Perfusion, Vol. 19, No. 5,
289-294 (2004) |
|||