Mobile Site ›

The INR and FFP

Is This a Good Relationship with Regard to Transfusion Practice?



Subscribe

Receive notification when new Hot Topics are published:

Coagulation Tests and Invasive Procedures, cont.

Slide 13

December 2008

For the sake of time, I will not go through all the different invasive procedure settings evaluated by these authors individually, but will now look at the data from a more general perspective.

Overall, the authors identified 14 studies of patients undergoing invasive procedures that compared patients with and without abnormal coagulation testing results. In 12 studies, the difference in the risk of procedural-related bleeding ranged from -0.03 to +0.01. A negative number reflects a lower risk of bleeding for patients with abnormal coagulation test results, while a positive number reflects a lower risk of bleeding in patients with normal coagulation test results.

In two studies, the risk differences were +0.20 and -0.19 respectively. In all studies, the 95% confidence interval included zero, and all but one of the studies spanned from a negative to a positive number. Therefore, this data suggests that in these 14 studies, there was essentially no difference in the risk of bleeding between patients with and without abnormal coagulation testing in association with the invasive procedures that were performed.

Coagulation Tests, cont.

 


Jump to section:


Key