Background: The safety and efficacy of bedside monitors of activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) have not been examined in a large population receiving intravenous heparin after thrombolytic treatment for acute myocardial infarction. We compared outcomes among patients monitored with these devices versus standard monitoring methods. Methods and Results: Investigators chose the bedside device (n = 1713 patients) or their standard method (n = 26,162) for all aPTT measurements at their sites. Clinical outcomes at 30 days, 1-year mortality rate, and aPTT levels at 6, 12, and 24 hours were compared. Bedside-monitored patients had significantly less moderate/severe bleeding (10% vs 12%, P < .01), fewer transfusions (7% vs 11%, P < .001), and a smaller decrease in hematocrit (5.5% vs 6.7%, P < .001) but significantly more recurrent ischemia (22% vs 20%, P = .01). Fewer bedside-monitored patients had subtherapeutic aPTT levels at 12 and 24 hours. Among patients with subtherapeutic levels at 6 and 12 hours, more bedside- monitored patients had therapeutic levels when next monitored. After adjustment for baseline differences, no significant difference in mortality rate was observed in bedside-monitored patients at 30 days (4.3% vs 4.8%, P = .27) and at 1 year (7.1% vs 7.7%, P = .38). The groups had similar rates of reinfarction, shock, heart failure, and stroke. Conclusion: This prospective substudy supports the use of bedside monitoring of heparin anticoagulation after thrombolysis.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine