Reviews

Anti-Xa assays: What is their role today in antithrombotic therapy?

Author and Disclosure Information

Release date: June 1, 2019
Expiration date: May 31, 2020
Estimated time of completion: 1 hour

Click here to start this CME/MOC activity.

ABSTRACT

Although some suggest anti-Xa assays should be the preferred method for monitoring intravenous unfractionated heparin therapy, which method is best is unknown owing to the lack of large randomized controlled trials correlating different assays with clinical outcomes. This article provides an overview of heparin monitoring and the pros, cons, and clinical applications of anti-Xa assays.

KEY POINTS

  • Intravenous unfractionated heparin treatment is typically monitored by the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), with a therapeutic target defined as the range that corresponds to an anti-Xa level of 0.3 to 0.7 U/mL.
  • Monitoring unfractionated heparin is important to achieve a therapeutic target within the first 24 hours and to maintain therapeutic levels thereafter.
  • The heparin anti-Xa assay is unreliable for unfractionated heparin monitoring when switching from oral factor Xa inhibitor therapy to intravenous unfractionated heparin. In such cases, the aPTT is preferred.
  • Most patients receiving low-molecular-weight heparin do not need monitoring, but monitoring should be considered for pregnant women with prosthetic heart valves, using an anti-Xa assay specific for low-molecular-weight heparin.


 

References

Should clinicians abandon the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) for monitoring heparin therapy in favor of tests that measure the activity of the patient’s plasma against activated factor X (anti-Xa assays)?

Although other anticoagulants are now available for preventing and treating arterial and venous thromboembolism, unfractionated heparin—which requires laboratory monitoring of therapy—is still widely used. And this monitoring can be challenging. Despite its wide use, the aPTT lacks standardization, and the role of alternative monitoring assays such as the anti-Xa assay is not well defined.

This article reviews the advantages, limitations, and clinical applicability of anti-Xa assays for monitoring therapy with unfractionated heparin and other anticoagulants.

UNFRACTIONATED HEPARIN AND WARFARIN ARE STILL WIDELY USED

Until the mid-1990s, unfractionated heparin and oral vitamin K antagonists (eg, warfarin) were the only anticoagulants widely available for clinical use. These agents have complex pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, resulting in highly variable dosing requirements (both between patients and in individual patients) and narrow therapeutic windows, making frequent laboratory monitoring and dose adjustments mandatory.

Over the past 3 decades, other anticoagulants have been approved, including low-molecular-weight heparins, fondaparinux, parenteral direct thrombin inhibitors, and direct oral anticoagulants. While these agents have expanded the options for preventing and treating thromboembolism, unfractionated heparin and warfarin are still the most appropriate choices for many patients, eg, those with stage 4 chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease on dialysis, and those with mechanical heart valves.

In addition, unfractionated heparin remains the anticoagulant of choice during procedures such as hemodialysis, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, and cardiopulmonary bypass, as well as in hospitalized and critically ill patients, who often have acute kidney injury or require frequent interruptions of therapy for invasive procedures. In these scenarios, unfractionated heparin is typically preferred because of its short plasma half-life, complete reversibility by protamine, safety regardless of renal function, and low cost compared with parenteral direct thrombin inhibitors.

As long as unfractionated heparin and warfarin remain important therapies, the need for their laboratory monitoring continues. For warfarin monitoring, the prothrombin time and international normalized ratio are validated and widely reproducible methods. But monitoring unfractionated heparin therapy remains a challenge.

UNFRACTIONATED HEPARIN’S EFFECT IS UNPREDICTABLE

Unfractionated heparin, a negatively charged mucopolysaccharide, inhibits coagulation by binding to antithrombin through the high-affinity pentasaccharide sequence.1–6 Such binding induces a conformational change in the antithrombin molecule, converting it to a rapid inhibitor of several coagulation proteins, especially factors IIa and Xa.2–4

Unfractionated heparin inhibits factors IIa and Xa in a 1:1 ratio, but low-molecular-weight heparins inhibit factor Xa more than factor IIa, with IIa-Xa inhibition ratios ranging from 1:2 to 1:4, owing to their smaller molecular size.7

One of the most important reasons for the unpredictable and highly variable individual responses to unfractionated heparin is that, infused into the blood, the large and negatively charged unfractionated heparin molecules bind nonspecifically to positively charged plasma proteins.7 In patients who are critically ill, have acute infections or inflammatory states, or have undergone major surgery, unfractionated heparin binds to acute-phase proteins that are elevated, particularly factor VIII. This results in fewer free heparin molecules and a variable anticoagulant effect.8

In contrast, low-molecular-weight heparins have longer half-lives and bind less to plasma proteins, resulting in more predictable plasma levels following subcutaneous injection.9

Pages

Next Article:

Dabigatran-induced esophagitis

Related Articles