Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dental surgery can be carried out on patients under oral anticoagulation therapy by using haemostyptic measures. The aim of the study was a comparative analysis of coagulation by laboratory methods and immediate patient diagnosis on the day of the planned procedure. METHODS: On the planned day of treatment, diagnoses were carried out on 298 patients for Prothrombin Time (PT), the International Normalised Ratio (INR), and Partial Thromboplastin Time (PTT). The decision to proceed with treatment was made with an INR < 4.0 according to laboratory results. RESULTS: Planned treatment did not go ahead in 2.7% of cases. Postoperatively, 14.8% resulted in secondary bleeding, but were able to be treated as out-patients. 1.7% had to be treated as in-patients. The average error between the immediate diagnosis and the laboratory method: 95% confidence interval was -5.8 +/- 15.2% for PT, -2.7 +/- 17.9 s for PTT and 0.23 +/- 0.80 for INR. The limits for concordance were 9.4 and -21.1% for PT, 15.2 and -20.5 s for PTT, and 1.03 and -0.57 for INR. CONCLUSION: This study showed a clinically acceptable concordance between laboratory and immediate diagnosis for INR. Concordance for PT and PTT did not meet clinical requirements. For patients under oral anticoagulation therapy, patient INR diagnosis enabled optimisation of the treatment procedure when planning dental surgery.