General Question About aPTT/PTT/INR

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

REP - 26 Jun 2006 14:35 GMT

I have a general question about aPTT/PTT/INR testing. I don't have all
the reference range for the lab, but my results were:

aPTT 33.5 (normal up to 28)
PTT 9.8 (normal; don't know the range)
INR 1.0 (abnormal; not sure if too high or too low)

I am not on coumadin or any blood thinner. I have no known liver disease
or signs of liver disease (no jaundice) or any other reasons (no vitamin
K, no non-stop beef-eating) for these abnormal results. I am very
nephrotic and my GFR is now 84. Could kidney disease/nephrotic syndrome
cause these unusual results?

I have a call in to my doctor, but I've never failed this test before so
I'm curious as to (very general) things that can cause these results.

Signature

"Did Father shoot him? I will eat Grandfather for dinner."
- Helen Keller, on learning of the death of her grandfather

Reply to this Message

Manky Badger - 26 Jun 2006 18:06 GMT

>I have a general question about aPTT/PTT/INR testing. I don't have all
> the reference range for the lab, but my results were:
>
> aPTT 33.5 (normal up to 28)
> PTT 9.8 (normal; don't know the range)
> INR 1.0 (abnormal; not sure if too high or too low)

What makes you think the INR is abnormal?

Signature

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Reply to this Message

fake name - 27 Jun 2006 06:04 GMT

I wonder if it has been written on the lab's note?
Isn't INR defined only for people in treatment thus making an INR of 1
"undefined" and thereby abnormal?
(Though of course very normal and not at all uncommon for untreated persons.
;-) )

Reply to this Message

Manky Badger - 27 Jun 2006 17:10 GMT

>I wonder if it has been written on the lab's note?
> Isn't INR defined only for people in treatment thus making an INR of 1
> "undefined" and thereby abnormal?
> (Though of course very normal and not at all uncommon for untreated
> persons.
> ;-) )

Well, that's entirely the problem with INRs - they *should* only be used to
control warfarin (etc) therapy and so an INR of 1 is abnormal.
However many medics today seem to use PT & INR synonymously, so whether an
INR of 1 is abnormal is anyone's guess.

Signature

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Reply to this Message

kuhnfucius - 28 Jun 2006 00:09 GMT

The second value you give as the PTT isd in fact the "PT". From my
experience PTs this low have a high probablity of association with truamatic
vienapunctures and clotted (partially) samples. I have standing
instructions to inspect (with wooden applicator sticks) tubes of all PTs
below 10.8 seconds (especially if they are from the ED/ER. As with all
"abnormal" results, a repeat test is wise. I also suspect that the
calculated INR is actuality lower and 1.0 is the lower report range in this
case.

>I have a general question about aPTT/PTT/INR testing. I don't have all
> the reference range for the lab, but my results were:
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> I have a call in to my doctor, but I've never failed this test before so
> I'm curious as to (very general) things that can cause these results.

Reply to this Message