BackgroundHeparin therapy and prophylaxis may be accompanied by bleeding and thrombotic complications due to individual responses to treatment. Dosage control based on standard laboratory assays poorly reflects the effect of the therapy. The aim of our work was to compare the heparin sensitivity of new thrombodynamics (TD) assay with sensitivity of other standard and global coagulation tests available to date.Study population and methodsA total of 296 patients with high risk of venous thromboembolism (deep vein thrombosis (DVT), early postoperative period, hemoblastosis) were enrolled in the study. We used a case-crossover design to evaluate the sensitivity of new thrombodynamics assay (TD) to the hemostatic state before and after unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) therapy/prophylaxis and to compare it with the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), anti-Xa activity test, thrombin generation test (TGT) and thromboelastography (TEG). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate changes before and after heparin prophylaxis and therapy. Blood was sampled before heparin injection, at the time of maximal blood heparin concentration and before the next injection.ResultsHypercoagulation before the start of heparin treatment was detected by TD, TGT and TEG but not by APTT. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was maximal for TD and anti-Xa, intermediate for TGT and TEG and minimal for APTT.ConclusionsThese results indicate that TD has a high sensitivity to the effects of UFH and LMWH after both prophylactic and therapeutic regimes and may be used for heparin monitoring.

Research objective To research the association of prothrombin (factor II) activity given the prothrombin G20210A mutation carriage with its clinical manifestations as thrombotic complications. Materials and methods A prospective clinical cohort study of 290 women of reproductive age was conducted. Two cohort groups were identified: the study group of 140 patients with prothrombin mutation G20210A genotype and the control group of 150 women with G20210G genotype. Results The prothrombin G20210A mutation carriage is associated with the risk of thrombotic complications compared to the wild G20210G type (RR =17.1; p <0.0001) and is characterized by thrombosis localized both in the venous (66.7%) and arterial (33.3%) vascular pools. The threshold value of prothrombin activity (174.8%) for G20210A genotype was calculated, making it possible to conclusively predict the risk of thrombotic events with the accuracy of 90.4%. Conclusion The phenotypic manifestation of the prothrombin G20210A mutation in the form of venous and arterial thromboses in women of reproductive age is associated with a super-threshold increase in prothrombin (factor II) activity, which makes it possible to stratify the patients into the group of high risk of thromboses.

Objective To study the association between high activity of Factor II (prothrombin) in blood plasma with G20210A mutation and the development of great obstetrical syndromes. Material and methods A prospective clinical cohort study was conducted on 290 pregnant women (average age 31.7 ± 4.7 years old). The main group was made up of 140 G20210A patients, while the control group comprised 150 women with the wild G20210G type. The aim was to evaluate the activity of Factor II in the venous blood plasma during the stages of pregnancy with regard to trophoblast invasion waves. As per results, association analysis of Factor II activity value and gestational complications was carried out. Results In the control group, the median (Me) of Factor II activity ranged from 108% (preconception period) to 144% (pregnancy) [95% CI 130–150]. In patients with the GA type, the value was significantly higher in related periods, ranging from 149 to 181% [95% CI 142–195], p < 0.0001. With Factor II activity ranging from 148.5 to 180.6%, pregnancies in the main group had no complications. Higher levels of Factor II activity were associated with the development of early and/or severe preeclampsia (PE) and fetal growth retardation (FGR). Conclusion The data obtained regarding Factor II activity in blood plasma, juxtaposed with the development of great obstetrical syndromes, allow to assume that manifestation of G20210A in early and/or severe PE and FGR is associated with this coagulation factor’s level of activity. Threshold value of the Factor II activity with G20210A mutation, allowing to predict the development of PE, comprised 171.0% at the preconception stage (AUC – 0.86; p < 0.0001) and within 7–8 weeks of gestation it was 181.3% (AUC – 0.84; p < 0.0001).

The composition dependences of magnetic exchange couplings for the cubic phase of Fe2+xMn1-xAl Heusler alloys, where 0.0 < x < 1.0 are obtained with the help of first principles calculations. Our simulations have shown that the Fe-Fe nearest neighbors present a strong ferromagnetic coupling. Moreover, these exchange interactions are larger than the other ones.

Purpose: The purposes of this study were (1) to investigate discrepancies between what physical therapy students report learning in the classroom regarding blood pressure (BP) guidelines and what physical therapy students report observing and practicing in clinical settings and (2) to establish whether students felt discomfort when discrepancies were encountered. Methods: This was a prospective descriptive survey study generated using a sample of convenience employing a survey developed by the researchers. Face and content validity were established through expert review. An email was sent to 21 New York State Physical Therapy Programs asking each program to share the survey with students in their programs who had completed clinical experiences. The responses were analyzed descriptively using frequency counts, percentages, and cross tabulations. Results: Responses were received from 206 students attending 13 different programs, or 61.9% of the programs contacted. More than half the students (53.4%) reported there were differences between what they learned during classroom instruction regarding BP assessment and what they saw and practiced in the clinic; 24.8% of students expressed discomfort related to discrepancies between what they learned in school and what they saw and practiced in the clinic. Inpatient and outpatient experiences were compared. Statistical differences were found indicating patients had their BP assessed less often in outpatient settings. In addition, students were less likely to discuss BP assessment with their clinical instructors (CIs) in outpatient settings and students were more likely to express increased competence taking BP after inpatient clinical experiences. Across all settings, 20.4% of students reported that neither they nor their CI ever measured BP during their most recent clinical experience. Conclusions: Across all settings, the BP assessment practices that students encounter in clinic differ from what students report learning is best practice during their physical therapy education. Students are more likely to encounter discrepancies in outpatient settings. For many students, encountering discrepancies gives rise to feelings of discomfort.