Failure of Onx valve and problems with lowering INR

Help Support ValveReplacement.org:

pellicle

Professional Dingbat
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
6,825
Location
Queensland, OzTrayLeeYa
Duke of Texas
Hey, I was thinking of annexing (*via military action) parts of Oklahoma and New Mexico ... does this interfere with any of your other dispensations? (*I'd hate to show disrespect to you ..). I have a bunch of gun tottin fellas who have put this to me as a God Given Right of Texas to do this (so I'm asking ya)
 

Agian

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Location
Adelaide, South Australia
Hey, I was thinking of annexing (*via military action) parts of Oklahoma and New Mexico ... does this interfere with any of your other dispensations? (*I'd hate to show disrespect to you ..). I have a bunch of gun tottin fellas who have put this to me as a God Given Right of Texas to do this (so I'm asking ya)
I will consider it.
 

Agian

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Location
Adelaide, South Australia
Hey, I was thinking of annexing (*via military action) parts of Oklahoma and New Mexico ... does this interfere with any of your other dispensations? (*I'd hate to show disrespect to you ..). I have a bunch of gun tottin fellas who have put this to me as a God Given Right of Texas to do this (so I'm asking ya)
My dearest Duke of Texas,
After some deliberation, We have decided you may proceed.

Regards,
George III Dei Gratia Kingus of Brittanicus and ****.
 

pellicle

Professional Dingbat
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
6,825
Location
Queensland, OzTrayLeeYa
Are you Aussies makin' fun of the screwed up mess we have in the US?😤
Would never do that. I understood that there are already sufficient numbers of American people doing that already, so it's a saturated market.

(If a slanted one)
However I invite you to make fun of our PM donating money to the US for assisting space research...
 

Warrick

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
528
Location
New Zealand
Came across this while surfin the interweb


A tad surprised to read this considering I have come across anon in the UK who has an on-x valve, has not had an INR above 2.0 for well over a year and was NOT prescribed low dose asprin as per the on-x protocol

“ We currently do NOT endorse the company advertised claims that On-X aortic valve can have target INR’s lower than that recommended in the above table”
 

pellicle

Professional Dingbat
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
6,825
Location
Queensland, OzTrayLeeYa
A tad surprised to read this considering I have come across anon in the UK who has an on-x valve, has not had an INR above 2.0 for well over a year and was NOT prescribed low dose asprin as per the on-x protocol
I must be tired, because I don't understand this

“ We currently do NOT endorse the company advertised claims that On-X aortic valve can have target INR’s lower than that recommended in the above table”
interesting (and I probably wouldn't do it either) ... perhaps its just their view
 

Warrick

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
528
Location
New Zealand
@pellicle I meant the fact that they are not going by the onx low inr protocol in wales, yet heres a person in the uk that is on the protocol and not even prescribed the mandatory daily asprin to go with it, piss poor
 

pellicle

Professional Dingbat
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
6,825
Location
Queensland, OzTrayLeeYa
@pellicle I meant the fact that they are not going by the onx low inr protocol in wales, yet heres a person in the uk that is on the protocol and not even prescribed the mandatory daily asprin to go with it, piss poor
it is indeed ... Its a bit poor that professionals in this area are somehow only focused on the lower INR aspect and the anti-platelet therapy component was missed. Its almost like they were briefed by sales people not the anticoagulation specialists ....
 

tom in MO

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
1,192
Location
MO USA
The document has some other things of concern:
  • They state that a target INR is more desirable than a range. However they do not take action until the INR is 0.5 low or above 0.7, this essentially is a target range. Semantics...
  • They recommend seeing a cardiologist every 5 years. Some people visit a cardiologist every year with an echo every 5 years.
  • They recommend bridging with heparin for all procedures requiring a lower INR irrespective of valve. My cardiologist and those of others on this forum have indicated for some procedure/valve combinations heparin is not needed.
If you want the source material, the most current paper they cite is here: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/36/2739/4095039
 

DDT77

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
49
Location
NC, USA
Interesting that recommendation for adjustment of high INR (< 6.0 but > 0.7 above target ) is 10-25% reduction in rat poison dosage. My cardio works on the 'hold' view on correction for even 0.1 above target range, which this reference uses for INR > 6.

I like the limited reduction approach due to the long half-life, even when INR is upto 6.

It seems the practitioners view (that I regularly see) of risk/reward push desire for low INR. We've likely all seen the figure the pellicle regularly circulates, and I find it comforting to see literature indicating INR even to 5 is not especially dangerous. Given inaccuracy in testing, I see more and more risk of being below 2.5 (which is center of my prescribed target range). I'll provide a challenge to my care staff with my next draw...
 

tom in MO

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
1,192
Location
MO USA
Don't forget, the risk that these people are managing is lawsuits not just medical risk. Running a high INR and using a target number rather than range could very well be a legal-based decision not a scientific one.
 

Warrick

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
528
Location
New Zealand
Not in my country, they just have a big rug to sweep medical misadventure under.. its called the ACC (accident compensation corporation) which is goverment run, medical mistakes are called accidents... rather than a lack of competence, hence you can’t sue under nz law
 

Protimenow

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
3,031
Location
California
Interesting that recommendation for adjustment of high INR (< 6.0 but > 0.7 above target ) is 10-25% reduction in rat poison dosage. My cardio works on the 'hold' view on correction for even 0.1 above target range, which this reference uses for INR > 6.

I like the limited reduction approach due to the long half-life, even when INR is upto 6.

It seems the practitioners view (that I regularly see) of risk/reward push desire for low INR. We've likely all seen the figure the pellicle regularly circulates, and I find it comforting to see literature indicating INR even to 5 is not especially dangerous. Given inaccuracy in testing, I see more and more risk of being below 2.5 (which is center of my prescribed target range). I'll provide a challenge to my care staff with my next draw...
I think that you must have completely misread the statement that you responded to. This was NOT about INRs of 6 or 7 - it was of INRs that were .5 BELOW the target INR up to .7 ABOVE the target INR - NOT INRs between 5 and 7. This is above and below the RANGe - not absolute values.

And referring to warfarin as 'Rat Poison' is outdated and inaccurate. There are some rats that have developed an immunity to warfarin -- but it IS killing animals further up the food chain that somehow eat animals that WERE killed by very high doses of warfarin.

Using the statement that warfarin is Rat Poison, you can say that salt is 'tree poison' because it is used to dry up the roots of trees that have been cut. Yet we eat salt, without considering that it can kill tree roots. We use chlorine to disinfect pools and clean water - it's a component of salt - is salt, then, 'bacteria poison' that must be avoided?

I read, years ago, that injecting plain water into a part of the body, over and over, every day, can result in the development of cancer, just as a result of the persistent injury to tissue. Is water carcinogenic? How can we safely drink it if it causes cancer?

This 'Rat Poison' thing should end here.
 
2
Group Builder
Top