Comparison of Rapid Centrifugation Technique with Conventional Centrifugation for Prothrombin Time (PT) and Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT) Testing

  • Ekta Chandler
  • Naveen KakkarEmail author
  • Rupinder Kaur
Original Article


Prothrombin Time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) are frequently performed coagulation tests in patients with coagulation disorders especially in critical care areas and in monitoring patients on anticoagulation therapy. In coagulation testing, sample processing especially centrifugation is one of the most critical steps that affect turnaround time (TAT). This study was carried out over a period of 1 year. Three hundred paired samples from patients sent for PT and APTT estimation were included. One sample was centrifuged in a regular bench top centrifuge at 1500g for 20 min. The other sample was divided into two polypropylene aliquots and centrifuged in a microcentrifuge at 13000g for 3 min. The plasma obtained from both methods was tested for PT and APTT using the automated method on STA Compact coagulometer (Stago) using commercial thromboplastin STAR-NeoplastineR C1 Plus and phospholipid (cephalin), STAR-C K PRESTR 5 respectively. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Student t test, correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plots. Mean PT, INR and APTT for both centrifugation methods was comparable with no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). PT, INR and APTT also showed good correlation (r > 0.98) when compared between the two methods of centrifugation. Bland–Altman comparison between rapid and conventional methods of centrifugation for PT, INR and APTT also showed acceptable agreement. Rapid centrifugation technique for routine coagulation testing can be used safely with a significant reduction in the TAT. This can benefit patients in critical care settings and those on outpatient oral anticoagulant therapy.


Centrifugation Conventional Rapid PT APTT TAT 



We thank the laboratory technicians of the Clinical hematology laboratory for their assistance during the study.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. No patient/subject identifying information has been disclosed in the manuscript. No patient/subject intervention was done and the subjects were not exposed to any risks during the study.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was taken from the patients included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Laffan MA, Manning R (2012) Investigation of hemostasis. In: Bain BJ, Bates I, Laffan M, Lewis SM (eds) Dacie and Lewis practical hematology, 11th edn. Churchill Livingstone, London, pp 393–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Magnette A, Chatelain M, Chatelain B, Ten Cate H, Mullier F (2016) Pre-analytical issues in the haemostasis laboratory: guidance for the clinical laboratories. Thromb J 14:49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adcock DM, Hoefner DM, Kottke-Marchant K, Marlar RA, Szamosi DI, Warunek DJ (2008) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: collection, transport and processing of blood specimens for testing plasma-based coagulation assays and molecular hemostasis assay; Approved guideline- H21-A5, 5th edn. NCCLS, WayneGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hilborne LH, Oye RK, McArdle JE, Repinski JA, Rodgerson DO (1989) Evaluation of stat and routine turnaround times as a component of laboratory quality. Am J Clin Pathol 91:331–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steindel SJ, Howanitz PJ (2001) Physician satisfaction and emergency department laboratory test turnaround time. Arch Pathol Lab Med 125:863–871Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Callum JL, Rizoli S, Pendergrast J (2010) Rapid laboratory testing for trauma patients: where a perfect result may not be in the best interests of the patient. Transfusion 50:2529–2532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hope E, Mayorga SR, Robinson S, Goldberg L, Leveson JE, Marengo-Rowe AJ et al (1991) Preparation of plasma for coagulation testing: evaluation of the StatSpin® high-speed centrifuge. Lab Med 22:190–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boudaoud L, Divaret G, Marie P, Bezeaud A (2006) Rapid centrifugation for routine coagulation testing. Ann Biol Clin 64:315–317Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kao CH, Shu LC, Yen WH (2010) Evaluation of a high-speed centrifuge with rapid preparation of plasma for coagulation testing to improve turnaround time. J Biomed Lab Sci 22:23–27Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pappas AA, Palmer SK, Meece D, Fink LM (1991) Rapid preparation of plasma for coagulation testing. Arch Pathol Lab Med 115:816–817Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nelson S, Pritt A, Marlar RA (1994) Rapid preparation of plasma for ‘Stat’ coagulation testing. Arch Pathol Lab Med 118:175–176Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hope E, Mayorga SR, Robinson S, Goldberg L, Leveson JE, Marengo-Rowe AJ et al (1991) Preparation of plasma for coagulation testing: evaluation of the StatSpin® high-speed centrifuge. Lab Med 22:190–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sultan A (2010) Five-minute preparation of platelet-poor plasma for routine coagulation testing. East Mediterr Health J 16:233–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Azlin I, Hafiza A, Azma RZ, Aidifitrina RK, Hamidah NH (2011) Effect of higher centrifugation speed and shortened centrifugation time on prothrombin and activated thromboplastin time. Med Health 6:68–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boissier E, Sévin-Allouet M, Le Thuaut A, De Gaalon S, Trossaërt M, Rozec B et al (2017) A 2-min at 4500g rather than a 15-min at 2200g centrifugation does not impact the reliability of 10 critical coagulation assays. Clin Chem Lab Med 55:e118–e121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Suchsland J, Friedrich N, Grotevendt A, Kallner A, Lüdemann J, Nauck M et al (2014) Optimizing centrifugation of coagulation samples in laboratory automation. Clin Chem Lab Med 52:1187–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lawrence JB (2003) Preanalytical variables in the coagulation laboratory. Lab Med 34:49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Lima-Oliveira G, Guidi GC, Favaloro EJ (2012) Quality standards for sample collection in coagulation testing. Semin Thromb Hemost 38:565–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laga AC, Cheves TA, Sweeney JD (2006) The effect of specimen hemolysis on coagulation test results. Am J Clin Pathol 126:748–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PathologyChristian Medical College and HospitalLudhianaIndia

Personalised recommendations