Wednesday, March 26, 2008

28--160--100

One number is her age.


One number is her INR

One number is her BUN

I'm going to fix her.

Medications are vewy, vewy, danguous.


5 Outbursts:

ArkieRN said...

Holy Crap!!!! An INR of 28! Was she popping them like M&Ms? Man she sure screwed up her kidneys. Is the renal insuffiency reversible?

Michael Rack, MD said...

So, INR is 28, age is 100, and BUN is 160- is that right?

The Happy Hospitalist said...

yes.

That is correct

Ohio Oncologist said...

Remember that INR is logrithmic and not linear so an INR of 28 is not that different from an INR of 14 - the number just seems scarier. However, in a 100 year old neither an INR of 14 nor 28 is a good thing.

The Happy Hospitalist said...

ohio, As far as I'm concerned, anything above 4 is a moot point to me. Then it's a matter of:

Are they bleeding or are they not bleeding? If they are having clinically significant bleeding it doesn't matter if their INR is 2 or 20, it's too high.

I generally don't treat any INR below 6-8 unless they are actively bleeding. Above 8-10, they'll get a whiff of Vit K.