Laboratory diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: advantages of a functional flow cytometric test in comparison to the heparin-induced platelet-activation test

2001 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Poley ◽  
Wolfgang Mempel
Biomedicines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 332
Author(s):  
Brigitte Tardy-Poncet ◽  
Aurélie Montmartin ◽  
Michele Piot ◽  
Martine Alhenc-Gelas ◽  
Philippe Nguyen ◽  
...  

Reliable laboratory diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) remains a major clinical concern. Immunoassays are highly sensitive, while confirmatory functional tests (based on heparin-dependent platelet activation) lack standardization. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of a functional flow cytometric assay (FCA) based on the detection of heparin-dependent platelet activation with an anti-p-selectin. A total of 288 patients were included (131 HIT-positive and 157 HIT-negative) with a HIT diagnosis established by expert opinion adjudication (EOA) considering clinical data and local laboratory results. The FCA was centrally performed in a single laboratory on platelet-rich plasma, using a very simple four-color fluorometer. The results were standardized according to the Heparin Platelet Activation (HEPLA) index. The serotonin release assay (SRA) was performed in the four French reference laboratories. Based on the final HIT diagnosis established by EOA, the sensitivity and specificity of the FCA were 88 and 95%, respectively, values very similar to those of the SRA (88 and 97%, respectively). This study showed that the FCA, based on easily implementable technology, may be routinely used as a reliable confirmatory test for HIT diagnosis.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 2189-2189
Author(s):  
Susanne Macher ◽  
Nazanin Sareban ◽  
Camilla Drexler ◽  
Gerhard Lanzer ◽  
Katharina Schallmoser

Abstract Abstract 2189 Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), caused by antibodies against heparin/platelet factor 4 (HPF4) complex, is a rare but potentially serious side effect of heparin therapy where due to high mortality, rapid diagnosis is crucial. For the detection of HPF4 antibodies we compared the new nanoparticle-based lateral-flow immunoassay (LFI-HIT, Milenia Biotec, Germany) and a particle gel immunoassay (PaGIA, BioRad, Germany) with an IgG-specific-PF4/polyanion enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (IgG-ELISA, GTI Diagnostics, USA). Sera from 121 patients (54/67 f/m, median 73 years, range 14–94) with suspected HIT were prospectively tested. The LFI-HIT and the PaGIA were evaluated visually, the IgG-ELISA was positive at an optical density (OD) cutoff > 0.4. For most of the positive samples, the functional heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) assay was additionally performed to detect false positive serological results and to confirm a clinically relevant HIT by in vitro platelet-activation. Regarding HIT as a clinico-pathological syndrome, characteristics for HIT were evaluated for each patient by the 4Ts scoring system and divided into high, intermediate or low risk. Results of serological analyses and OD values are summarized in the table. Ten of 121 samples were positive in the LFI-HIT, 10/10 positive in the PaGIA and 8/10 positive in the IgG-ELISA. The HIPA was tested in 9/10 samples and was positive in 8/9 samples. Of the 2 samples positive for LFI-HIT and PaGIA but negative in the ELISA, 1 was HIPA positive, 1 HIPA negative, resulting in a specificity of 88.9% for the LFI-HIT assay correlated to the HIPA. From 111/121 LFI-HIT-negative samples, 2 were positive in the PaGIA, the IgG-ELISA (OD 1.318 and 2,019) and in the HIPA. Seven of the 111 LFI-HIT negative samples were positive only in the IgG-ELISA. Due to marginal positive reactions of 5/7 samples in the ELISA with OD values between 0.4 to 0.5, only 2 LIF-HIT negative IgG-ELISA positive samples were tested by HIPA and 1/2 was positive. Based on the ELISA, the sensitivity of the LFI-HIT was 91.9% (102/111 negative samples also negative in the ELISA) in contrast to 93.1% of the PaGIA. The specificity of the LFI-HIT was 80% (LFI-HIT and IgG-ELISA positive), compared to 57.9% of the PaGIA. Notably, the clinical risk estimated by the 4Ts score system (received from 92/121 patients) did not correlate with laboratory diagnosis of HIT, probably due to inadequate evaluation. Concluding our data, a reliable exclusion of HIT by rapid testing with the LFI-HIT only seems possible with additional analysis of HPF4 antibodies by IgG-ELISA and/or HIPA assay. LFI-HIT PaGIA IgG-ELISA OD IgG-ELISA HIPA assay Median (range) Samples n=121 Pos 10 Pos 10 Pos 8 2.366 (0.902-3.000) 7/7 pos Neg 2 0.199 and 0.170 1/2 pos, 1/2 neg Neg 0 - - - - Neg 111 Pos 9 Pos 2 1.318 and 2.019 2/2 pos Neg 7 0.110 (0.054-0.139) 6/6 neg Neg 102 Pos 7 0.436 (0.404-1.463) 1/2 pos, 1/2 neg Neg 95 0.082 (0.013-0.376) Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


1999 ◽  
Vol 82 (10) ◽  
pp. 1255-1259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenche Jy ◽  
Wei Wei Mao ◽  
Lawrence Horstman ◽  
Peter Valant ◽  
Yeon Ahn

SummaryHeparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a well-known complication of heparin administration but usually resolves upon discontinuation without sequelae. However, a small proportion of HIT patients develop thrombosis associated with HIT, designated as HITT, which is often life-threatening and may lead to gangrene and amputations. Existing laboratory methods of confirming HIT/HITT do not distinguish between HIT and HITT. We report a flow cytometric assay of platelet activation marker CD62P to distinguish the effects of addition of HIT vs. HITT plasma to normal blood. Briefly, normal whole blood was incubated with platelet-poor plasma from 12 patients with HITT, 30 with HIT, and 65 controls, in presence and absence of heparin, and expression of CD62P was assayed by flow cytometry. When the ratios of fluorescent intensity of CD62P with heparin divided by that without heparin were compared, HITT plasma induced significantly higher ratios than HIT plasma (HITT ratios ~2.5 vs. HIT ratios ~1.2; p <0.001). Eleven of 12 HITT patients were positive by this test but only 5 of 30 HIT patients were positive (p < 0.0005). In a case of HIT with silent thrombosis, this assay gave a positive results prior to clinically evident thrombosis. In conclusion, this method distinguishes HITT from HIT and may be clinically useful in the detection of HITT, allowing early intervention for preventing catastrophic thrombosis.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. e0192079 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana Huskens ◽  
Yaqiu Sang ◽  
Joke Konings ◽  
Lisa van der Vorm ◽  
Bas de Laat ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document