scholarly journals The Challenge of Diagnosing Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia with Negative Immunologic and Functional Assays

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Glosser LD ◽  
◽  
Knauss HM ◽  
Jodeh W ◽  
Craig D ◽  
...  

Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a prothrombotic and potentially fatal immune complication of heparin therapy. HIT is challenging to diagnose, particularly in critically ill patients where multiple causes of thrombocytopenia must be considered. Diagnostic algorithms for HIT begin with a clinical assessment, followed by laboratory testing when indicated. If Platelet Factor-4 (PF4)/heparin immunoassay and Serotonin Release Assays (SRA) are negative, HIT is deemed unlikely and heparin therapy may be resumed. Current recommendations have excluded the next step in work up for thrombocytopenia after immunoassay and functional assays result negative despite worsening thrombocytopenia following heparin re-initiation. We present the case of an 85-year-old male with multiple comorbidities, found to have a clinical course consistent with HIT despite negative serologic and functional assay results. Our case highlights the challenge in diagnosing heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in a medically complex patient and demonstrates the need for standardized recommendations following negative laboratory results despite high clinical suspicion.

Perfusion ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J DeBois ◽  
Junli Liu ◽  
Leonard Y Lee ◽  
Leonard N Girardi ◽  
Charles Mack ◽  
...  

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a major side effect secondary to the administration of heparin. This syndrome is serious and potentially life threatening. This response is the result of antibodies formed against the platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin complex. The incidence of this immune-mediated syndrome has been estimated to be 1-3% of all patients receiving heparin therapy. The occurrence of HIT in patients requiring full anticoagulation for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), therefore, presents a serious challenge to the cardiac surgery team. The diagnosis of HIT should be based on both clinical and laboratory evidence. While functional assays, platelet aggregation tests, and the serotonin release assay can be used to support the diagnosis, the negative predictive value of these tests is generally less than 50%. In contrast, although non-functional antibody detection assays are more sensitive, they have a low specificity. HIT can be treated in several ways, including cessation of all heparin and giving an alternative thrombin inhibitor, platelet inhibition followed by heparin infusion, and the use of low molecular weight heparins. In this presentation, the pathology and current diagnostic tests, as well as the successful management of patients with HIT undergoing CPB at New York Presbyterian Hospital, are reviewed.


2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 410-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suresh G. Shelat ◽  
Anne Tomaski ◽  
Eleanor S. Pollak

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) can lead to life-threatening and limb-threatening thrombosis. HIT is thought to be initiated by the interaction of pathogenic antibodies toward a complex platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin (PF4:H), which can activate platelets and predispose to thrombosis. As such, the laboratory diagnosis of HIT includes antigenic and functional assays to detect antibodies directed at PF4:H complexes. We performed a retrospective analysis of 1017 consecutive samples tested by serotonin-release assay and by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Most samples showed no serologic evidence of HIT, whereas 4% to 5% of samples demonstrated both antigenic and functional serological evidence for HIT. Approximately 12% to 18% of samples showed immunologic evidence of anti-PF4:H antibodies but without functional evidence of serotonin release in vitro. Interestingly, a small minority of samples (0.7%) caused serotonin release but were negative in the ELISA. The results are presented using cutoff values established at our hospital and for the ELISA manufacturer. This study provides a pretest probability of the serologic results from an antigenic assay (ELISA) and a functional assay (serotonin-release assay) in patients clinically suspected of having HIT.


Hematology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
pp. 536-544
Author(s):  
Allyson M. Pishko ◽  
Adam Cuker

Abstract Clinicians generally counsel patients with a history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) to avoid heparin products lifelong. Although there are now many alternative (nonheparin) anticoagulants available, heparin avoidance remains challenging for cardiac surgery. Heparin is often preferred in the cardiac surgery setting based on the vast experience with the agent, ease of monitoring, and reversibility. To “clear” a patient with a history of HIT for cardiac surgery, hematologists must first confirm the diagnosis of HIT, which can be challenging due to the ubiquity of heparin exposure and frequency of thrombocytopenia in patients in the cardiac intensive care unit. Next, the “phase of HIT” (acute HIT, subacute HIT A/B, or remote HIT) should be established based on platelet count, immunoassay for antibodies to platelet factor 4/heparin complexes, and a functional assay (eg, serotonin release assay). As long as the HIT functional assay remains positive (acute HIT or subacute HIT A), cardiac surgery should be delayed if possible. If surgery cannot be delayed, an alternative anticoagulant (preferably bivalirudin) may be used. Alternatively, heparin may be used with either preoperative/intraoperative plasma exchange or together with a potent antiplatelet agent. The optimal strategy among these options is not known, and the choice depends on institutional experience and availability of alternative anticoagulants. In the later phases of HIT (subacute HIT B or remote HIT), brief intraoperative exposure to heparin followed by an alternative anticoagulant as needed in the postoperative setting is recommended.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brigitte Tardy ◽  
Thomas Lecompte ◽  
François Mullier ◽  
Caroline Vayne ◽  
Claire Pouplard

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a prothrombotic immune drug reaction caused by platelet-activating antibodies that in most instances recognize platelet factor 4 (PF4)/polyanion complexes. Platelet activation assays (i.e., functional assays) are more specific than immunoassays, since they are able to discern clinically relevant heparin-induced antibodies. All functional assays used for HIT diagnosis share the same principle, as they assess the ability of serum/plasma from suspected HIT patients to activate fresh platelets from healthy donors in the presence of several concentrations of heparin. Depending on the assay, donors’ platelets are stimulated either in whole blood (WB), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), or in a buffer medium (washed platelets, WP). In addition, the activation endpoint studied varies from one assay to another: platelet aggregation, membrane expression of markers of platelet activation, release of platelet granules. Tests with WP are more sensitive and serotonin release assay (SRA) is considered to be the current gold standard, but functional assays suffer from certain limitations regarding their sensitivity, specificity, complexity, and/or accessibility. However, the strict adherence to adequate preanalytical conditions, the use of selected platelet donors and the inclusion of positive and negative controls in each run are key points that ensure their performances.


Author(s):  
Ulrich J. Sachs ◽  
Nina Cooper ◽  
Andreas Czwalinna ◽  
Jens Müller ◽  
Bernd Pötzsch ◽  
...  

Background. COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCov-19 may rarely lead to vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT). Antibody-mediated, platelet factor 4 (PF4) dependent platelet activation appears to resemble a key mechanism in VITT, partially comparable to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). The use of PF4/heparin immunoassays has been proposed as part of a diagnostic approach, but their sensitivity has not been established. Methods. Sera from 12 well-defined VITT patients were first studied by two different laboratories in functional assays. Sera where then used for an inter-laboratory comparison, in which 5 different PF4/heparin immunoassays were used by 4 laboratories. Results. Results for functional testing were highly concordant. VITT antibodies were also reliably detected by PF4/heparin ELISAs (92-100%). In contrast, only 25% of VITT antibodies were reactive in a particle gel immunoassay (PaGIA), and 8% in a lateral flow assay (LFA). An automated chemiluminescence assay (CLIA) was negative for all sera tested (0%). Conclusion. It seems feasible to establish functional antibody testing for the confirmation of VITT. For the initial screening of suspected VITT cases, PaGIA, LFA, and CLIA are useless when applied as single tests. Only ELISA-based PF4/heparin immunoassays are sensitive enough to be incorporated in the diagnostic work-up. However, a combination of a positive ELISA and a negative CLIA may be useful to identify VITT antibodies in the absence of confirmatory functional assays.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2757-2757
Author(s):  
Ishac Nazi ◽  
Donald M Arnold ◽  
James W Smith ◽  
Theodore E. Warkentin ◽  
Jane C Moore ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a common drug reaction that causes arterial or venous thrombosis as a result of heparin therapy. Platelet-activating antibodies, against complexes of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin, cause intense platelet activation, ultimately leading to an increased risk of thrombosis, limb-loss and even death. Most patients exposed to heparin will produce non-pathogenic anti-PF4/heparin antibodies while only a small number will produce platelet-activating and HIT-causing antibodies (pathogenic HIT antibodies). Among HIT tests, the functional assays, such as the serotonin release assay (SRA), correlate best with the disease because they can specifically identify the pathogenic HIT antibodies whereas the enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) cannot. We have previously shown that anti-PF4/heparin antibody production precedes thrombocytopenia in HIT patients (Warkentin et al., Blood 2009 113: 4963-4969) possibly indicating the need for a threshold plasma level of pathogenic HIT antibody, among other factors, to cause the disease. The objective of this study was to investigate the presence of low levels of pathogenic HIT antibodies in samples from patients suspected of HIT who had detectable anti-PF4/heparin antibodies in the EIA (EIA-positive), but who did not have platelet-activating antibodies in the standard SRA (SRA-negative). Methods: We used an in-house IgG-specific EIA to detect the presence of anti-PF4/heparin antibodies (EIA-positive: OD405nm> 0.45) and the standard SRA to detect the presence of heparin-dependent platelet-activating antibodies (SRA-positive: release >20% with 0.1-0.3 IU/mL of unfractionated heparin). We developed an enhanced SRA (eSRA) by adding increasing concentrations of exogenous PF4 (0-100 μg/mL) to detect sub-threshold levels of platelet activating antibodies undetectable in the standard SRA (eSRA-positive: release >20%). Samples tested were referred for HIT testing by the McMaster Platelet Immunology Laboratory (Hamilton, Canada). Results: Sera from healthy individuals (n=10) and from suspected HIT patients with a negative anti-PF4/heparin EIA (n=15) did not demonstrate platelet activation in the eSRA at any dose of exogenous PF4 added. SRA-positive sera (n = 7), diluted sufficiently that they were non-reactive in the standard SRA, demonstrated PF4 dose-dependent platelet activation in the eSRA. This confirmed the increased sensitivity of the eSRA in detecting low-titre platelet-activating antibodies. Reactivity in the eSRA was inhibited by high heparin (100 U/mL) and by blocking the platelet FcgRIIa receptor with the monoclonal antibody IV.3. We then tested samples (n=24) referred for HIT testing that were positive in the anti-PF4/heparin EIA (optical densities OD405nm 0.7 to 2.4) but negative in the standard SRA. Heparin-dependent platelet activation (20-99% release) was demonstrated in 11 of 24 (46%) in the eSRA. This reactivity directly correlated with the amount of PF4 added to the platelets (optimal concentration of PF4 12.5 - 100 μg/mL) but not with the strength (OD405nm) of the anti-PF4/heparin EIA. In further investigations, we concentrated (4-fold) 7 of the 11 eSRA-positive samples in an attempt to increase the concentration of the antibodies. Of those 7 samples, 5 (71%) became positive in the standard SRA upon testing of the concentrated sample. Conclusions: These data indicate that low-titre platelet-activating antibodies may be found in some patients suspected of having HIT that test negative in the standard SRA irrespective of the strength (OD405nm) of the anti-PF4/heparin EIA. The immune response during heparin therapy can produce both families of pathogenic and non-pathogenic anti-PF4/heparin antibodies but it is the titre of the pathogenic antibody that may be necessary for platelet activation. Perhaps under permissive clinical conditions and with patient-specific factors, the titre of the pathogenic HIT antibodies may increase and lead to HIT. Disclosures Warkentin: Pfizer Canada: Honoraria; Instrumentation Laboratory: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; W.L. Gore: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3209-3209
Author(s):  
Edward C.C. Wong ◽  
Laura A. Worfolk ◽  
Caixia Bi ◽  
Lina J. Noh ◽  
Andrew Espinoza ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Antibodies that cause heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) can be detected with either antigenic or functional assays. Previously, it has been shown that antigenic (ELISA based) assays that detect anti-platelet factor 4 (anti-PF4) IgG, IgM, or IgA (polyspecific) antibodies are more sensitive but less specific than functional assays such as the unfractionated serotonin release assay (UFH SRA), and that the use of anti-PF4 assays that detect IgG antibodies only, would increase the specificity but decrease the sensitivity of these assays for the detection of HIT antibodies that are prothrombotic (associated with positive functional assay). To date large epidemiologic studies have not confirm these findings. To evaluate the relative performance of anti-PF4 polyspecific and IgG-specific antibodies in their ability to detect prothrombotic HIT antibodies, we evaluated results of non-reflexive HIT panels that contained either anti-PF4 polyspecific or IgG-specific assays and unfractionated heparin serotonin release assays over an eight-year period at a U.S. reference laboratory. Methods: Test results for 2 HIT detection panels were compared: 1 panel had UFH SRA plus the polyspecific PF4 ENHANCED® assay (GTI Diagnostics, Waukesha, WI) and 1 panel had UFH SRA plus the IgG-specific Zymutest HIA IgG assay (Hyphen Biomed, France). Test results were from the last 4 years of use for each panel (2009 to 2012 for the polyspecific panel; 2017 to 2020 for the IgG-specific panel). UFH SRA was performed as described by Sheridan et al, (1986) with positivity defined as ≥20% serotonin release by low dose UFH and >50% suppression of release at high dose (100 U/mL) UFH. For each year and assay, test results were stratified by optical density (OD) results, and the percent of results positive by UFH SRA was determined for each OD range. Median yearly UFH SRA positivity rates for each OD interval were compared for anti-PF4 polyspecific vs IgG-specific antibody assays using non-parametric statistical testing, Mann-Whitney U test, two-tailed, with significance defined as <0.05. Results: HIT panels with either ELISA based assays detecting either anti-PF4 polyspecific or IgG specific antibodies demonstrated increasing UFH SRA positivity rates as OD increased. Approximately 50% UFH SRA positivity occurred when OD was in the 2.000 to range. No significant differences in SRA positivity were seen at any positive OD interval when comparing anti-PF4 polyspecific vs IgG-specific assays. A small but significant difference was seen when OD results were considered This observation may have been due to a in the review process (2017-2020): when a UFH SRA result was positive with a negative OD result, repeat UFH SRA testing was performed. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that the correlations of UFH SRA positivity and OD measurements are similar for anti-PF4 IgG-specific and polyspecific antibody assays. These results suggest the assay types may perform similarly for the detection of HIT and importantly provide important predictive information as to when an optical density value will lead to a positive UFH SRA result. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wong: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Worfolk: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment. Bi: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment. Noh: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment. Espinoza: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment. Wu: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment. Sahud: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment. Racke: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment. Dlott: Quest Diagnostics: Current Employment.


TH Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Caroline Gonthier ◽  
Nicolas Gendron ◽  
philippine Eloy ◽  
Marie-Charlotte Bourrienne ◽  
martine alhenc-gelas ◽  
...  

Laboratory confirmation of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is of crucial importance and remains challenging and relies on platelet functional assays highlighting the presence of heparin-dependent platelet-activating antibodies in patient serum or plasma. Platelet functional assays using washed platelets include the 14C-serotonin release assay (SRA), usually described as the gold standard, and the heparin-induced platelet activation assay (HIPA). Since its first comparison with SRA there has been no additional published study regarding HIPA diagnostic performances compared to SRA. Aim of our retrospective study was to compare the concordance between HIPA and SRA in HIT suspected-patients with positive anti-PF4/heparin antibodies between October 2010 and October 2015. Fifty-five HIT-suspected patients who beneficiated from both HIPA and SRA were included. Positive and negative percent agreements were 83.8% (95% CI 68.0–93.8%) and 66.7% (95% CI 41.0–86.7%), respectively. Overall percent agreement was 78.2% (95% CI 65.0–92.2%). Agreement was higher in patients who underwent cardiopulmonary bypass with extracorporeal circulation circuit for cardiac surgery. We also confirm that the use of a minimum of 2 platelet donors to establish positive HIT diagnosis and 4 platelet donors to exclude HIT diagnosis allows obtaining a good agreement with SRA. Although HIPA and SRA were performed with different platelet donors and in different laboratories, HIPA had a good positive agreement with SRA for HIT diagnosis, showing that HIPA is a useful functional assay that does not require radioactivity and could be developed worldwide to improve HIT diagnosis.


1993 ◽  
Vol 69 (04) ◽  
pp. 344-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
B H Chong ◽  
J Burgess ◽  
F Ismail

SummaryThe platelet aggregation test is widely used for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), a potentially serious complication of heparin therapy. We have evaluated its sensitivity and specificity in comparison with those of the 14C-serotonin release test. The sensitivity of the platelet aggregation test was found to vary with the heparin concentration and the donor of the platelets used in the test. The optimal heparin concentrations were between 0.1 and 1.0 U/ml. Using these heparin concentrations, the mean sensitivity varied from 39% (with the least reactive platelets) to 81% (with the most reactive platelets). In comparison, the sensitivity of the release test ranged from 65% to 94%. The specificities of the platelet aggregation test were 82%, 90% and 100% for the following control groups: (1) non-thrombocytopenic patients given heparin, (2) patients with thrombocytopenia due to other causes, and (3) normal controls not given heparin, respectively. The corresponding specificities for the release test was 94%, 90% and 100%. The specificities can be further increased to 100% for all controls with the adoption of a two-point system which defines a positive result as one in which platelet aggregation occurs with a low heparin concentration (0.5 U/ml) but not with 100 U heparin/ml. For optimal results, a two-point platelet aggregation test should be performed with heparin concentrations of 0.5 and 100 U/ml and using platelets of more reactive donors.


2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 944-949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinya Motohashi ◽  
Takefumi Matsuo ◽  
Hidenori Inoue ◽  
Makoto Kaneko ◽  
Shunya Shindo

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is one of the serious complications in patients who undergo cardiac surgery. However, there remains a major problem in diagnosing HIT because the current immunological assays for detection of HIT antibody have limitations. Furthermore, the clinical course of thrombocytopenia in this surgery makes it increasingly difficult to diagnose HIT. We investigated the relationship between platelet count and HIT antibody in 59 patients who underwent cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The number of postoperative HIT antibody-positive patients evaluated using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit (polyanion IgG/IgA/IgM complex antibodies/antiplatelet factor 4 enhanced) was 37 (62.7%). In contrast, platelet activation by HIT antibody was evaluated using the serotonin release assay (SRA). More than 20% and 50% release of serotonin was obtained from 12 patients (20.3%) and 8 patients (13.6%), respectively. The levels of d-dimer were significantly different on postoperative day 14 between SRA-positive and SRA-negative groups; however, postoperative thrombus complication was not detected using sonography in the patients with positive serotonin release at all. After being decreased by the operation, their platelet count recovered within 2 weeks in both groups equally. In our study, although the patients were positive in the platelet activating HIT antibody assay, they remained free from thrombosis and their platelet count recovered after early postoperative platelet decrease. Therefore, in addition to the SRA, monitoring of platelet count might be still considered an indispensable factor to facilitate the prediction of HIT thrombosis prior to manifestation in the patients undergoing cardiac surgery using CPB.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document