Armando Tripodi1. 1. Angelo Bianchi Bonomi Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Milan and IRCCS Maggiore Hospital, Mangiagalli and Regina Elena Foundation, Milano, Italy. armando.tripodi@unimi.it
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lupus anticoagulants (LA) are a heterogeneous class of immunoglobulins. Persistent LA positivity is a risk factor for the occurrence and recurrence of venous/arterial thromboembolism and/or pregnancy morbidity and qualifies the patient for anticoagulation therapy. The laboratory diagnosis for LA that is used for crucial decision-making about the optimal duration of the therapy rests entirely on diagnostic criteria. These criteria are based on the prolongation of phospholipid-dependent tests not corrected upon mixing patient and normal plasmas, with confirmation provided by the evidence that the anticoagulant is directed against proteins bound to negatively charged phospholipids. AIMS: This article reviews issues related to the diagnosis of LA, including the effect of preanalytical variables, choice of tests, results interpretation of screening, mixing and confirmation procedures, patients to be investigated, and transmission of results. Unresolved issues and future direction for research on laboratory diagnosis are also discussed. METHODS: Search of PubMed with the key term "lupus anticoagulant" plus articles and unpublished data known to the author. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The preanalytical variables (i.e., plasma preparation and storage before analysis) as well as the diagnostic steps to detect LA present potential problems that undermine the process of making a correct diagnosis. A truly specific test for LA detection is badly needed, but its development may require understanding of the mechanisms associated with the occurrence of clinical events. Until then, clinical laboratories should rely on the existing procedures, which must be applied with caution and awareness of the many issues that may affect their results.
BACKGROUND: Lupus anticoagulants (LA) are a heterogeneous class of immunoglobulins. Persistent LA positivity is a risk factor for the occurrence and recurrence of venous/arterial thromboembolism and/or pregnancy morbidity and qualifies the patient for anticoagulation therapy. The laboratory diagnosis for LA that is used for crucial decision-making about the optimal duration of the therapy rests entirely on diagnostic criteria. These criteria are based on the prolongation of phospholipid-dependent tests not corrected upon mixing patient and normal plasmas, with confirmation provided by the evidence that the anticoagulant is directed against proteins bound to negatively charged phospholipids. AIMS: This article reviews issues related to the diagnosis of LA, including the effect of preanalytical variables, choice of tests, results interpretation of screening, mixing and confirmation procedures, patients to be investigated, and transmission of results. Unresolved issues and future direction for research on laboratory diagnosis are also discussed. METHODS: Search of PubMed with the key term "lupus anticoagulant" plus articles and unpublished data known to the author. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The preanalytical variables (i.e., plasma preparation and storage before analysis) as well as the diagnostic steps to detect LA present potential problems that undermine the process of making a correct diagnosis. A truly specific test for LA detection is badly needed, but its development may require understanding of the mechanisms associated with the occurrence of clinical events. Until then, clinical laboratories should rely on the existing procedures, which must be applied with caution and awareness of the many issues that may affect their results.
Authors: Michael D Lockshin; Mimi Kim; Carl A Laskin; Marta Guerra; D Ware Branch; Joan Merrill; Michelle Petri; T Flint Porter; Lisa Sammaritano; Mary D Stephenson; Jill Buyon; Jane E Salmon Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2012-07
Authors: Nasir A S Al-Allawi; Maida Y Shamdeen; Qais O Mohammed; Ahmed S Ahmed Journal: Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus Date: 2014-02-23 Impact factor: 0.900
Authors: Lena Hell; Cihan Ay; Florian Posch; Johanna Gebhart; Silvia Koder; Nigel Mackman; Ingrid Pabinger; Johannes Thaler Journal: Ann Hematol Date: 2018-11-22 Impact factor: 3.673
Authors: Pavla Bradacova; Ludek Slavik; Jana Ulehlova; Adela Skoumalova; Jana Ullrychova; Jana Prochazkova; Antonin Hlusi; Gayane Manukyan; Eva Kriegova Journal: Biomedicines Date: 2021-02-08