OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and to study platelet count trends potentially suggestive of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in a population of extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 926-bed teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients who survived longer than 48 hours from extracorporeal membrane oxygenator initiation between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Demographic and clinical data were collected prospectively on all extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia testing results and platelet count variables were obtained from the electronic medical record. We used our institutional algorithm to interpret the results of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia testing. Ninety-six extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients met the inclusion criteria. Eight patients met the algorithm criteria for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia diagnosis and seven of those had documented thromboembolic event while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (prevalence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia related thrombosis, 8.3 and 7.3, respectively). Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia positive patients were younger; all underwent venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator; spent more hours on extracorporeal membrane oxygenator; had significantly higher heparin-induced thrombocytopenia enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays optical density; had a higher prevalence of thromboembolic events and reached platelet count nadir later. There was no difference in mortality between heparin-induced thrombocytopenia positive and negative patients. Comparison of platelet count trends revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between the predefined study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia-related thrombosis among extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients at our institution is relatively high. Using platelet count trends to guide decision to test for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is not an optimal strategy in extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients. Without a validated pretest probability clinical score, serosurveillance in a defined high-risk group of extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients may be needed.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and to study platelet count trends potentially suggestive of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in a population of extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 926-bed teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients who survived longer than 48 hours from extracorporeal membrane oxygenator initiation between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Demographic and clinical data were collected prospectively on all extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia testing results and platelet count variables were obtained from the electronic medical record. We used our institutional algorithm to interpret the results of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia testing. Ninety-six extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients met the inclusion criteria. Eight patients met the algorithm criteria for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia diagnosis and seven of those had documented thromboembolic event while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (prevalence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia related thrombosis, 8.3 and 7.3, respectively). Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia positive patients were younger; all underwent venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator; spent more hours on extracorporeal membrane oxygenator; had significantly higher heparin-induced thrombocytopenia enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays optical density; had a higher prevalence of thromboembolic events and reached platelet count nadir later. There was no difference in mortality between heparin-induced thrombocytopenia positive and negative patients. Comparison of platelet count trends revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between the predefined study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia-related thrombosis among extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients at our institution is relatively high. Using platelet count trends to guide decision to test for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is not an optimal strategy in extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients. Without a validated pretest probability clinical score, serosurveillance in a defined high-risk group of extracorporeal membrane oxygenator patients may be needed.
Authors: Jae Hwan Choi; Jessica G Y Luc; Matthew P Weber; Haritha G Reddy; Elizabeth J Maynes; Avijit K Deb; Louis E Samuels; Rohinton J Morris; H Todd Massey; Antonio Loforte; Vakhtang Tchantchaleishvili Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2019-01
Authors: Michael M Koerner; Michael D Harper; Christopher K Gordon; Douglas Horstmanshof; James W Long; Michael J Sasevich; James D Neel; Aly El Banayosy Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2019-01