Ryan Jajosky1, Mark Floyd2, Thomas Thompson3, James Shikle4. 1. Augusta University Medical Center, United States. Electronic address: rjajosky@gmail.com. 2. Augusta University Medical Center, United States. Electronic address: marfloyd@augusta.edu. 3. Augusta University Medical Center, United States. Electronic address: ththompson@augusta.edu. 4. Augusta University Medical Center, United States. Electronic address: jashikle@augusta.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The PLASMIC score was recently described as a convenient tool for predicting ADAMTS13 activity ≤10% in patients with possible thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), while awaiting the results of this send-out test. The purpose of this study was to validate the PLASMIC score at our University Medical Center. METHODS: Apheresis records were reviewed from 2008 to 2017 to identify patients who received plasma exchange (PLEX) for suspected TTP. The ADAMTS13 activity and PLASMIC scoring criteria were recorded, and the PLASMIC score was calculated. RESULTS: Of the 41 patients identified, 20 met inclusion criteria, of which 7 patients had ADAMTS13 activity ≤10%. Intermediate and high PLASMIC scores had 100% sensitivity, 46.2% specificity, 50% positive predictive value (PPV), and 100% negative predictive value (NPV). CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with the original validation study of the PLASMIC score, supporting the efficacy of the PLASMIC score and validating its use at our institution.
BACKGROUND: The PLASMIC score was recently described as a convenient tool for predicting ADAMTS13 activity ≤10% in patients with possible thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), while awaiting the results of this send-out test. The purpose of this study was to validate the PLASMIC score at our University Medical Center. METHODS: Apheresis records were reviewed from 2008 to 2017 to identify patients who received plasma exchange (PLEX) for suspected TTP. The ADAMTS13 activity and PLASMIC scoring criteria were recorded, and the PLASMIC score was calculated. RESULTS: Of the 41 patients identified, 20 met inclusion criteria, of which 7 patients had ADAMTS13 activity ≤10%. Intermediate and high PLASMIC scores had 100% sensitivity, 46.2% specificity, 50% positive predictive value (PPV), and 100% negative predictive value (NPV). CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with the original validation study of the PLASMIC score, supporting the efficacy of the PLASMIC score and validating its use at our institution.
Authors: Rasha A El-Gamal; Mohamed A Mekawy; Ayman M Abd Elkader; Haitham M Abdelbary; Mary Z Fayek Journal: Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus Date: 2019-10-05 Impact factor: 0.900
Authors: Elie Azoulay; Philippe R Bauer; Eric Mariotte; Lene Russell; Paul Knoebl; Ignacio Martin-Loeches; Frédéric Pène; Kathryn Puxty; Pedro Povoa; Andreas Barratt-Due; Jose Garnacho-Montero; Julia Wendon; Laveena Munshi; Dominique Benoit; Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon; Marco Maggiorini; Paul Coppo; Spero Cataland; Agnès Veyradier; Andry Van de Louw Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2019-10-07 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Vivek A Upadhyay; Benjamin P Geisler; Lova Sun; Lynne Uhl; Richard M Kaufman; Christopher Stowell; Robert S Makar; Pavan K Bendapudi Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2019-05-26 Impact factor: 8.615
Authors: Nicolas Fage; Corentin Orvain; Nicolas Henry; Chloé Mellaza; François Beloncle; Marie Tuffigo; Franck Geneviève; Paul Coppo; Jean François Augusto; Benoit Brilland Journal: Kidney Int Rep Date: 2021-11-16
Authors: Murtadha Al-Khabori; Faisal Alsayegh; Hasan Al Yaseen; Sabir Hussien; Amar Lal; Muna Al Rasheed; Mohammad Al Bader; Salam Al Kindi; Mahmoud Marashi Journal: Oman Med J Date: 2022-07-31