Literature DB >> 31271706

Clinical and laboratory practice for lupus anticoagulant testing: An International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization Committee survey.

Hannah Cohen1,2, Ian J Mackie1, Katrien M J Devreese3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines have contributed to more uniformity in the performance and interpretation of lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing. However, points to reconsider include testing for LA in patients on anticoagulation, cut-off values, and interpretation of results.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization committee (ISTH SSC) questionnaire was to capture the spectrum of clinical and laboratory practice in LA detection, focusing on variability in practice, so that the responses could inform further ISTH SSC recommendations.
METHODS: Members of the ISTH SSC on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies and participants of the Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies Programme of the External quality Control of diagnostic Assays and Tests Foundation were invited to complete a questionnaire on LA testing that was placed on the ISTH website using RedCap, with data tallied using simple descriptive statistics.
RESULTS: There was good agreement on several key recommendations in the ISTH and other guidelines on LA testing, such as sample processing, principles of testing, choice of tests, repeat testing to confirm persistent positivity and the use of interpretative reporting. However, the results highlight that there is less agreement on some other aspects, including the timing of testing in relation to thrombosis or pregnancy, testing in patients on anticoagulation, cut-off values, and calculation and interpretation of results.
CONCLUSIONS: Although some of the variability in practice in LA testing reflects the lack of substantive data to underpin evidence-based recommendations, a more uniform approach, based on further guidance, should reduce the inter-center variability of LA testing.
© 2019 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anticoagulation; antiphospholipid antibodies; confirmatory testing; cut-off values; lupus anticoagulant; pre-analytical

Year:  2019        PMID: 31271706     DOI: 10.1111/jth.14560

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 1538-7836            Impact factor:   5.824


  5 in total

Review 1.  Laboratory Diagnosis of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Insights and Hindrances.

Authors:  Arne Vandevelde; Katrien M J Devreese
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 4.964

2.  The effect of unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, and danaparoid on lupus anticoagulant testing: Can activated carbon eliminate false-positive results?

Authors:  Pieter M M De Kesel; Katrien M J Devreese
Journal:  Res Pract Thromb Haemost       Date:  2019-12-10

Review 3.  Current Promising Biomarkers and Methods in the Diagnostics of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Review.

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

4.  Role of antiphospholipid antibodies in the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome.

Authors:  Katrien M J Devreese; Stéphane Zuily; Pier Luigi Meroni
Journal:  J Transl Autoimmun       Date:  2021-11-06

Review 5.  Escaping the catch 22 of lupus anticoagulant testing.

Authors:  Pernille Just Vinholt; Søren Andreas Just
Journal:  RMD Open       Date:  2020-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.