Rapid exclusion or confirmation of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a single-center experience with 1,291 patients

The dynamic range of immunoassays for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

Following the current guidelines, immunoassays for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) are interpreted dichotomously, with test results categorized as either positive or negative. However, the extent to which test results hold diagnostic significance across the entire dynamic range remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We utilized data from the prospective towards precise and rapid diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia study, comprising 1393 consecutive patients with suspected HIT, to assess the diagnostic significance of 2 heparin/platelet factor 4 immunoassay test results across their respective dynamic ranges: HemoSil Acustar HIT IgG (chemiluminescence immunoassay [CLIA]) and Lifecodes PF4 immunoglobulin G (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]).

METHODS

HIT diagnosis was determined by a washed platelet heparin-induced platelet activation assay. For each measurement point in the dataset, we computed likelihood ratios (LRs), sensitivities, and specificities. To provide posttest probabilities for individual test results, we calculated interval-specific LRs and integrated them into a web-based calculator.

RESULTS

The prevalence of HIT was 8.5% (n = 119). An LR of ≥10 was first achieved at 0.3% of the dynamic range (0.4 U/mL; CLIA) and then at 16% (0.64 optical density; ELISA). An LR of ≥100 was present at 9.4% (12 U/mL; CLIA) and 75.0% (3.0 optical density; ELISA). The slope of the linear regression line (LR ∼ dynamic range) was 9.5 (CLIA) and 0.9 (ELISA).

CONCLUSION

Despite both immunoassays showing an association between results and diagnostic significance, the strength of the association varies by assay. CLIA has a larger increase per measurement unit. Posttest probabilities for individual patients can be estimated using a web-based calculator: https://pcd-research.shinyapps.io/BayesianCalculator/.

Laboratory Testing for Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia Antibodies: A Narrative Review

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) are highly prothrombotic (thrombosis frequency ≥50%). Both are caused by platelet-activating anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibodies, forming PF4/IgG-containing immune complexes that engage platelet FcγIIa receptors, producing strong platelet activation. In HIT, heparin crosslinks several PF4 molecules, whereas in VITT, anti-PF4 antibodies alone crosslink PF4. Sufficient levels of circulating anti-PF4 antibodies are needed to create the pathogenic immune complexes on platelet surfaces; this explains why certain serum (plasma)-based assays are highly sensitive for detecting HIT/VITT antibodies. Accordingly, HIT and VITT are "clinical-pathological" disorders, that is, positive testing for such antibodies-together with a compatible clinical picture-is integral for diagnosis. Heparin (low concentrations) enhances HIT antibody-induced platelet activation, but platelet activation by VITT sera is usually inhibited by heparin. For both HIT and VITT, high sensitivity (>99% and >95%, respectively) characterizes PF4-dependent enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) and PF4-enhanced platelet activation assays; in contrast, certain rapid immunoassays have high sensitivity for HIT (>90-97%) but poor sensitivity (<25%) for VITT. HIT and VITT antibodies are directed at distinct sites on PF4: solid-phase EIAs and platelet activation assays are indifferent to these distinct antigen targets, but rapid immunoassays are not. We discuss a conceptual model where PF4 is viewed as a "globe," with the heparin-binding site the "equator"; in this model, HIT antibodies are primarily directed at antigen site(s) at the north and south "poles" of PF4 (formed when PF4 binds to heparin), whereas VITT antibodies recognize sites on the equator.

Limited concordance of heparin/platelet factor 4 antibody assays for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: an analysis of the TORADI-HIT study

BACKGROUND

Anecdotal reports suggest that the correlation between heparin/platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibody assays for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the correlation between widely used assays and examine possible factors contributing to variability.

METHODS

This is a large, prospective cohort study with 10 participating tertiary care hospitals including 1393 patients with suspected HIT in clinical practice. HIT was defined by a positive heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) assay (washed platelet reference standard test). Three different immunoassays were used to measure heparin/PF4 antibodies: chemiluminescent immunoassay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and particle gel immunoassay. Various factors that could influence the assays were examined: sex (male or female), age (<65 years or ≥65 years), unfractionated heparin exposure, presence of thrombosis, cardiovascular surgery, and intensive care unit. Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated. Z-scores and diagnostic odds ratios were determined in the aforementioned subgroups of patients.

RESULTS

Among 1393 patients, 119 were classified as HIT-positive (prevalence, 8.5%). The median 4Ts score was 5 (IQR, 4-6) in patients with HIT compared with 3 (IQR, 2-4) in patients without HIT. Correlations (rs) between immunoassays were weak (0.53-0.65). Inconsistencies between immunoassays could not be explained by further analyses of z-scored test results and diagnostic odds ratios in subgroups of patients.

CONCLUSION

The correlation between widely used heparin/PF4 antibody assays was weak, and key factors could not explain this variability. Standardization of immunoassays is requested to improve comparability.

A machine-learning model for reducing misdiagnosis in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: A prospective, multicenter, observational study

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) at the bedside remains challenging, exposing a significant number of patients at risk of delayed diagnosis or overtreatment. We hypothesized that machine-learning algorithms could be utilized to develop a more accurate and user-friendly diagnostic tool that integrates diverse clinical and laboratory information and accounts for complex interactions.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study including 1393 patients with suspected HIT between 2018 and 2021 from 10 study centers. Detailed clinical information and laboratory data were collected, and various immunoassays were conducted. The washed platelet heparin-induced platelet activation assay (HIPA) served as the reference standard.

FINDINGS

HIPA diagnosed HIT in 119 patients (prevalence 8.5%). The feature selection process in the training dataset (75% of patients) yielded the following predictor variables: (1) immunoassay test result, (2) platelet nadir, (3) unfractionated heparin use, (4) CRP, (5) timing of thrombocytopenia, and (6) other causes of thrombocytopenia. The best performing models were a support vector machine in case of the chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) and the ELISA, as well as a gradient boosting machine in particle-gel immunoassay (PaGIA). In the validation dataset (25% of patients), the AUROC of all models was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.00). Compared to the currently recommended diagnostic algorithm (4Ts score, immunoassay), the numbers of false-negative patients were reduced from 12 to 6 (-50.0%; ELISA), 9 to 3 (-66.7%, PaGIA) and 14 to 5 (-64.3%; CLIA). The numbers of false-positive individuals were reduced from 87 to 61 (-29.8%; ELISA), 200 to 63 (-68.5%; PaGIA) and increased from 50 to 63 (+29.0%) for the CLIA.

INTERPRETATION

Our user-friendly machine-learning algorithm for the diagnosis of HIT (https://toradi-hit.org) was substantially more accurate than the currently recommended diagnostic algorithm. It has the potential to reduce delayed diagnosis and overtreatment in clinical practice. Future studies shall validate this model in wider settings.

FUNDING

Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), and International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH).

Combinations of rapid immunoassays for a speedy diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

Early recognition and treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) are key to prevent severe complications.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the diagnostic performance of rapid immunoassays (IA) in detecting anti-PF4/heparin-antibodies.

METHODS

Diagnostic performances of lateral-flow IA (LFIA; STic Expert HIT) and latex IA (LIA; HemosIL HIT-Ab) were analyzed in pilot (n = 74) and derivation cohorts (n = 267). Two novel algorithms based on the combination of HIT clinical probability with sequentially performed LIA and chemiluminescent IA (CLIA; HemosIL AcuStar-HIT-IgG) were compared with published rapid diagnostic algorithms: the "Lausanne algorithm" sequentially combining CLIA and particle-gel IA (PaGIA) and the "Hamilton algorithm" based on simultaneously performed LIA and CLIA.

RESULTS

LFIA missed 6/30 HIT. The sensitivity and specificity of LIA were 90.9% and 93.5%. The Lausanne algorithm correctly predicted HIT in 19/267 (7.1%), excluded it in 240/267 (89.9%), leaving 8/267 (3%) cases unsolved. The algorithm sequentially combining CLIA and LIA predicted HIT in 19/267 (7.1%) with 1/19 wrong prediction, excluded it in 236/267 (88.4%), leaving 11/267 (4.1%) cases unsolved. The algorithm employing LIA as a first assay predicted HIT in 22/267 (8.2%), excluded it in 235/267 (88%), leaving 9/267 (3.4%) cases unsolved. Finally, the Hamilton algorithm correctly predicted HIT in 10/267 (3.7%), excluded it in 229/267 (85.7%), leaving 28/267 (10.5%) cases unsolved.

CONCLUSION

LFIA cannot be used to exclude or predict HIT when using frozen plasma. A Bayesian approach sequentially employing two rapid immunoassays for anti-PF4/heparin antibodies is most effective for the accurate diagnosis of HIT. Based on retrospective data, the combination LIA/CLIA is a candidate for a prospective validation.

A case of severe COVID-19 with pulmonary thromboembolism related to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia during prophylactic anticoagulation therapy

A 53-year-old male Japanese patient with COVID-19 was admitted to our hospital after his respiratory condition worsened on day 9 of the disease. With the diagnosis of severe COVID-19, treatment with remdesivir, dexamethasone, and unfractionated heparin was started for the prevention of thrombosis. Although the patient's respiratory status data improved after treatment, severe respiratory failure persisted. Thrombocytopenia and D-dimer elevation were observed on day 8 after heparin therapy initiation. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) antibody measured by immunological assay was positive, and contrast computed tomography showed pulmonary artery thrombus. The patient was diagnosed with HIT because the pre-test probability score (4Ts score) for HIT was 7 points. Heparin was changed to apixaban, a direct oral anticoagulant, which resulted in a reduction of the pulmonary thrombus and improvement of the respiratory failure. In patients with COVID-19, anticoagulant therapy with heparin requires careful monitoring of thrombocytopenia and elevated D-dimer as possible complications related to HIT. (151/250 words).

Measurement of procoagulant platelets provides mechanistic insight and diagnostic potential in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a prothrombotic, immune-mediated adverse drug reaction associated with high rates of thrombosis-related morbidity and mortality caused by FcγRIIa-activating pathogenic antibodies to PF4-heparin. Procoagulant platelets are a platelet subset that promote thrombin generation, are clinically relevant in prothrombotic diseases, and are formed when platelet G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and ITAM-linked receptors are co-stimulated.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the procoagulant platelet response of healthy donors to platelet agonists in the presence of HIT plasma and determined the contribution of FcγRIIa.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Our previously established flow cytometry-based procoagulant platelet assay was modified to incorporate plasma samples, performed using FcγRIIa-responsive donor platelets. Plasma samples were serotonin-release assay-confirmed HIT (HIT+), or negative on HIT screening.

RESULTS

In response to GPCR stimulation, only HIT+ plasma produced a heparin-dependent sensitization that required active FcγRIIa. As a potential diagnostic tool, the procoagulant platelet assay achieved 98% accuracy in identifying clinically verified HIT when performed blinded to the diagnoses of a validation cohort. Samples inducing a higher procoagulant platelet response were more likely from patients with thrombotic complications. Thrombin stimulation markedly increased the procoagulant platelet response with HIT+ plasma that was heparin independent and only partially reversed by FcγRIIa blockade, possibly reflecting ongoing thrombotic risk after heparin cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate that HIT plasma together with platelet agonists increased the procoagulant platelet proportions, which may contribute to thrombotic risk in HIT. Targeting procoagulant platelet activation may represent a novel treatment strategy. This assay may be a rapid, clinically relevant functional assay for accurately detecting pathological HIT antibodies.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: Construction of a pretest diagnostic score derived from the analysis of a prospective multinational database, with internal validation

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) requires pretest probability assessment and dedicated laboratory assays.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a pretest score for HIT.

DESIGN

Observational; analysis of prospectively collected data of hospitalized patients suspected with HIT (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00748839).

SETTING

Thirty-one tertiary hospitals in France, Switzerland, and Belgium.

PATIENTS

Patients tested for HIT antibodies (2280 evaluable), randomly allocated to derivation and validation cohorts.

MEASUREMENTS

Independent adjudicators diagnosed HIT based on the prospectively collected data and serotonin release assay results.

RESULTS

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was diagnosed in 234 (14.7%) and 99 (14.5%) patients in the two cohorts. Eight features were associated with HIT (in brackets, points assigned for score calculation of the score): unfractionated heparin (1); therapeutic-dose heparin (1); cardiopulmonary bypass (cardiac surgery) (2); major trauma (3); 5- to 21-day interval from anticoagulation initiation to suspicion of HIT (4); ≥40% decrease in platelet count over ≤6 days (3); thrombotic event, arterial (3) or venous (3). The C-statistic was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.76-0.82). In the validation cohort, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.74-0.80). Three groups of scores were defined; HIT prevalence reached almost 30% in the high-probability group.

LIMITATION

The performance of the score may depend on settings and practices.

CONCLUSION

The objective, easy-to-collect, clinical features of HIT we evidenced were incorporated into a pretest score, which may guide clinical decisions regarding diagnostic testing and anticoagulation.

Accuracy of the functional, flow cytometer-based Emo-Test HIT Confirm® for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

INTRODUCTION

Rapid functional assays have been proposed to overcome the limitations of washed platelet assays in the work-up of patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Data on the diagnostic accuracy are, however, scarce and conflicting. We aimed to study the diagnostic accuracy of a rapid, flow cytometer-based assay and to explore sources of variability.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Frozen serum samples of 103 consecutive patients, evaluated for suspected HIT at our institution in 2017, and characterized with 4Ts score, IgG-PF4/heparin ELISA (GTI), HemosIL®Acustar (IgG), as well as heparin-induced platelet activation test (HIPA), were further tested using HIT Confirm, determining P-selectin release of donor platelets after incubation with patient's serum. The diagnosis of HIT was defined as a positive HIPA result.

RESULTS

HIT was confirmed in 15 out of 103 patients corresponding to a prevalence of 14.6%. HIT Confirm was positive in 11 patients (10.7%), negative in 88 patients (85.4%), and inconclusive in 4 patients (3.9%). According to the intention-to-diagnose principle, the number of true positives was 9, the number of true negatives 83, the number of false negatives was 6, the number of false positives 5. This corresponds to a sensitivity of 60.0%, and a specificity of 94.3%. Modifications of the test did not improve sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

The rapid, flow cytometer-based assay HIT Confirm is able to verify HIT in positive patient samples but cannot rule-out HIT in clinical practice. Other rapid functional assays shall be studies in appropriately designed diagnostic accuracy studies.

Using information theory to optimize a diagnostic threshold to match physician-ordering practice

OBJECTIVE

Clinicians order laboratory tests in an effort to reduce diagnostic or therapeutic uncertainty. Information theory provides the opportunity to quantify the degree to which a test result is expected to reduce diagnostic uncertainty. We sought to apply information theory toward the evaluation and optimization of a diagnostic test threshold and to determine if the results would differ from those of conventional methodologies. We used a heparin/PF4 immunoassay (PF4 ELISA) as a case study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The laboratory database was queried for PF4 ELISA and serotonin release assay (SRA) results during the study period, with the latter serving as the gold standard for the disease heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). The optimized diagnostic threshold of the PF4 ELISA test was compared using conventional versus information theoretic approaches under idealized (pretest probability = 50%) and realistic (pretest probability = 2.4%) testing conditions.

RESULTS

Under ideal testing conditions, both analyses yielded a similar optimized optical density (OD) threshold of OD > 0.79. Under realistic testing conditions, information theory suggested a higher threshold, OD > 1.5 versus OD > 0.6. Increasing the diagnostic threshold improved the global information value, the value of a positive test and the noise content with only a minute change in the negative test value.

DISCUSSION

Our information theoretic approach suggested that the current FDA approved cutoff (OD > 0.4) is overly permissive leading to loss of test value and injection of noise into an already complex diagnostic dilemma. Because our approach is purely statistical and takes as input data that are readily accessible in the clinical laboratory it offers a scalable and data-driven strategy for optimizing test value that may be widely applicable in the domain of laboratory medicine.

CONCLUSION

Information theory provides more meaningful measures of test value than the widely used accuracy-based metrics.

Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia: A Review of New Concepts in Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Management

Knowledge on heparin-induced thrombocytopenia keeps increasing. Recent progress on diagnosis and management as well as several discoveries concerning its pathogenesis have been made. However, many aspects of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia remain partly unknown, and exact application of these new insights still need to be addressed. This article reviews the main new concepts in pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

Clinical validation of immunoassay HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-IgG (PF4-H) in the diagnosis of Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a life and limb-threatening complication of heparin exposure. The misdiagnosis of this disease can have major consequences on the patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate a diagnostic strategy that combines the 4Ts score with the result of HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-IgG (PF4-H) to confirm the diagnosis of HIT. Citrated plasmas from 1300 patients with suspicion of HIT were analyzed with a fully automated quantitative chemiluminescent immunoassay (HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-IgG (PF4/H)). If the IgG anti-PF4/H antibodies were positive (cut-off, 1 U/mL), HIT diagnosis was confirmed using functional tests. In total, 1300 samples of consecutive patients were enrolled, 94 (7.2%) of which gave positive results in HemosIL® AcuStar-IgG. HIT was diagnosed in 65 out of these patients, corresponding to a prevalence of 5%. Using ROC curve analysis, patients were divided into three groups according to their titer of antibodies. Higher values of the IgG (PF4-H) were associated with increased probability of HIT, and the diagnostic specificity was greatly increased using the combination of a 4Ts score > 3 and a positive titer ≥ 3.25 U/mL. Importantly, the diagnostic specificity is 100% when the titer is > 12.40 U/mL. We demonstrated that higher values of Anti PF4/H Antibodies were associated with a high probability of having HIT. A titer of HemosIL® IgG (PF4-H) > 12.40 U/mL has a specificity of 100% which should no require a functional test to confirm the diagnosis of HIT.

Prospective evaluation of two specific IgG immunoassays (HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-IgG and HAT45G® ) for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: A Bayesian approach

INTRODUCTION

The accurate diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is essential to ensure adequate treatment and prevent complications. First step diagnosis test are immunoassays including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and rapid immunoassays.

METHODS

Using a Bayesian approach, we prospectively evaluated the performance of the IgG PF4/polyvinylsulfonate ELISA and a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA), which are specific for IgG and use the same antigenic target to detect HIT antibodies.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-four 184 consecutive patients with an intermediate (n = 159) or high (n = 25) clinical pretest probability of HIT based on the 4Ts score or platelet pattern were included. Both immunoassays (IAs) were performed on all 184 samples, and definite HIT was confirmed with a positive serotonin release assay in 29 patients (12.7%). The sensitivity (Ss) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ELISA were excellent (100%) allowing HIT to be excluded with good confidence when the test was negative. In addition, the Ss and NPV of the CLIA equalled 93.1% and 98.6%, respectively, as it was negative in two definite HIT. When the CLIA was negative, the post-test probability of HIT was 0.7% in case of intermediate risk. Although there was excellent agreement between CLIA and ELISA results, the quantitative values provided by the two IAs were not correlated.

CONCLUSION

AcuStar HIT^® detects more than 90% of HIT, as do all rapid IAs, and appears to be a good tool for excluding HIT when the pretest probability is intermediate. A chemiluminescent signal higher than 10 IU/mL is highly predictive of definite HIT with a PPV of 100%.

How would we treat our own heparin-induced thrombocytopenia during cardiac surgery?

The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive review of the current state of knowledge on heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in cardiac surgery. The management of HIT patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass is complex and requires an interdisciplinary and patient-tailored approach because available evidence is limited and current anticoagulation strategies have potential risks. An index case is used to discuss both the established and new perioperative therapeutic options in HIT patients undergoing urgent cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

Pathogenesis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

There are currently no effective substitutes for high intensity therapy with unfractionated heparin (UFH) for cardiovascular procedures based on its rapid onset of action, ease of monitoring and reversibility. The continued use of UFH in these and other settings requires vigilance for its most serious nonhemorrhagic complication, heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). HIT is an immune prothrombotic disorder caused by antibodies that recognize complexes between platelet factor 4 (PF4) and polyanions such as heparin (H).The pathogenicity of anti-PF4/H antibodies is likely due to the formation of immune complexes that initiate intense procoagulant responses by vascular and hematopoietic cells that lead to the generation of platelet microparticles, monocyte and endothelial cell procoagulant activity, and neutrophil extracellular traps, among other outcomes. The development of anti-PF4/H antibodies after exposure to UFH greatly exceeds the incidence of clinical disease, but the biochemical features that distinguish pathogenic from nonpathogenic antibodies have not been identified. Diagnosis relies on pretest clinical probability, screening for anti-PF4/H antibodies and documentation of their platelet activating capacity. However, both clinical algorithms and test modalities have limited predictive values making diagnosis and management challenging. Given the unacceptable rates of recurrent thromboembolism and bleeding associated with current therapies, there is an unmet need for novel rational nonanticoagulant therapeutics based on the pathogenesis of HIT. We will review recent developments in our understanding of the pathogenesis of HIT and its implications for future approaches to diagnosis and management.

Challenges in Detecting Clinically Relevant Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia Antibodies

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an antibody-mediated hypercoagulable state featuring high thrombosis risk and distinct pathogenesis involving immunoglobulin G-mediated platelet activation. The target of the immune response is a cationic “self” protein, platelet factor 4 (PF4), rendered antigenic by heparin. A key problem is that only a minority of anti-PF4/polyanion antibodies induced by heparin are pathogenic, i.e., capable of causing platelet activation and thereby clinical HIT. Since thrombocytopenia occurs frequently in hospitalized, heparin-treated patients, testing for “HIT antibodies” is common; thus, the problem of distinguishing between pathogenic and nonpathogenic antibodies is important. The central concept is that those antibodies that have platelet-activating properties demonstrable in vitro correlate well with pathogenicity, as shown by platelet activation tests such as the serotonin-release assay (SRA) and heparin-induced platelet activation assay. However, in most circumstances, immunoassays are used for first-line testing, and so it is important for clinicians to appreciate which immunoassay result profiles—in the appropriate clinical context—predict the presence of platelet-activating antibodies (Bayesian analysis). Clinicians with access to rapid, on-demand HIT immunoassays (e.g., particle gel immunoassay, latex immunoturbidimetric assay, chemiluminescent immunoassay) can look beyond simple dichotomous result interpretation (“negative”/“positive”) and incorporate semiquantitative interpretation, where, for example, a strong-positive immunoassay result (or even combination of two immunoassays) points to a greater probability of detecting platelet-activating antibodies, and hence supporting a diagnosis of HIT. Recent recognition of “SRA-negative HIT” has increased the importance of semiquantitative interpretation of immunoassays, given that strong immunoassay reactivity is a potential clue indicating possible HIT despite a (false) negative platelet activation assay.

Potential and Limitations of the New P2Y12 Inhibitor, Cangrelor, in Preventing Heparin-Induced Platelet Aggregation During Cardiac Surgery: An In Vitro Study

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) can put cardiac surgery patients at a high risk of lethal complications. If anti-PF4/heparin antibodies (anti-PF4/Hep Abs) are present, 2 strategies exist to prevent intraoperative aggregation during bypass surgery: first, using an alternative anticoagulant, and second, using heparin combined with an antiaggregant. The new P2Y12 inhibitor, cangrelor, could be an attractive candidate for the latter strategy; several authors have reported its successful use. The present in vitro study evaluated cangrelor's ability to inhibit heparin-induced platelet aggregation in the presence of anti-PF4/Hep Abs.

METHODS

Platelet-poor plasma (PPP) from 30 patients with functional anti-PF4/Hep Abs was mixed with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) from 5 healthy donors.Light transmission aggregometry was used to measure platelet aggregation after adding 0.5 IU·mL of heparin (HIT) to the plasma, and this was compared with samples spiked with normal saline (control) and samples spiked with cangrelor 500 ng·mL and heparin 0.5 IU·mL (treatment). Friedman test with post hoc Dunn-Bonferroni test was used for between-group comparisons.

RESULTS

Heparin 0.5 IU·mL triggered aggregation in 22 of 44 PPP-PRP mixtures, with a median aggregation of 86% (interquartile range [IQR], 69-91). The median aggregation of these 22 positive samples' respective control tests was 22% (IQR, 16-30) (P < .001). Median aggregation in the cangrelor-treated samples was 29% (IQR, 19-54) and significantly lower than the HIT samples (P < .001). Cangrelor inhibited heparin-induced aggregation by a median of 91% (IQR, 52-100). Cangrelor only reduced heparin-induced aggregation by >95% in 10 of the 22 positive samples (45%). Cangrelor inhibited heparin-induced aggregation by <50% in 5 of the 22 positive samples (22%) and by <10% in 3 samples (14%).

CONCLUSIONS

This in vitro study found that cangrelor was an unreliable inhibitor of heparin-induced aggregation in the presence of anti-PF4/Hep Abs. We conclude that cangrelor should not be used as a standard antiaggregant for cardiac patients affected by HIT during surgery. Unless cangrelor's efficacy in a particular patient has been confirmed in a presurgery aggregation test, other strategies should be chosen.

Prediction of Heparin Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) Using a Combination of 4Ts Score and Screening Immune Assays

Clinical assessment (4Ts) followed by testing for Heparin/platelet factor 4 (HPF4) antibody in intermediate and high risk patients is the standard algorithm of pretest for Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), and the diagnosis is confirmed by serotonin releasing assay (SRA) in those who have positive antibodies. We conducted a retrospective analysis in a cohort of patients treated in a community hospital who had HIT antibody test by either ELISA or a rapid Particle Immunofiltration Assay (PIFA), regardless of their 4Ts scores. Among 224 patients, 17 had HIT. The PPV for those with a 4 T score ≥4 was 10.4%, which misdianosed 3 patients with HIT who tested positive for antibodies. Combining 4 T score ≥4 AND positive HIT antibody showed a PPV of 20.3% and a sensitivity of 70.6%, misdiagnosing 5 HIT patients. Using 4Ts ≥4 OR positive HIT antibody showed 100% sensitivity and 100% negative predictive value (NPV). The ELISA test had 100% sensitivity and 100% NPV, while the PIFA test missed 2 HIT patients, with sensitivity of 60% and NPV of 96.7%. Our results suggest that SRA testing should be conducted if a patient presents with a 4 T score ≥4 OR a positive HIT antibody, and antibody tests should be conducted for every patient suspected of HIT.

Cardiac Surgery Successfully Managed With Cangrelor in a Patient With Persistent Anti-PF4/Heparin Antibodies 8 Years After Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

A 66-YEAR-OLD female requiring cardiac surgery had persisting anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies (HIT-abs) 8 years after heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). In 2010, she developed thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) (ADAMTS-13 <5%, inhibitor at 1.0 BU/mL), which was treated successfully with corticotherapy, plasmapheresis, and intravenous heparin. While taking heparin, she developed HIT, as evidenced by a positive functional test. Her platelet count fully resolved without thrombotic complications with danaparoid treatment. In 2018, the preoperative titer of HIT-abs was still 0.38 U/mL by chemoluminescent immunoassay (CLIA), and positive by particle-gel agglutination immunoassay (PaGIA) with a titer of 2 and was strongly positive on an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The authors of the case report chose to use cangrelor combined with heparin during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Cangrelor was used without increased postoperative bleeding or thrombotic complications. Postoperatively she exhibited a huge rise in HIT-abs (14.22 U/mL on postoperative day 11) with a positive functional assay. There was no recurrence of HIT, however. This case illustrates the importance of excluding the presence of persisting HIT-abs before CPB and ensuring close medical follow-up after even a single exposure to heparin.

Pathogenic heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (HIT) antibodies determined by rapid functional flow cytometry

OBJECTIVES

Reliable diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (HIT) is mandatory for patient management, yet prompt determination of pathogenic antibodies remains an unmet clinical challenge. Common immunoassays carry inherent limitations and functional assays which detect antibody-mediated platelet activation are not usually readily available to routine laboratories, especially the serotonin release assay (SRA), being technically demanding, time consuming, and requires high level expertise. To overcome some of these limitations, we have developed a practical functional flow cytometric assay (FCA) for routine clinical use.

METHODS

A simple FCA is described which avoids platelet manipulation, is highly specific and sensitive compared with SRA, and provides rapid results.

RESULTS

Of the 650 consecutive samples, from HIT-suspected patients, 99 (15.3%) were positive by the PaGIA Heparin/PF4 immunoassay and 31 (4.8%) by FCA. Average platelet activation was 11-fold higher in PaGIA+/FCA+ vs PaGIA-/FCA- samples. Of 21 SRA-positive samples, 19 were FCA-positive (relative sensitivity 90.5%), and of 42 SRA-negative samples, 40 were FCA-negative (relative specificity 95.2%). The FCA showed significantly higher correlation with the clinical presentation of HIT (4Ts score) performed on 182 patients, compared with PaGIA Heparin/PF4 (ROC-plot analysis, AUC 0.93 vs 0.63, P < 0.001). At a 92% sensitivity, the assay specificity was 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

The present FCA is practical for routine testing, providing prompt reliable results for initial diagnosis and confirmation, to effectively assist in HIT patient management.

[Diagnostic value of two immunoassays for detecting heparin/PF4 complex antibodies in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia]

Objectives: To assess the diagnostic values of latex immunoturbidimetric assay (LIA) and particle immunofiltration assay (PIFA) for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) . Methods: Samples from 94 patients with suspected HIT from May 2016 to July 2018 in our hospital were prospectively analyzed by the two immunoassays. Their medical records and further follow-up data were also collected and analyzed by our hematologists to make the 4Ts scores and confirm the diagnosis of HIT, respectively. Performance characteristics of the two immunoassays were assessed, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) . Their post-test probabilities (PTP) were also calculated based on the 4Ts score. Results: Among 94 cases, 15 (16.0%) had a positive HIT, including 6 of 37 (16.2%) with an intermediate, and 9 of 15 (60.0%) with a high 4Ts score. PIFA operating characteristics were: sensitivity 100.0% (15/15) , specificity 51.9% (41/80) , PPV 28.3% (15/53) , NPV 100.0% (41/41) . The positive PTP in intermediate and high 4Ts score group were 28.7% and 75.7%, respectively, while negative PTP were all 0. At manufacturers' cutoffs, LIA operating characteristics were: sensitivity 66.7% (10/15) , specificity 94.9% (75/79) , PPV 71.4% (10/14) and NPV 93.8% (75/80) . The positive and negative PTP in intermediate 4Ts score group were 71.8% and 6.3%, while 95.2% and 34.4% in high 4Ts score group, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis manifested that LIA was preferable than PIFA, and combining the 2 assays together was significantly better than single test. Conclusions: 4Ts score is still an important tool for the diagnosis of HIT. Combining clinical score with heparin/PF4 antibody assay can increase the accuracy of confirming or excluding HIT. Although PIFA is inferior to LIA in the diagnostic value, its user friendliness and 100% NPV have major advantages. Combining the 2 assays together can achieve a higher diagnostic value.

Targeted resequencing of a locus for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia on chromosome 5 identified in a genome-wide association study

Immune-mediated heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is the clinically most important adverse drug reaction (ADR) in response to heparin therapy characterized by a prothrombotic state despite a decrease in platelet count. We conducted a genome-wide association study in 96 suspected HIT cases and 96 controls to explore the genetic predisposition for HIT within a case-control pharmacovigilance study followed by replication in additional 86 cases and 86 controls from the same study. One single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP, rs1433265, P = 6.5 × 10^-5, odds ratio (OR) 2.79) from 16 identified SNPs was successfully replicated (P = 1.5 × 10^-4, OR 2.77; combined data set P = 2.7 × 10^-8, OR 2.77) and remained the most strongly associated SNP after imputing locus genotypes. Fine mapping revealed a significantly associated risk-conferring haplotype (P = 4.9 × 10^-6, OR 2.41). In order to find rare variants contributing to the association signals, we applied a targeted resequencing approach in a subgroup of 73 HIT patients and 23 controls for the regions with the 16 most strongly HIT-associated SNPs. C-alpha testing was applied to test for the impact of rare variants and we detected two candidate genes, the discoidin domain receptor tyrosine kinase 1 (DDR1, P = 3.6 × 10^-2) and the multiple C2 and transmembrane domain containing 2 (MCTP2, P = 4.5 × 10^-2). For the genes interactor of little elongation complex ELL subunit 1 (ICE1) and a disintegrin-like and metalloproteinase with thrombospondin type 1 motif, 16 (ADAMTS16) nearby rs1433265, we identified several missense variants. Although replication in an independent population is warranted, these findings provide a basis for future studies aiming to identify and characterize genetic susceptibility factors for HIT. KEY MESSAGES: We identified and validated a HIT-associated locus on chromosome 5. Targeted NGS analysis for rare variants identifies DDR1 and MCTP2 as novel candidates. In addition, missense variants for ADAMTS16 and ICE1 were identified in the locus.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia associated with thrombotic microangiopathy

Some cases of thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) are refractory to plasma exchange therapy (PE) with persistence or recurrence of thrombocytopenia. We report two patients suffering from TMA of different aetiologies (associated with disseminated malignancy, typical haemolytic uraemic syndrome) with recurrent or persistent thrombocytopenia despite adequate therapy including PE. Since both patients were exposed to unfractionated heparin, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) was suspected as a cause. Pretest probabilities for HIT were intermediate. ELISA for PF4/heparin antibodies was strongly positive in both cases, and HIT was confirmed by heparin-induced platelet activation assay. Anticoagulation with lepirudin was initiated, with subsequent rapid increase of the platelet count.

TMA might represent a predisposition for HIT. This could be due to TMA-related platelet activation with increased PF4 release. In TMA patients exposed to heparin and with refractory or rapidly recurrent thrombocytopenia HIT should always be considered as a possible cause.

My patient is thrombocytopenic! Is (s)he? Why? And what shall I do?

Solving the riddle of a thrombocytopenic patient is a difficult and fascinating task. The spectrum of possible aetiologies is wide, ranging from an in vitro artefact to severe treatment-resistant thrombocytopenic bleeding conditions, or even life-threatening prothrombotic states. Moreover, thrombocytopenia by itself does not protect from thrombosis and sometimes a patient with a low platelet count requires concomitant antithrombotic treatment as well. In order to identify and treat the cause and the effects of the thrombocytopenia, you have to put together several pieces of information, solving a unique jig-jaw puzzle.

The present work is not a textbook article about thrombocytopenia, rather a collection of differential diagnostic thoughts, treatment concepts, and some basic knowledge, that you can retrieve when facing your next thrombocytopenic patient. Enjoy reading it, but most importantly enjoy taking care of patients with a low platelet count. I bet the present work will assist you in this challenging and rewarding clinical task.

Clinical and laboratory tests for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

A rapid diagnostic work-up is required in patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). However, diagnosis of HIT is challenging due to a number of practical issues and methodological limitations. Many laboratory tests and a few clinical scoring systems are available but the individual characteristics and the diagnostic accuracy of these are hard to appraise. The 4Ts score is a well evaluated clinical assessment tool with the potential to rule out HIT in many patients. Still, it requires experience and is subject to a relevant inter-observer variability. Immunoassays such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays or recently developed rapid assays are able to exclude HIT in a number of patients. But, accuracy of immunoassays differs depending on type of assay, threshold, antibody specificity and even manufacturer. Due to a comparatively low positive predictive value, HIT cannot be confirmed by immunoassays alone. In addition, only some of them are immediately accessible, particularly in small laboratories. While functional assays such as the serotonin release assay (SRA) and the heparin-induced platelet activation assay (HIPA) are considered as gold standard for diagnosis of HIT, they require a highly specialised laboratory. In addition, some of them are not adequately evaluated. In clinical practice, we recommend an integrated diagnostic approach combining not only clinical assessment (the 4Ts score) but immunoassays and functional assays as well. We propose a clear diagnostic algorithm supporting clinical decision-making. Furthermore, we provide an overview of all current laboratory techniques for HIT and discuss diagnostic pathways and strategies to reduce diagnostic errors, and future perspectives.

Rapid immunoassays for diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: Comparison of diagnostic accuracy, reproducibility, and costs in clinical practice

Background

Immunoassays are crucial in the work-up of patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and rapid tests have been recently developed. However, comparative data on diagnostic accuracy, reproducibility, and analytical costs of different immunoassays in clinical practice are limited.

Methods

Samples of 179 consecutive patients evaluated for suspected HIT in clinical practice using a polyspecific enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay (GTI diagnostics; ELISA) and a rapid particle gel immunoassay (PaGIA), were additionally analysed with a IgG-specific chemiluminescent immunoassay (AcuStar HIT-IgG). Presence of HIT was defined as a positive functional heparin-induced platelet aggregation test. Diagnostic accuracy was determined for low, intermediate and high thresholds as previously established (ELISA: optical density 0.4, 1.3, and 2.0 respectively; PaGIA: positive/negative, titre of 4, titre of 32; AcuStar HIT-IgG: 1.0 U/ml, 2.8, 9.4) and reproducibility was assessed by repeated measurements. Costs of test determination were calculated taking reagents, controls, and working time of technicians according to Swiss health care system into account.

Results

Data on PaGIA results were available for 171 patients (95.5%), ELISA for 144 patients (80.4%), and AcuStar HIT-IgG for 179 patients (100%). Sensitivity was above 95% for all assays at low and intermediate thresholds. Specificity increased with higher thresholds and was above 90% for all assays with intermediate and high thresholds. Specificity of AcuStar HIT-IgG (92.8%; 95% CI 87.7, 96.2) was significantly higher than PaGIA (83.0%; 95% CI 76.3, 88.5) and higher than ELISA (81.8%, 95% CI 74.2, 88.0) at low threshold (p<0.05). Reproducibility was adequate for all assays. Total costs per test were CHF 51.02 for ELISA, 117.70 for AcuStar HIT-IgG, and 83.13 for PaGIA.

Conclusions

We observed favourable diagnostic accuracy measures and a high reproducibility for PaGIA and AcuStar HIT-IgG. Implementation into 24-hours-service might improve patient care but the results must be confirmed in other settings and larger populations as well.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune complication of heparin therapy caused by antibodies to complexes of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. Pathogenic antibodies to PF4/heparin bind and activate cellular FcγRIIA on platelets and monocytes to propagate a hypercoagulable state culminating in life-threatening thrombosis. It is now recognized that anti-PF4/heparin antibodies develop commonly after heparin exposure, but only a subset of sensitized patients progress to life-threatening complications of thrombocytopenia and thrombosis. Recent scientific developments have clarified mechanisms underlying PF4/heparin immunogenicity, disease susceptibility, and clinical manifestations of disease. Insights from clinical and laboratory findings have also been recently harnessed for disease prevention. This review will summarize our current understanding of HIT by reviewing pathogenesis, essential clinical and laboratory features, and management.

Profile of Instrumentation Laboratory's HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-Ab(PF4-H) assay for diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

INTRODUCTION

Immunoassays play an essential role in the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). The objective of this article is to review HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-Ab(PF4-H) (Instrumentation Laboratory, Bedford, MA, USA), a new chemiluminescent immunoassay for HIT. Areas covered: The authors searched the published literature for evaluation studies of HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-Ab(PF4-H) and sought information from the manufacturer. In this paper, the authors discuss the analytical principle and technical aspects of the assay; describe its diagnostic performance in validation studies; report on its reproducibility, cost-effectiveness, and regulatory status; and discuss the implications of the assay on clinical practice and means of integrating it in diagnostic pathways. HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-Ab(PF4-H) is compared with other rapid assays and widely used enzyme-linked immunoassays for the diagnosis of HIT. Expert commentary: HemosIL® AcuStar HIT-Ab(PF4-H) is automatable, can be performed 24 h per day, offers a rapid turnaround time, and appears to have favorable diagnostic accuracy, particularly at thresholds above that listed in the label. These advantages could lead to improved patient outcomes through rapid provision of results at the point of care, enhancing the accuracy of initial diagnosis.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: research and clinical updates

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) remains an important diagnosis to consider in hospitalized patients developing thrombocytopenia. HIT is an immune-mediated prothrombotic disorder caused by antibodies to platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. Recent basic scientific studies have advanced our understanding of disease pathogenesis through studies of the PF4/heparin structure, immune mechanisms, and cellular basis of thrombosis. Clinical advances have also occurred in areas of HIT prevention, description of disease variants, and diagnostic strategies. Emerging anticoagulants with the potential to change HIT treatment are evolving, although with limited data. This review will provide a current perspective on HIT pathogenesis, disease features, diagnostic strategies, and role of emerging therapies for the management of HIT.

Over-testing for heparin induced thrombocytopenia in hospitalized patients

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a pro-thrombotic and potentially fatal complication of heparin therapy. Its diagnosis rests on high clinical probability and the laboratory demonstration of anti-PF4/heparin antibodies. The high prevalence of thrombocytopenia in hospitalized patients and the high sensitivity but low specificity of immunoassays for HIT antibodies can lead to over-testing and over-diagnosis. We conducted a study to review HIT screening practices in a tertiary care setting. We reviewed 63 consecutive patients undergoing testing for anti-PF4/heparin antibodies over 3 months. Pre-test probability for HIT was calculated using the 4T score. Sixty three patients underwent testing for anti-PF4/heparin antibodies. Twenty one had been admitted for cardiovascular surgery, 5 for other surgery and 35 for non-surgical indications. Twenty nine patients (46 %) had low pre- test probability, twenty three (36.5 %) had intermediate probability, and eleven (17.4 %) had high pre-test probability of having HIT. Anti-PF4/heparin ELISA was positive in 8 of 63 patients. SRA was ordered for 16 patients and was positive in 5. Only five patients were diagnosed and treated for HIT. Over-testing for HIT is highly prevalent in a tertiary care setting. This increases cost and exposes patients to expensive anti-coagulation with its attendant risk of hemorrhage. The 4Ts score has been shown to have high sensitivity and may be used to rule out HIT in most situations, although its utility depends on subjective analysis. Consistently applying this in practice could minimize over-testing and facilitate safer, cost-effective care.

Diagnostic accuracy of rapid immunoassays for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. A systematic review and meta-analysis

The platelet factor 4/heparin ELISA has limited specificity for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and frequently does not provide same-day results. Rapid immunoassays (RIs) have been developed which provide results in 30 minutes or less. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of RIs for HIT. We searched the literature for studies in which samples from patients with suspected HIT were tested using a RI and a functional assay against which the performance of the RI could be measured. We performed sensitivity analyses of studies that directly compared different RIs with each other and with ELISAs. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity for each RI were calculated. Twenty-three articles, collectively involving six different RIs, met eligibility criteria. All RIs exhibited high sensitivity (0.96 to 1.00); there was wider variability in specificity (0.68 to 0.94). Specificity of the IgG-specific chemiluminescent assay (IgG-CA) was greater than the polyspecific chemiluminescent assay [0.94 (95 %CI 0.89-0.99) vs 0.82 (0.77-0.87)]. The particle gel immunoassay demonstrated greater specificity than the polyspecific ELISA [0.96 (0.95-0.97) vs 0.91 (0.89-0.92)]. The IgG-CA and lateral flow immunoassay [0.94 (0.91-0.97)] exhibited greater specificity than the IgG-specific ELISA [0.86 (0.82-0.90)]. Given their high sensitivity and rapid turnaround time, RIs are a reliable means of excluding HIT at the point-of-care in patients with low or intermediate clinical probability. Additionally, some RIs have greater specificity than HIT ELISAs. In summary, IgG-specific RIs appear to have improved diagnostic accuracy compared with ELISAs in patients with suspected HIT and may reduce misdiagnosis and overtreatment.

Diagnostic value of immunoassays for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Immunoassays are essential in the workup of patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. However, the diagnostic accuracy is uncertain with regard to different classes of assays, antibody specificities, thresholds, test variations, and manufacturers. We aimed to assess diagnostic accuracy measures of available immunoassays and to explore sources of heterogeneity. We performed comprehensive literature searches and applied strict inclusion criteria. Finally, 49 publications comprising 128 test evaluations in 15 199 patients were included in the analysis. Methodological quality according to the revised tool for quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies was moderate. Diagnostic accuracy measures were calculated with the unified model (comprising a bivariate random-effects model and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics model). Important differences were observed between classes of immunoassays, type of antibody specificity, thresholds, application of confirmation step, and manufacturers. Combination of high sensitivity (>95%) and high specificity (>90%) was found in 5 tests only: polyspecific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with intermediate threshold (Genetic Testing Institute, Asserachrom), particle gel immunoassay, lateral flow immunoassay, polyspecific chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) with a high threshold, and immunoglobulin G (IgG)-specific CLIA with low threshold. Borderline results (sensitivity, 99.6%; specificity, 89.9%) were observed for IgG-specific Genetic Testing Institute-ELISA with low threshold. Diagnostic accuracy appears to be inadequate in tests with high thresholds (ELISA; IgG-specific CLIA), combination of IgG specificity and intermediate thresholds (ELISA, CLIA), high-dose heparin confirmation step (ELISA), and particle immunofiltration assay. When making treatment decisions, clinicians should be a aware of diagnostic characteristics of the tests used and it is recommended they estimate posttest probabilities according to likelihood ratios as well as pretest probabilities using clinical scoring tools.

Combination of 4Ts score and PF4/H-PaGIA for diagnosis and management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: prospective cohort study

A negative PaGIA test in a patient with low/intermediate 4Ts score excludes HIT with a high level of confidence. A low 4Ts score was insufficient to exclude HIT in some cases because the posttest probability of HIT with a positive PaGIA was moderate.

Prospective evaluation of a rapid nanoparticle-based lateral flow immunoassay (STic Expert(®) HIT) for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

A rapid lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) (STic Expert(®) HIT), recently developed for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), was evaluated in a prospective multicentre cohort of 334 consecutive patients. The risk of HIT was estimated by the 4Ts score as low, intermediate and high in 28·7%, 61·7% and 9·6% of patients, respectively. Definite HIT was diagnosed in 40 patients (12·0%) with positive results on both enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Asserachrom(®) HPIA IgG) and serotonin release assay. The inter-reader reproducibility of results obtained was excellent (kappa ratio > 0·9). The negative predictive value of LFIA with plasma samples was 99·6% with a negative likelihood ratio (LR) of 0·03, and was comparable to those of the particle gel immunoassay (H/PF4-PaGIA(®) ) performed in 124 cases. Positive predictive value and positive LR were 44·4% and 5·87, respectively, and the results were similar for serum samples. The probability of HIT in intermediate risk patients decreased from 11·2% to 0·4% when the LFIA result was negative and increased to 42·5% when it was positive. In conclusion, the STic Expert(®) HIT combined with the 4Ts score is a reliable tool to rule out the diagnosis of HIT.

The new direct oral anticoagulants in special indications: rationale and preliminary data in cancer, mechanical heart valves, anti-phospholipid syndrome, and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and beyond

The present review will briefly summarize the interplay between coagulation and inflammation, highlighting possible effects of direct inhibition of factor Xa and thrombin beyond anticoagulation. Additionally, the rationale for the use of the new direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for indications such as cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT), mechanical heart valves, thrombotic anti-phospholipid syndrome (APS), and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) will be explored. Published data on patients with cancer or mechanical heart valves treated with DOAC will be discussed, as well as planned studies in APS and HIT. Although at the present time published evidence is insufficient for recommending DOAC in the above-mentioned indications, there are good arguments in favor of clinical trials investigating their efficacy in these contexts. Direct inhibition of factor Xa or thrombin may reveal interesting effects beyond anticoagulation as well.

Relationship between the 4Ts scoring system and the antiplatelet factor 4/heparin antibodies test in critically ill patients

Aim

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse drug reaction and potentially progresses to fatal thrombosis. The 4Ts scoring system has been reported as a clinical pretest for HIT. However, its usefulness in critically ill patients has not yet been thoroughly examined. Thus, we evaluated the clinical usefulness of the 4Ts score in the diagnosis of HIT in critically ill patients.

Methods

One hundred and four critically ill patients who were admitted to our intensive care unit and who underwent the antiplatelet factor 4/heparin complex antibodies (PF4/heparin Ab) test with suspected HIT were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint variable was the 4Ts score. The secondary endpoint variables were laboratory data, length of stay, and mortality, compared between thePF4/heparin Ab positive and negative groups.

Results

There was no significant difference in the 4Ts scores between the PF4/heparin Ab positive and negative groups. The positive predictive value (HIT patients/4T high score patients) was 15.4% (2/13), the negative predictive value (non-HIT patients/4T low score patients) was 87.5% (42/48), and the false-negative rate for the 4Ts score (4T low score patients/HIT patients) was as high as 54.5% (6/11). The PF4/heparin Ab positive patients had longer stay in intensive care compared to the PF4/heparin Ab negative patients (P = 0.035).

Conclusions

The present study showed the discrepancy between the 4Ts score and PF4/heparin Ab. When HIT is suspected in critically ill patients, an immediate HIT antibody test and initiation of therapeutic management of HIT are required regardless of the 4Ts score.

Diagnosis and management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a prothrombotic disorder caused by antibodies to platelet factor 4/heparin (PF4/H) complexes. It presents with declining platelet counts 5 to 14 days after heparin administration and results in a predisposition to arterial and venous thrombosis. Establishing the diagnosis of HIT can be extremely challenging. It is essential to conduct a thorough clinical evaluation in addition to laboratory testing to confirm the presence of PF4/H antibodies. Multiple clinical algorithms have been developed to aid the clinician in predicting the likelihood of HIT. Once HIT is recognized, an alternative anticoagulant should be initiated to prevent further complications.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a prothrombotic disorder caused by antibodies that recognize complexes of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. HIT is frequently considered in the differential diagnosis of thrombocytopenia occurring in patients on heparin therapy. HIT is a challenging diagnosis because of routine heparin use in hospitalized patients, the common occurrence of thrombocytopenia, and high rates of anti-PF4/heparin seroconversions in patients treated with heparin. Our diagnostic approach to HIT is presented here, underscoring critical elements of clinical and laboratory evaluation.