High-dose IVIG plus cangrelor platelet "anesthesia" during urgent heparin-CPB in a patient with recent SRA-negative HIT-thrombosis with persisting platelet-activating antibodies

Efficacy of Therapeutic Plasma Exchange or Cangrelor as an Adjunctive Strategy to Facilitate Cardiopulmonary Bypass in Patients with Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) or intravenous cangrelor to prevent thromboembolism in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) who undergo cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) with heparin.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

N/A.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults having cardiac surgery with a history of HIT who received preoperative or intraoperative TPE or intravenous cangrelor as an adjunct to CPB with heparin.

INTERVENTIONS

None MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The primary outcome was avoidance of thromboembolism (venous or arterial) during or after CPB. Proportional meta-analysis with a random effects model was used to calculate a weighted-pooled proportion/efficacy for the study's primary outcome. Fifty-seven patients in 17 reports received TPE as an adjunctive treatment to prevent HIT-related thrombosis related to heparinization during CPB and 3 (5.3%) experienced thrombosis. Proportional meta-analysis suggested a weighted-pooled freedom from perioperative thromboembolism rate of 91.0% (95% CI 82.6%-96.9%). Fifteen patients in 6 reports received intravenous cangrelor as an adjunctive treatment to prevent HIT-related thrombosis related to heparinization during CPB and 2 (13.3%) experienced thrombosis. Proportional meta-analysis suggested a weighted-pooled freedom from perioperative thromboembolism rate of 83.0% (95% CI 61.2%- 97.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

TPE and cangrelor are feasible strategies to prevent thromboembolism in adults with HIT who require CPB with heparin. Given the relatively small number of cases in the published literature and a high likelihood for publication and detection biases, prudence remains warranted when using these strategies.

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.

How to Solve the Conundrum of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia during Cardiopulmonary Bypass

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a major issue in cardiac surgery requiring cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). HIT represents a severe adverse drug reaction after heparin administration. It consists of immune-mediated thrombocytopenia paradoxically leading to thrombotic events. Detection of antibodies against platelets factor 4/heparin (anti-PF4/H) and aggregation of platelets in the presence of heparin in functional in vitro tests confirm the diagnosis. Patients suffering from HIT and requiring cardiac surgery are at high risk of lethal complications and present specific challenges. Four distinct phases are described in the usual HIT timeline, and the anticoagulation strategy chosen for CPB depends on the phase in which the patient is categorized. In this sense, we developed an institutional protocol covering each phase. It consisted of the use of a non-heparin anticoagulant such as bivalirudin, or the association of unfractionated heparin (UFH) with a potent antiplatelet drug such as tirofiban or cangrelor. Temporary reduction of anti-PF4 with intravenous immunoglobulins (IvIg) has recently been described as a complementary strategy. In this article, we briefly described the pathophysiology of HIT and focused on the various strategies that can be applied to safely manage CPB in these patients.

Heparin-induced Thrombocytopenia: Perioperative Diagnosis and Management

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is a severe prothrombotic disease. Timely diagnosis and treatment are essential. Application of diagnostic algorithms based on validated clinical scoring tools and rapid, specific laboratory assays may improve outcomes.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and cardiovascular surgery

Clinicians generally counsel patients with a history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) to avoid heparin products lifelong. Although there are now many alternative (nonheparin) anticoagulants available, heparin avoidance remains challenging for cardiac surgery. Heparin is often preferred in the cardiac surgery setting based on the vast experience with the agent, ease of monitoring, and reversibility. To "clear" a patient with a history of HIT for cardiac surgery, hematologists must first confirm the diagnosis of HIT, which can be challenging due to the ubiquity of heparin exposure and frequency of thrombocytopenia in patients in the cardiac intensive care unit. Next, the "phase of HIT" (acute HIT, subacute HIT A/B, or remote HIT) should be established based on platelet count, immunoassay for antibodies to platelet factor 4/heparin complexes, and a functional assay (eg, serotonin release assay). As long as the HIT functional assay remains positive (acute HIT or subacute HIT A), cardiac surgery should be delayed if possible. If surgery cannot be delayed, an alternative anticoagulant (preferably bivalirudin) may be used. Alternatively, heparin may be used with either preoperative/intraoperative plasma exchange or together with a potent antiplatelet agent. The optimal strategy among these options is not known, and the choice depends on institutional experience and availability of alternative anticoagulants. In the later phases of HIT (subacute HIT B or remote HIT), brief intraoperative exposure to heparin followed by an alternative anticoagulant as needed in the postoperative setting is recommended.

The Triple HIT: Perioperative Management of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia Using Plasma Exchange, Intravenous Immunoglobulin, and Protamine Infusion for Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a serious complication in patients exposed to heparin, leading to thrombocytopenia and, potentially, thrombosis. This disorder is challenging in cardiac surgery when anticoagulation for cardiopulmonary bypass is required. Herein a patient with HIT who had active thrombosis and successfully underwent urgent left ventricular assist device implantation managed with plasma exchange, intravenous immunoglobulin, and protamine infusion is described. These therapies reduce the immune response to heparin and minimize thrombosis when heparin reexposure is planned. These approaches to perioperative management of HIT represent an attractive alternative to the use of non-heparin anticoagulants in the cardiac and vascular surgical population.

GTH 2021 State of the Art-Cardiac Surgery: The Perioperative Management of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia in Cardiac Surgery

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a severe, immune-mediated, adverse drug reaction that paradoxically induces a prothrombotic state. Particularly in the setting of cardiac surgery, where full anticoagulation is required during cardiopulmonary bypass, the management of HIT can be highly challenging, and requires a multidisciplinary approach. In this short review, the different perioperative strategies to run cardiopulmonary bypass will be summarized.

Thrombocytopenia: Perioperative Considerations for Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

The etiologies of thrombocytopenia in patients presenting for cardiac surgery are extensive, but clinically relevant conditions generally can be categorized by those related to decreased platelet production or increased platelet destruction. Many causes require mere acknowledgment and availability of allogeneic platelet transfusion; others have unique considerations for which providers should be familiar. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the common causes of thrombocytopenia, summarize the literature, and discuss perioperative considerations for patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

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.