Accuracy of a prediction model for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT): An analysis based on individual patient data

Evaluation of a new nanoparticle-based lateral-flow immunoassay for the exclusion of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT)

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse complication of heparin caused by HIT antibodies (abs) that recognise platelet factor 4-heparin (PF4/hep) complexes. Several laboratory tests are available for the confirmation and/or refutation of HIT. A reliable and rapid singlesample test is still pending. It was the objective of this study to evaluate a new lateral-flow immunoassay based on nanoparticle technology. A cohort of 452 surgical and medical patients suspected of having HIT was evaluated. All samples were tested in two IgG-specific ELISAs, in a particle gel immunoassay (PaGIA) and in a newly developed lateral-flow immunoassay (LFI-HIT) as well as in a functional test (HIPA). Clinical pre-test probability was determined using 4T's score. Platelet-activating antibodies were present in 34/452 patients, all of whom had intermediate to high clinical probability. PF4/hep abs were detected in 79, 87, 86, and 63 sera using the four different immunoassays. The negative predictive values (NPV) were 100% for both ELISA tests and LFI-HIT but only 99.2% for PaGIA. There were less false positives (n=29) in the LFI-HIT compared to any other test. Additionally, significantly less time was required to perform LFI-HIT than to perform the other immunoassays. In conclusion, a newly developed lateral-flow assay, LFI-HIT, was capable of identifying all HIT patients in a cohort in a short period of time. Beside an NPV of 100%, the rate of false-positive signals is significantly lower with LFI-HIT than with other immunoassay(s). These performance characteristics suggest a high potency in reducing the risk and costs in patients suspected of having HIT.

Unfractionated heparin versus low molecular weight heparins for avoiding heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in postoperative patients

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse drug reaction presenting as a prothrombotic disorder related to antibody-mediated platelet activation. It is a paradoxical immune reaction resulting in thrombin generation in vivo, which leads to a hypercoagulable state and the potential to initiate venous or arterial thrombosis. A number of factors are thought to influence the incidence of HIT including the type and preparation of heparin (unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)) and the heparin-exposed patient population, with the postoperative patient population at higher risk.Although LMWH has largely replaced UFH as a front-line therapy, there is evidence supporting a lack of superiority of LMWH compared with UFH regarding prevention of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism following surgery, and similar frequencies of bleeding have been described with LMWH and UFH. The decision as to which of these two preparations of heparin to use may thus be influenced by harmful effects such as HIT. We therefore sought to determine the relative impact of UFH and LMWH on HIT in postoperative patients receiving thromboembolism prophylaxis. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to compare the incidence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and HIT complicated by venous thromboembolism in postoperative patients exposed to unfractionated heparin (UFH) versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH).

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Specialised Register (May 2016), CENTRAL (2016, Issue 4) and trials registries. The authors searched Lilacs (June 2016) and additional trials were sought from reference lists of relevant publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which participants were postoperative patients allocated to receive prophylaxis with UFH or LMWH, in a blinded or unblinded fashion. Studies were excluded if they did not use the accepted definition of HIT. This was defined as a relative reduction in the platelet count of 50% or greater from the postoperative peak (even if the platelet count at its lowest remained greater than 150 x 10⁹/L) occurring within five to 14 days after the surgery, with or without a thrombotic event occurring in this timeframe. Additionally, we required circulating antibodies associated with the syndrome to have been investigated through laboratory assays.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with participation of a third author.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we included three trials involving 1398 postoperative participants. Participants were submitted to general surgical procedures, minor and major, and the minimum mean age was 49 years. Pooled analysis showed a significant reduction in the risk of HIT with LMWH compared with UFH (risk ratio (RR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.73); low-quality evidence. The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) was 59. The risk of HIT was consistently reduced comparing participants undergoing major surgical procedures exposed to LMWH or UFH (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.75); low-quality evidence. The occurrence of HIT complicated by venous thromboembolism was significantly lower in participants receiving LMWH compared with UFH (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.84); low-quality evidence. The NNTB was 75. Arterial thrombosis occurred in only one participant who received UFH. There were no amputations or deaths documented. Although limited evidence is available, it appears that HIT induced by both types of heparins is common in people undergoing major surgical procedures (incidence greater than 1% and less than 10%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This updated review demonstrated low-quality evidence of a lower incidence of HIT, and HIT complicated by venous thromboembolism, in postoperative patients undergoing thromboprophylaxis with LMWH compared with UFH. Similarily, the risk of HIT in people undergoing major surgical procedures was lower when treated with LMWH compared to UFH (low-quality evidence). The quality of the evidence was downgraded due to concerns about the risk of bias in the included studies and imprecision of the study results. These findings may support current clinical use of LMWH over UFH as front-line heparin therapy. However, our conclusions are limited and there was an unexpected paucity of RCTs including HIT as an outcome. To address the scarcity of clinically-relevant information on HIT, HIT must be included as a core harmful outcome in future RCTs of heparin.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a review of concepts regarding a dangerous adverse drug reaction

Heparin is a natural agent with antithrombotic action, commercially available for therapeutic use as unfractionated heparin and low molecular weight heparin. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a serious adverse reaction to heparin that promotes antibody-mediated platelet activation. HIT is defined as a relative reduction in platelet count of 50% (even when the platelet count at its lowest level is above>150 x 10(9)/L) occurring within five to 14 days after initiation of the therapy. Thrombocytopenia is the main feature that directs the clinical suspicion of the reaction and the increased risk of thromboembolic complications is the most important and paradoxical consequence. The diagnosis is a delicate issue, and requires a combination of clinical probability and laboratory tests for the detection of platelet activation induced by HIT antibodies. The absolute risk of HIT has been estimated between 1% and 5% under treatment with unfractionated heparin, and less than 1% with low molecular weight heparin. However, high-quality evidence about the risk of HIT from randomized clinical trials is scarce. In addition, information on the frequency of HIT in developing countries is not widely available. This review aims to provide a better understanding of the key features of this reaction and updated information on its frequency to health professionals and other interested parties. Knowledge, familiarity, and access to therapeutic options for the treatment of this adverse reaction are mandatory to minimize the associated risks, improving patient safety.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia following hip and knee arthroplasty

Until recently, both the British Society for Haematology and American College of Chest Physicians recommended platelet monitoring in all surgical patients receiving prophylactic low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for the early diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). These guidelines were reversed in 2012 based upon an analysis considering resource expenditure, assay result timeframes, and complications relating to HIT treatment. However, there are no large studies reviewing lower limb arthroplasty patients on an individual basis to determine the incidence of HIT in this patient group. This study investigated 10 797 patients who underwent primary hip or knee arthroplasty with LMWH prophylaxis over a 5 years period. 32·6% of patients (n = 3515) had platelet counts recorded up to 14 d postoperatively with 13 patients (0·37%) developing thrombocytopenia. Platelet counts recovered spontaneously in five patients, and two patients had other identifiable causes. Only one of the remaining six patients developed thrombosis indicating an incidence of HIT-related thrombosis of 0·03%. The potential for identifying HIT with platelet monitoring in patients receiving LMWH prophylaxis is low and therefore routine monitoring for HIT is not justified.