HIT paradigms and paradoxes

Demystifying autoimmune HIT: what it is, when to test, and how to treat

Antibodies to platelet factor 4 (PF4) have been primarily linked to classical heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (cHIT). However, during the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine program a new condition, vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT), was identified, related to adenoviral-based COVID-19 vaccines. The differences between these 2 conditions, both clinically and in laboratory testing, set the scene for the development of a new rapid anti-PF4 assay that is not linked with heparin (as relevant for cHIT). Concurrently, there has been a reassessment of those cases described as autoimmune HIT. Such scenarios do not follow cHIT, but there is now a clearer differentiation of heparin-dependent and heparin-independent anti-PF4 conditions. The importance of this distinction is the identification of heparin-independent anti-PF4 antibodies in a new subgroup termed VITT-like disorder. Cases appear to be rare, precipitated by infection and in a proportion of cases, orthopaedic surgery, but are associated with high mortality and the need for a different treatment pathway, which includes immunomodulation therapy.

Cost-Effectiveness and Return on Investment Analysis of an In-house HemosIL Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia Antibody Assay at a Mid-Sized Institution

CONTEXT.—

Laboratories face the challenge of providing quality patient care while managing costs and turnaround times (TATs). To this end, we brought the heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) antibody test in-house with the goal of reducing costs and the time to diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES.—

To determine the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of our in-house HIT antibody test by comparing it to send-out assays with TATs of 2, 3, or 4 days.

DESIGN.—

We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients with a HIT antibody assay and analysis of laboratory financial records. Analysis included the percentage of patients receiving alternative treatment, cost of treatment, startup costs of bringing the test in-house, and average TAT of the in-house test.

RESULTS.—

We found significant reductions in the cost of treatment for patients and the overall cost to the health care system. The in-house assay became cost-effective at between 8 and 20 tests, with a return on investment of up to 298%.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Bringing the HIT antibody assay in-house becomes cost-effective at a very low test volume with excellent return on investment. This novel analysis can provide a framework for other laboratory medicine professionals to analyze the benefits of bringing this and other assays in-house.

Trivalent nanobody-based ligands mediate powerful activation of GPVI, CLEC-2, and PEAR1 in human platelets whereas FcγRIIA requires a tetravalent ligand

BACKGROUND

Clustering of the receptors glycoprotein receptor VI (GPVI), C-type lectin-like receptor 2 (CLEC-2), low-affinity immunoglobulin γ Fc region receptor II-a (FcγRIIA), and platelet endothelial aggregation receptor 1 (PEAR1) leads to powerful activation of platelets through phosphorylation of tyrosine in their cytosolic tails and initiation of downstream signaling cascades. GPVI, CLEC-2, and FcγRIIA signal through YxxL motifs that activate Syk. PEAR1 signals through a YxxM motif that activates phosphoinositide 3-kinase. Current ligands for these receptors have an undefined valency and show significant batch variation and, for some, uncertain specificity.

OBJECTIVES

We have raised nanobodies against each of these receptors and multimerized them to identify the minimum number of epitopes to achieve robust activation of human platelets.

METHODS

Divalent and trivalent nanobodies were generated using a flexible glycine-serine linker. Tetravalent nanobodies utilize a mouse Fc domain (IgG2a, which does not bind to FcγRIIA) to dimerize the divalent nanobody. Ligand affinity measurements were determined by surface plasmon resonance. Platelet aggregation, adenosine triphosphate secretion, and protein phosphorylation were analyzed using standardized methods.

RESULTS

Multimerization of the nanobodies led to a stepwise increase in affinity with divalent and higher-order nanobody oligomers having sub-nanomolar affinity. The trivalent nanobodies to GPVI, CLEC-2, and PEAR1 stimulated powerful and robust platelet aggregation, secretion, and protein phosphorylation at low nanomolar concentrations. A tetravalent nanobody was required to activate FcγRIIA with the concentration-response relationship showing a greater variability and reduced sensitivity compared with the other nanobody-based ligands, despite a sub-nanomolar binding affinity.

CONCLUSION

The multivalent nanobodies represent a series of standardized, potent agonists for platelet glycoprotein receptors. They have applications as research tools and in clinical assays.

Hematology in the post-COVID era: spotlight on vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia and a conceptual framework (the 4P's) for anti-PF4 diseases

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a life-threatening prothrombotic disorder first identified following the introduction of adenoviral vector vaccines for COVID-19. The condition is characterized by anti-PF4 antibodies and clinically presents with thrombocytopenia and thrombosis often in unusual anatomical sites.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we discuss the clinical presentation, diagnostic testing, and treatment of VITT. We also review VITT-like syndromes that have been described in patients without previous vaccination. We propose a conceptual framework for the mechanism of anti-PF4 diseases that includes sufficiently high levels of PF4, the presence of a Polyanion that can form immune complexes with PF4, a Pro-inflammatory milieu, and an immunological Predisposition - the 4Ps.

EXPERT OPINION

Significant progress has been made in understanding the characteristics of the VITT antibody and in testing methods that can confirm that diagnosis. Future work should be directed at understanding long-term outcomes, mechanisms of thrombosis, and individual risk factors for this rare but dangerous immune-thrombotic disease.

Successful Treatment With the Oral Factor Xa Inhibitor Edoxaban in Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia With Thrombosis

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with thrombosis (HITT) is a rare immune reaction to the drug heparin that causes increased blood clotting, putting patients at risk for arterial and venous thromboembolism which can have severe consequences. We present a case of HITT successfully treated with the direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), edoxaban. A 56-year-old man had surgery to remove a colorectal mass. After discharge, he developed chest discomfort, shortness of breath, and low oxygen levels and was diagnosed with a right-sided lobar pulmonary embolism. His platelet count dropped, his tests confirmed a diagnosis of HITT, and he was initially treated with fondaparinux. After showing clinical and laboratory improvement, he was switched to edoxaban. Despite being diagnosed with colonic adenocarcinoma during follow-up, the patient's platelet count returned to normal, and he did not experience any more blood clots or serious bleeding events. The use of DOACs like edoxaban as potential therapies for HITT is promising; further research is being conducted to evaluate their effectiveness, safety, and potential benefits for treating this acquired high-risk thrombophilia.

Autoimmune Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Autoimmune thrombocytopenia (aHIT) is a severe subtype of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) with atypical clinical features caused by highly pathological IgG antibodies ("aHIT antibodies") that activate platelets even in the absence of heparin. The clinical features of aHIT include: the onset or worsening of thrombocytopenia despite stopping heparin ("delayed-onset HIT"), thrombocytopenia persistence despite stopping heparin ("persisting" or "refractory HIT"), or triggered by small amounts of heparin (heparin "flush" HIT), most cases of fondaparinux-induced HIT, and patients with unusually severe HIT (e.g., multi-site or microvascular thrombosis, overt disseminated intravascular coagulation [DIC]). Special treatment approaches are required. For example, unlike classic HIT, heparin cessation does not result in de-escalation of antibody-induced hemostasis activation, and thus high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) may be indicated to interrupt aHIT-induced platelet activation; therapeutic plasma exchange may be required if high-dose IVIG is ineffective. Also, aHIT patients are at risk for treatment failure with (activated partial thromboplastin time [APTT]-adjusted) direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI) therapy (argatroban, bivalirudin), either because of APTT confounding (where aHIT-associated DIC and resulting APTT prolongation lead to systematic underdosing/interruption of DTI therapy) or because DTI inhibits thrombin-induced protein C activation. Most HIT laboratories do not test for aHIT antibodies, contributing to aHIT under-recognition.

Incidence and clinical outcomes of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: 11 year experience in a tertiary care university hospital

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare immuno-mediated adverse reaction with high thrombotic and mortality risk. To evaluate incidence and outcomes of HIT cases diagnosed at a tertiary care hospital from 2007 to 2018. A retrospective study was conducted. Patients with suspected HIT underwent 4Ts score assessment and anti-heparin PF4 IgG antibodies ELISA screening test. If the latter was positive, platelet aggregation test (PAT) was performed. If the latter was positive, any form of heparin was stopped, alternative anticoagulants were started and then overlapped with warfarin. HIT incidence was calculated by dividing HIT cases by the mean yearly number of admitted patients over 11 years. Follow-up was 90 days. Among 2125 screening tests, 96 (4.5%) were positive with confirmatory PAT in 82/90 (3.8% for missing data in 6). Median age was 75; 39 patients were surgical and 51 medical. The median 4Ts score was 5. Unfractionated heparin was employed in 34 (37%). HIT incidence was 0.16/1000/patient/years (95% CI: 0.12-0.23) in surgical and 0.15/1000/patient/years (95%: 0.12-0.20) in medical patients. HIT with thrombosis (HIT-T) was observed in 31 patients (0.05/1000/patient/years 95% CI: 0.04-0.1), with venous thromboses in 25 (80%). HIT without thrombosis was observed in 59 patients (0.1/1000 patient/years; 95% CI: 0.08-0.13, twofold vs HIT-T). All cause mortality was 25.5% (95% CI: 17.6-35.4), major bleeding 7.7% (95% CI:3.2-15.3), and thromboembolic complications 3.3% (95% CI:1.1-9.3). HIT is a rare event with high mortality, despite the use of non heparin anticoagulants.

How to assess hypercoagulability in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia? Biomarkers of potential value to support therapeutic intensity of non-heparin anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

In case of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), the switch to a non-heparin anticoagulant is mandatory, at a therapeutic dose. Such a treatment has limitations though, especially for patients with renal and/or hepatic failure. Candidate laboratory tests could detect the more coagulable HIT patients, for whom therapeutic anticoagulation would be the more justified.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a monocentre observational prospective study in which 111 patients with suspected HIT were included. Nineteen were diagnosed with HIT (ELISA and platelet activation assay), among whom 10 were classified as HITT + when a thrombotic event was present at diagnosis or during the first following week. Two plasma prethrombotic biomarkers of in vivo activation of the haemostasis system, procoagulant phospholipids (ProcoagPPL) associated with extracellular vesicles and fibrin monomers (FM test), as well as in vitro thrombin potential (ST Genesia; low picomolar tissue factor) after heparin neutralization (heparinase), were studied. The results were primarily compared between HITT + and HITT- patients.

RESULTS

Those HIT + patients with thrombotic events in acute phase or shortly after (referred as HITT+) had a more coagulable phenotype than HIT + patients without thrombotic events since: (i) clotting times related to plasma procoagulant phospholipids tended to be shorter; (ii) fibrin monomers levels were statistically significantly higher (p = 0.0483); (iii) thrombin potential values were statistically significantly higher (p = 0.0404). Of note, among all patients suspected of suffering from HIT, we did not evidence a hypercoagulable phenotype in patients diagnosed with HIT compared to patients for whom the diagnosis of HIT was ruled out.

CONCLUSION

The three tests could help identify those HIT patients the most prone to thrombosis.

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.

Recurrent thrombosis rescued by fondaparinux in high-risk patients: A case series

Background

Recurrent thrombosis treatment options are limited when anticoagulation with dose escalation of low molecular weight heparin or unfractionated heparin fail. Fondaparinux is a pure, synthetic pentasaccharide that consists of heparin's essential five-sugar chain that binds antithrombin to inactivate factor Xa. There is scarce data regarding fondaparinux's use in recurrent thrombosis.

Key Clinical Question

We aim to explore fondaparinux's role in recurrent thrombosis when other standard anticoagulation treatments fail.

Clinical Approach

We report a case series of six high thrombotic risk patients successfully treated with fondaparinux after thrombosis progression while on supratherapeutic low molecular weight heparin or unfractionated heparin. Of our six patients, two were previously diagnosed with a high-risk thrombophilia: triple positive antiphospholipid syndrome, and homozygous factor V Leiden. The other four had an underlying malignancy.

Conclusion

With fondaparinux, no thrombosis progression was observed, and no bleeding complications occurred.

A rare case of intracerebral hemorrhage complicating heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in a COVID-19 patient

Introduction

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is a rare complication of heparin therapy associated with thrombocytopenia and mainly thrombotic complications.

Case report

we herein describe a case of a woman hospitalized for management of a severe case of COVID-19 treated with low molecular weight heparin, who developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia complicated by intracerebral hemorrhage with no thrombotic complications.

Conclusion

Discontinuation of heparin was effective without the use of other non-heparin anticoagulants, platelet transfusion or plasmapheresis.

•

HIT is a rare complication of LMWH, it is associated with thrombocytopenia and mainly thrombotic complications.

•

In this paper we will report a rare complication of HIT : ICH in a 63 years old woman admitted for covid 19-infection.

•

Discontinuation of heparin was effective without the use of other non-heparin anticoagulants, platelet transfusion or plasmapheresis.

Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia in a Pediatric Population: Implications for Clinical Probability Scores and Testing

OBJECTIVES

To determine the applicability of the 4Ts score and the Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) Expert Probability (HEP) score in children with suspected HIT and to estimate the number of children potentially at risk of HIT.

STUDY DESIGN

We retrospectively estimated 4Ts and HEP scores in a cohort of 50 children referred for laboratory screening with enzyme immunoassay. In addition, minor modifications were introduced to the 4Ts score (modified 4Ts score) to adapt it for use in the pediatric setting. All patients with positive enzyme immunoassays were tested with serotonin release assay. We also extracted the number of patients started on heparins in a similar period of time.

RESULTS

The median age at the time of testing was 4 years (25th-75th percentile, 8.7 months to 13.5 years); 78% of patients had low and 22% had intermediate risk pretest probability scores using the original 4Ts score; 86% had low risk and 14% had intermediate risk scores using the modified 4Ts score; 54% of children had a HEP score of ≥2. Six patients (12%) had a positive (≥0.40 optical density units) enzyme immunoassay, but none had a positive serotonin release assay. Based on anticoagulation dose, there were 1-2 new daily potentially high-risk exposures to heparinoids at our institution.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified 4Ts and original 4Ts scores may be more adequate than the HEP score to determine HIT pretest probability in children. Despite the number of patients potentially at risk, HIT is rare in pediatrics.

Heparin Induced Thrombocytopenia for the Perioperative and Critical Care Clinician

Purpose of Review

This review will illustrate the importance of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the intraoperative and critical care settings.

Recent Findings

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) occurs more frequently in surgical patients compared with medical patients due to the inflammatory release of platelet factor 4 and perioperative heparin exposure. Recognition of this disease requires a high index of suspicion. Diagnostic tools and therapeutic strategies have been expanded and refined in recent years.

Summary

HIT is a condition where antibodies against the heparin/platelet factor 4 complex interact with platelet receptors to promote platelet activation, aggregation, and thrombus formation. Our review will focus on intraoperative and postoperative considerations related to HIT to help the clinician better manage this rare but often devastating hypercoagulable disease process.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia during extracorporeal life support: incidence, management and outcomes

Background

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a severe antibody-mediated reaction leading to transient prothrombosis. However, its incidence in patients on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is not well described. The aim of this systematic review was to report the incidence of HIT in patients on ECLS, as well as compare the characteristics and outcomes of HIT in patients undergoing veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and veno-venous ECMO (VV-ECMO).

Methods

An electronic search was performed to identify all studies in the English literature examining outcomes of patients with HIT on ECLS. All identified articles were systematically assessed using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Random effects meta-analysis as well as univariate analysis was performed.

Results

Of 309 patients from six retrospective studies undergoing ECLS, 83% were suspected, and 17% were confirmed to have HIT. Due to the sparsity of relevant retrospective data regarding patients with confirmed HIT on ECLS, patient-based data was subsequently collected on 28 patients from case reports and case series. Out of these 28 patients, 53.6% and 46.4% of them underwent VA-ECMO and VV-ECMO, respectively. Patients on VA-ECMO had a lower median platelet count nadir (VA-ECMO: 26.0 vs. VV-ECMO: 45.0 per µL, P=0.012) and were more likely to experience arterial thromboembolism (VA-ECMO: 53.3% vs. VV-ECMO: 0.0%, P=0.007), though there was a trend towards decreased likelihood of experiencing ECLS circuit oxygenator thromboembolism (VA-ECMO: 0.0% vs. VV-ECMO: 30.8%, P=0.075) and thromboembolism necessitating ECLS device or circuit exchange (VA-ECMO: 13.3% vs. VV-ECMO 53.8%, P=0.060). Kaplan-Meier survival plots including time from ECLS initiation reveal no significant differences in survival in patients supported on VA-ECMO as compared to VV-ECMO (P=0.300).

Conclusions

Patients who develop HIT on VA-ECMO are more likely to experience more severe thrombocytopenia and arterial thromboembolism than those on VV-ECMO. Further research in this area and development of standardized protocols for the monitoring, diagnosis and management of HIT in patients on ECLS support are warranted.

Characterization of hospitalized cardiovascular patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

Little is known about heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), a pro-thrombotic, potentially life-threatening immune-mediated reaction to heparin exposure, in conservative and interventional cardiovascular medicine.

HYPOTHESIS

The 4T score, validated for prediction of HIT in surgical patients before, is also suitable for assessing HIT probability in cardiovascular patients with unclear thrombocytopenia.

METHODS

A total of 403 consecutive patients from our Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Pneumology in whom a HIT screening test was performed between 2009 and 2016 were identified. All 72 patients with a positive screening test were subjected to a functional confirmation test (heparin-induced platelet activation test, HIPA), resulting in 23 patients with serologically confirmed HIT (positive screening test, positive HIPA) and 49 patients with nonconfirmed HIT (positive screening test, negative HIPA).

RESULTS

The 4TScore had a sensitivity of 82.6% and a specificity of 28.6% in our patients, suggesting that it might not sufficiently predict the clinical probability of HIT in cardiovascular patients. In both confirmed and nonconfirmed HIT, intrahospital mortality was high without a significant difference (30% in confirmed HIT vs 43% in nonconfirmed HIT). Bacteremia was more often found in patients with nonconfirmed HIT, suggesting infection as a frequent differential diagnosis of thrombocytopenia in these patients (49% vs 17%, P = 0.0185).

CONCLUSION

HIT screening should be initiated in cardiovascular patients with unclear thrombocytopenia despite a low 4Tscore in order to distinguish patients requiring alternative anticoagulants from those with other causes such as infections. Further research is needed to specify the risk profile for HIT in cardiovascular patients.

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.

Platelet count recovery and seroreversion in immune HIT despite continuation of heparin: further observations and literature review

One of the standard distinctions between type 1 (non-immune) and type 2 (immune-mediated) heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is the transience of thrombocytopenia: type 1 HIT is viewed as early-onset and transient thrombocytopenia, with platelet count recovery despite continuing heparin administration. In contrast, type 2 HIT is viewed as later-onset (i. e., 5 days or later) thrombocytopenia in which it is generally believed that platelet count recovery will not occur unless heparin is discontinued. However, older reports of type 2 HIT sometimes did include the unexpected observation that platelet counts could recover despite continued heparin administration, although without information provided regarding changes in HIT antibody levels in association with platelet count recovery. In recent years, some reports of type 2 HIT have confirmed the observation that platelet count recovery can occur despite continuing heparin administration, with serological evidence of waning levels of HIT antibodies (“seroreversion”). We now report two additional patient cases of type 2 HIT with platelet count recovery despite ongoing therapeutic-dose (1 case) or prophylactic-dose (1 case) heparin administration, in which we demonstrate concomitant waning of HIT antibody levels. We further review the literature describing this phenomenon of HIT antibody seroreversion and platelet count recovery despite continuing heparin administration. Our observations add to the concept that HIT represents a remarkably transient immune response, including sometimes even when heparin is continued.

False positive immunoassay for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the presence of monoclonal gammopathy: a case report

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a life-threatening disorder which diagnosis depends on laboratory evaluation. The objective of this report is to present the impact of different laboratory methods for HIT detection on the diagnostic evaluation process. In this case, a 78-year old female patient previously diagnosed with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) was administered with heparin for pulmonary embolism treatment. Patient’s initial diagnostic work-up (determination of platelet count and prothrombin time measurement for monitoring of pharmacotherapy) was followed by the clinical estimation of HIT likelihood by “4Ts” score, two immunoassays (ID-PaGIA Heparin/PF4 Antibody Test and ELISA PF4 IgG assay) and one functional test called high-performance liquid chromatography serotonin release assay (HPLC-SRA). The result of “4Ts” score indicated a low likelihood of HIT but persistent thrombocytopenia that appeared days after discontinuation of heparin therapy suggested delayed-onset HIT. Both immunoassays were positive for presence of HIT-autoantibodies, while the functional HPLC-SRA was negative. Since different methods gave opposing results, their interpretation required great attention. In comparison to the HPLC-SRA, immunoassays are prone to the analytical interferences associated with the presence of non-specific antibodies, which may lead to false positive results. In this case, where the patient is known to produce antibodies of undetermined significance, HIT was ruled out as the possible cause of persistent thrombocytopenia primarily due to the negative result of HPLC-SRA, which is not prone to this type of interferences, but also due to the low “4Ts” clinical score.

Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia: A Comprehensive Clinical Review

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is a profoundly dangerous, potentially lethal, immunologically mediated adverse drug reaction to unfractionated heparin or, less commonly, to low-molecular weight heparin. In this comprehensive review, the authors highlight heparin-induced thrombocytopenia's risk factors, clinical presentation, pathophysiology, diagnostic principles, and treatment. The authors place special emphasis on the management of patients requiring procedures using cardiopulmonary bypass or interventions in the catheterization laboratory. Clinical vigilance of this disease process is important to ensure its recognition, diagnosis, and treatment. Misdiagnosis of the syndrome, as well as misunderstanding of the disease process, continues to contribute to its morbidity and mortality.

Clinical picture of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and its differentiation from non-HIT thrombocytopenia

HIT is an acquired antibody-mediated disorder strongly associated with thrombosis, including microthrombosis secondary to disseminated intravascular dissemination (DIC). The clinical features of HIT are reviewed from the perspective of the 4Ts scoring system for HIT, which emphasises its characteristic timing of onset of thrombocytopenia. HIT antibodies recognize multimolecular complexes of platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin. However, a subset of HIT sera recognise PF4 bound to platelet chondroitin sulfate; these antibodies activate platelets in vitro and in vivo even in the absence of heparin, thus explaining: delayed-onset HIT (where HIT begins or worsens after stopping heparin); persisting HIT (where HIT takes several weeks to recover); spontaneous HIT syndrome (a disorder clinically and serologically resembling HIT but without proximate heparin exposure); and fondaparinux-associated HIT (four distinct syndromes featuring thrombocytopenia that begins or worsens during treatment with fondaparinux), with a new patient case presented with ongoing thrombocytopenia (and fatal haemorrhage) during treatment of HIT with fondaparinux, with fondaparinux-dependent platelet activation induced by patient serum ("fondaparinux cross-reactivity"). Ironically, despite existence of fondaparinux-associated HIT, this pentasaccharide anticoagulant is a frequent treatment for HIT (including one used by the author). HIT can be confused with other disorders, including those with a) timing similar to HIT (e. g. abciximab-associated thrombocytopenia of delayed-onset); b) combined thrombocytopenia/thrombosis (e. g. symmetrical peripheral gangrene secondary to acute DIC and shock liver); and c) both timing of onset and thrombosis (e. g. warfarin-associated venous limb gangrene complicating cancer-associated DIC). By understanding clinical and pathophysiological similarities and differences between HIT and non-HIT mimicking disorders, the clinician is better able to make the correct diagnosis.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Thrombocytopenia and heparin exposure are common in critically ill patients, yet immune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), a prothrombotic adverse effect of heparin, rarely accounts for thrombocytopenia in this patient population. The review discusses the clinical and laboratory features that distinguish HIT from non-HIT thrombocytopenia.

RECENT FINDINGS

The frequency of HIT in heparin-exposed critically ill patients is approximately 0.3-0.5% versus at least a 30-50% background frequency of non-HIT thrombocytopenia. Most patients who form anti-PF4/heparin antibodies do not develop HIT, contributing to HIT overdiagnosis. Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), particularly in the setting of cardiogenic or septic shock associated with 'shock liver', can cause ischemic limb gangrene with pulses, mimicking a clinical picture of HIT. However, whereas non-HIT-related DIC with microthrombosis can be treated with heparin, HIT usually requires nonheparin anticoagulation. HIT-associated DIC can result in an elevated INR, which could reflect factor VII depletion because of extrinsic (tissue factor) pathway-mediated activation of coagulation.

SUMMARY

Greater understanding of the various clinical and laboratory features that distinguish HIT from non-HIT thrombocytopenia could help improve outcomes in patients who develop thrombocytopenia and coagulopathies in the ICU.

Management of the multiple phases of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

The clinical course of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) may be separated into five sequential phases: 1. suspected HIT, 2. acute HIT, 3. subacute HIT A, 4. subacute HIT B, and 5. remote HIT. Each phase confronts the clinician with a unique set of management questions. In this review, the phases of HIT are defined and key management questions associated with each phase are discussed. Among patients with Suspected HIT, I use the 4Ts score to determine which patients have a sufficiently high probability of HIT to justify discontinuation of heparin and initiation of a non-heparin parenteral anticoagulant. An algorithm for selecting an appropriate non-heparin anticoagulant based on the patient's clinical stability, renal and hepatic function, drug availability, and physician comfort is provided. In patients with Acute HIT, I generally avoid prophylactic platelet transfusion and inferior vena cava filter insertion because of a potential increased risk of thrombosis. I perform 4-limb screening compression ultrasonography. In patients with symptomatic thromboembolism or asymptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis, I treat with anticoagulation for three months. In patients without thrombosis, I discontinue anticoagulation upon platelet count recovery. I do not transition patients to an oral anticoagulant until platelet count recovery (i. e. Subacute HIT A). I increasingly choose direct oral anticoagulants over vitamin K antagonists in this setting because of their greater convenience and safety. In Subacute HIT B and Remote HIT, I use heparin for cardiovascular surgery, whereas I use bivalirudin in patients with Acute HIT and Subacute HIT A in whom surgery cannot be delayed.

Distinguishing between anti-platelet factor 4/heparin antibodies that can and cannot cause heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

Many patients exposed to heparin develop antibodies against platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin, yet only those antibodies that activate platelets cause heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Patients who produce anti-PF4/heparin antibodies without developing HIT either have antibodies that do not cause platelet activation or produce pathogenic antibodies at levels that are insufficient to cause HIT. Understanding the differences between anti-PF4/heparin antibodies with and without HIT will improve test methods and reduce overdiagnosis.

AIMS

To investigate the presence of low levels of platelet-activating antibodies in patients investigated for HIT who had anti-PF4/heparin antibodies but failed to cause platelet activation in the (14) C-serotonin release assay (SRA).

MATERIALS/METHODS

We developed a platelet activation assay similar to the SRA using exogenous PF4 without added heparin (PF4-SRA). This assay was able to detect low levels of platelet-activating antibodies. We used this PF4-SRA to test for platelet-activating antibodies in patients investigated for HIT.

RESULTS

The PF4-SRA detected platelet-activating antibodies in seven (100%) of seven SRA-positive sera even after the samples were diluted until they were no longer positive in the standard SRA. Platelet-activating antibodies were detected in 14 (36%) of 39 patients who had anti-PF4/heparin antibodies but tested negative in the SRA and did not have clinical HIT. The clinical diagnosis of HIT was confirmed by chart review and concordant with the SRA results.

CONCLUSIONS

A subset of heparin-treated patients produce subthreshold levels of platelet-activating anti-PF4/heparin antibodies that do not cause HIT. An increase in the titer of these pathogenic antibodies, along with permissive clinical conditions, could lead to HIT.

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia in critically ill: Diagnostic dilemmas and management conundrums

Thrombocytopenia is often noted in critically ill patients. While there are many reasons for thrombocytopenia, the use of heparin and its derivatives is increasingly noted to be associated with thrombocytopenia. Heparin induced thrombocytopenia syndrome (HITS) is a distinct entity that is characterised by the occurrence of thrombocytopenia in conjunction with thrombotic manifestations after exposure to unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin. HITS is an immunologic disorder mediated by antibodies to heparin-platelet factor 4 (PF4) complex. HITS is an uncommon cause of thrombocytopenia. Reported incidence of HITS in patients exposed to heparin varies from 0.2% to up to 5%. HITS is rare in ICU populations, with estimates varying from 0.39%-0.48%. It is a complex problem which may cause diagnostic dilemmas and management conundrum. The diagnosis of HITS centers around detection of antibodies against PF4-heparin complexes. Immunoassays performed by most pathology laboratories detect the presence of antibodies, but do not reveal whether the antibodies are pathological. Platelet activation assays demonstrate the presence of clinically relevant antibodies, but only a minority of laboratories conduct them. Several anticoagulants are used in management of HITS. In this review we discuss the incidence, pathogenesis, diagnosis and management of HITS.

Non-injection-site necrotic skin lesions complicating postoperative heparin thromboprophylaxis

The patient case we present is a definite case of HIT from both clinical and serological perspectives. The 4Ts score was eventually 8/8 (maximum) based upon thrombocytopenia (88% platelet count fall to nadir of 58 × 109/L), appropriate timing (onset on Day 5 post-intraoperative UFH exposure), thrombosis (right lower limb DVTs, skin necrosis, anaphylactoid reaction to IV heparin, right hallux ischemic necrosis), and no plausible alternative explanation for thrombocytopenia. In addition, the patient had a strong positive SRA and PF4-dependent ELISA. Although necrotizing skin lesions distant from heparin injection sites are not a common consequence of HIT, their occurrence in this patient—along with previous supportive literature [11-13]—indicate that these lesions should be considered rare manifestations of HIT. Moreover, the distinct localization of the unusual necrotic skin rash to the right limb suggests that a low flow state due to the arterial obstruction or perhaps even as a result of an underlying venous thrombus, both of which were present in our patient, could play a key pathophysiological role in predisposing to this unusual complication of HIT.

Pitfalls in the diagnosis of heparin-Induced thrombocytopenia: A 6-year experience from a reference laboratory

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is caused by platelet-activating antibodies against complexes of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. The diagnosis of HIT is contingent on accurate and timely laboratory testing. Recently, alternative anticoagulants for the treatment of HIT have been introduced along with algorithms for better HIT diagnosis. However, the increased reliance on immunoassays for the diagnosis of HIT may have harmful consequences due to the high rate of false positive results. To compare trends and implications of current HIT testing approaches, we analyzed results over a six-year period from the McMaster University Platelet Immunology Reference Laboratory. From 2008 to 2013, 8,546 samples were investigated for HIT using both an in-house IgG-specific anti-PF4/heparin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and the serotonin-release assay (SRA). Of 8,546 samples tested, 13.4% were true-positives (positive in both assays); 65.6% were true-negatives (negative in both assays); 20.9% were presumed false positive for HIT (EIA-positive/SRA-negative); and 0.2% were EIA-negative/SRA-positive. The frequency of EIA-positive/SRA-negative results increased over time (from 12.9% in 2008 to 22.9% in 2013). We found that the number of SRA-negative samples was reduced from referring centers that used an immunoassay as an initial screen; however, 41% of those samples tested negative in the immunoassay and in the SRA at the reference laboratory. The suspicion of HIT continues at a high rate and the agreement between the EIA and SRA test results remains problematic.

The platelet serotonin-release assay

Few laboratory tests are as clinically useful as The platelet serotonin-release assay (SRA): a positive SRA in the appropriate clinical context is virtually diagnostic of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), a life- and limb-threatening prothrombotic disorder caused by anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies that activate platelets, thereby triggering serotonin-release. The SRA's performance characteristics include high sensitivity and specificity, although caveats include indeterminate reaction profiles (observed in ∼4% of test sera) and potential for false-positive reactions. As only a subset of anti-PF4/heparin antibodies detectable by enzyme-immunoassay (EIA) are additionally platelet-activating, the SRA has far greater diagnostic specificity than the EIA. However, requiring a positive EIA, either as an initial screening test or as an SRA adjunct, will reduce risk of a false-positive SRA (since a negative EIA in a patient with a "positive" SRA should prompt critical evaluation of the SRA reaction profile). The SRA also provides useful information on whether a HIT serum produces strong platelet activation even in the absence of heparin: such heparin-"independent" platelet activation is a marker of unusually severe HIT, including delayed-onset HIT and severe HIT complicated by consumptive coagulopathy with risk for microvascular thrombosis.

Is the incidence trend of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia decreased by the increased use of low-molecular-weight-heparin?

Background

The increasing trend of using low-molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH) versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) in hospitalized adult patients is raising concerns about the incidence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT).

Method

A retrospective study analyzed the requests for heparin-induced antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) among adult hospitalized patients during the period from January 2011 to December 2013. These patients received either UFH or LMWH for prevention or therapeutic indications. Those with positive immune-mediated HIT were identified and considered as case patients.

Result

The usage of LMWH and UFH and development of HIT was determined during the study period. The incidence of HIT in patients receiving UFH and those receiving LMWH was 4.09 per thousand patients and 0.48 per thousand patients, respectively, (p<0.0001) with an overall incidence of 2.49 per thousand patients.

Conclusion

The increased trend of using LMWH over UFH among hospitalized adult patients was observed and can be said to contribute to the diminished overall incidence of HIT.

Platelet transfusions in platelet consumptive disorders are associated with arterial thrombosis and in-hospital mortality

While platelets are primary mediators of hemostasis, there is emerging evidence to show that they may also mediate pathologic thrombogenesis. Little data are available on risks and benefits associated with platelet transfusions in thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). This study utilized the Nationwide Inpatient Sample to evaluate the current in-hospital platelet transfusion practices and their association with arterial/venous thrombosis, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, and in-hospital mortality over 5 years (2007-2011). Age and gender-adjusted odds ratios (adjOR) associated with platelet transfusions were calculated. There were 10 624 hospitalizations with TTP; 6332 with HIT and 79 980 with ITP. Platelet transfusions were reported in 10.1% TTP, 7.1% HIT, and 25.8% ITP admissions. Platelet transfusions in TTP were associated with higher odds of arterial thrombosis (adjOR = 5.8, 95%CI = 1.3-26.6), AMI (adjOR = 2.0, 95%CI = 1.2-3.3) and mortality (adjOR = 2.0,95%CI = 1.3-3.0), but not venous thrombosis. Platelet transfusions in HIT were associated with higher odds of arterial thrombosis (adjOR = 3.4, 95%CI = 1.2-9.5) and mortality (adjOR = 5.2, 95%CI = 2.6-10.5) but not venous thrombosis. Except for AMI, all relationships remained significant after adjusting for clinical severity and acuity. No associations were significant for ITP. Platelet transfusions are associated with higher odds of arterial thrombosis and mortality among TTP and HIT patients.

Presence of Antiheparin/Platelet Factor 4 Immunoglobulin G Is Associated With Poor Prognosis in Patients With Suspected Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation

The underlying inflammatory or infectious condition in disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) may stimulate the formation of antiheparin/platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibody, and the resulting antibody may affect the clinical course of DIC. We investigated the prognosis of antiheparin/PF4 antibodies in patients with suspected DIC. We measured heparin/PF4 immunoglobulin G (IgG) and total antibody levels using an automated chemiluminescence system in 118 patients with DIC. Of the 118 patients, 13 (11.0%) patients were positive for total antiheparin/PF4, and 6 (5.1%) patients were positive for antiheparin/PF4 IgG. These 13 patients were negative for platelet-activating antibody and had low-heparin-induced thrombocytopenia probability scores. Patients with antiheparin/PF4 IgG were older and had lower antithrombin levels than patients without antiheparin/PF4 IgG. Patients with antiheparin/PF4 IgG had a higher risk of mortality than those without antiheparin/PF4 IgG. The presence of antiheparin/PF4 IgG in old age or low antithrombin level patients with DIC with old age or low antithrombin level suggests a poor prognosis.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-hemostatic complications

The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support for cardiac and respiratory failure has increased in recent years. Improvements in ECMO oxygenator and pump technologies have aided this increase in utilization. Additionally, reports of successful outcomes in supporting patients with respiratory failure during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and reports of ECMO during cardiopulmonary resuscitation have led to increased uptake of ECMO. Patients requiring ECMO are a heterogenous group of critically ill patients with cardiac and respiratory failure. Bleeding and thrombotic complications remain a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients on ECMO. In this review, we describe the mechanisms and management of hemostatic, thrombotic and hemolytic complications during ECMO support.

Anti-platelet factor 4/heparin antibodies in patients with impaired graft function after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Heparin, the standard perioperative anticoagulant for the prevention of graft vessel thrombosis in patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT), binds to the chemokine platelet factor 4 (PF4). Antibodies that are formed against the resulting PF4/heparin complexes can induce heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. LT is a clinical situation that allows the study of T-cell dependency of immune responses because T-cell function is largely suppressed pharmacologically in these patients to prevent graft rejection.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the immune response against PF4/heparin complexes in patients undergoing LT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, 38 consecutive patients undergoing LT were systematically screened for anti-PF4/heparin antibodies (enzyme immunoassay and heparin-induced platelet aggregation assay), platelet count, liver function, and engraftment.

RESULTS

At baseline, 5 (13%) of 38 patients tested positive for anti-PF4/heparin IgG (non-platelet-activating) antibodies. By day 20, an additional 5 (15%) of 33 patients seroconverted for immunoglobulin G (two platelet-activating) antibodies. No patient developed clinical heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Two of six patients with graft function failure had anti-PF4/heparin IgG antibodies at the time of graft function failure. Graft liver biopsy samples from these patients showed thrombotic occlusions of the microcirculation.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-PF4/heparin IgG antibodies are generated despite strong pharmacologic suppression of T cells, indicating that T cells likely have a limited role in the immune response to PF4/heparin complexes in humans.

Evidence-based guidance on venous thromboembolism in patients with solid tumours

Venous thromboembolism (vte) is a serious, life-threatening complication of cancer. Anticoagulation therapy such as low molecular weight heparin (lmwh) has been shown to treat and prevent vte. Cancer therapy is often complex and ongoing, making the management of vte less straightforward in patients with cancer. There are no published Canadian guidelines available to suggest appropriate strategies for the management of vte in patients with solid tumours. We therefore aimed to develop a clear, evidence-based guideline on this topic. A systematic review of clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 2002 and 2013 in PubMed was conducted. Reference lists were hand-searched for additional publications. The National Guidelines Clearinghouse was searched for relevant guidelines. Recommendations were developed based on the best available evidence. In patients with solid tumours, lmwh is recommended for those with established vte and for those without established vte but with a high risk for developing vte. Options for lmwh include dalteparin, enoxaparin, and tinzaparin. No one agent can be recommended over another, but in the setting of renal insufficiency, tinzaparin is preferred. Unfractionated heparin can be used under select circumstances only (that is, when rapid clearance of the anticoagulant is desired). The most common adverse event is bleeding, but major events are rare, and with appropriate follow-up care, bleeding can be monitored and appropriately managed.

[Thrombocytopenia]

Thrombocytopenia means low platelet count. This is the most frequent cause of bleeding abnormalities. Petechias, purpuras, mucosal bleeding are typical clinical findings. Severe, even life threatening gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeding may also occur. Diagnostic laboratory finding is the prolonged bleeding time. There are several causes of thrombocytopenia. The major mechanisms for a reduced platelet count are decreased production and increased destruction of platelets, or both. The major task is to reveal the underlying cause. Examination of the bone marrow and the peripheral blood smear can be helpful as well as special diagnostics of the assumed disease. Therapy targets the underlying disease, and also involves platelet transfusion. However, in case of diseases with increased platelet activation and consumption, platelet transfusion is contraindicated because it may lead to aggravation of the pathologic process.

Serological investigation of patients with a previous history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia who are reexposed to heparin

Heparin rechallenge despite prior HIT often induces platelet-activating anti-PF4/heparin antibodies but no faster than seen with typical HIT. Risk of HIT recurring after heparin rechallenge is low but possible if IgG with heparin-independent platelet-activating properties are made.

Distinct specificity and single-molecule kinetics characterize the interaction of pathogenic and non-pathogenic antibodies against platelet factor 4-heparin complexes with platelet factor 4

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a thrombotic complication of heparin therapy mediated by antibodies to complexes between platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin or cellular glycosaminoglycans. However, only a fraction of patients with anti-PF4-heparin antibodies develop HIT, implying that only a subset of these antibodies is pathogenic. The basis for the pathogenic potential of anti-PF4-heparin antibodies remains unclear. To elucidate the intrinsic PF4-binding properties of HIT-like monoclonal antibody (KKO) versus non-pathogenic antibody (RTO) at the single-molecule level, we utilized optical trap-based force spectroscopy to measure the strength and probability of binding of surface-attached antibodies with oligomeric PF4 to simulate interactions on cells. To mimic the effect of heparin in bringing PF4 complexes into proximity, we chemically cross-linked PF4 tetramers using glutaraldehyde. Analysis of the force histograms revealed that KKO-PF4 interactions had ∼10-fold faster on-rates than RTO-PF4, and apparent equilibrium dissociation constants differed ∼10-fold with similar force-free off-rates (k(off) = 0.0031 and 0.0029 s(-1)). Qualitatively similar results were obtained for KKO and RTO interacting with PF4-heparin complexes. In contrast to WT PF4, KKO and RTO showed lower and similar binding probabilities to cross-linked PF4(K50E), which forms few if any oligomers. Thus, formation of stable PF4 polymers results in much stronger interactions with the pathogenic antibody without a significant effect on the binding of the non-pathogenic antibody. These results suggest a fundamental difference in the antigen-binding mechanisms between model pathogenic and non-pathogenic anti-PF4 antibodies that might underlie their distinct pathophysiological behaviors.