Maximum 24-hour platelet count fall: Metric for improving the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia among patients with intermediate probability 4Ts scores

Immunologic Effects of Heparin Associated With Hemodialysis: Focus on Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Intermittent hemodialysis (HD) is almost invariably performed with heparin, and thus HD patients are at risk of developing the immune-mediated adverse effect heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), caused by anti-platelet factor 4/heparin IgG, which strongly activates platelets. HIT patients develop hypercoagulability with greatly increased risk of thrombosis, both venous and arterial. Certain HIT-associated complications are more likely to develop among HD patients, including hemofilter thrombosis despite heparin, intravascular catheter and/or arteriovenous fistula-associated thrombosis, post-heparin bolus anaphylactoid/anaphylactic reactions, and thrombotic stroke and acute limb artery thrombosis (reflecting the high frequency of underlying arteriopathy in many patients with renal failure). Management of HIT in HD usually requires use of an alternative (non-heparin) anticoagulant; for example, danaparoid sodium (outside the USA) or argatroban (USA and elsewhere). Whether heparin-grafted hemodialyzers (without systemic heparin) can be used safely in acute HIT is unknown. The HIT immune response is remarkably transient and usually not retriggered by subsequent heparin administration. Accordingly, since renal failure patients often require long-term HD, there may be the opportunity-following seroreversion (loss of platelet-activating HIT antibodies)-to restart heparin for HD, a practice that appears to have a low likelihood of retriggering HIT.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: An illustrated review

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune-mediated adverse drug effect from unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin that results in thrombocytopenia and potentially catastrophic thrombosis. HIT occurs due to the development of platelet-activating antibodies against multimolecular complexes of platelet factor 4 and heparin. Given the frequency of thrombocytopenia and heparin use among hospitalized patients, calculation of the 4Ts Score is recommended to identify patients at increased likelihood of HIT and direct further evaluation. In patients with an intermediate or high probability 4Ts Score, an immunoassay and functional assay are recommended to confirm or refute the diagnosis of HIT. Heparin avoidance and initiation of nonheparin anticoagulation are the mainstays of acute HIT management. In this illustrated review, we provide visual summaries of the diagnosis and management of HIT, highlighting connections between pathophysiology and clinical care as well as summarizing efforts in quality improvement in the field. We further emphasize common pitfalls and pearls in diagnosis and management to encourage evidence-based care. We include graphical representation of the unique challenges of HIT with cardiopulmonary bypass and also delineate autoimmune HIT and its subtypes.

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).

Diagnosing heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: The need for accuracy and speed

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a prothrombotic condition resulting from pathogenic antibodies to complexes of heparin and platelet factor 4 (PF4). The diagnosis of HIT can be challenging due to the widespread use of heparin and the frequency of thrombocytopenia in hospitalized patients. Laboratory testing for HIT typically includes an immunoassay to detect antibodies to PF4-heparin and a functional assay. Current HIT diagnostic algorithms recommend using the 4Ts score to determine the need for HIT laboratory testing. Automated calculation of HIT clinical prediction scores in the electronic health record may improve the identification of patients who should undergo HIT testing. Another challenge in the management of patients with suspected HIT is the turnaround time of the laboratory testing needed to confirm the diagnosis. Due to the high daily thrombotic risk of HIT, clinicians must treat patients with intermediate to high pretest likelihood of HIT empirically while awaiting the test results. Treatment for HIT often involves alternative anticoagulants that lack reversal agents, which may increase bleeding risk, prolong hospital stays, and increase costs for patients suspected of having HIT. Rapid immunoassays hold promise to improve the speed of HIT diagnosis. These assays must retain a very high sensitivity for this "can't miss" diagnosis, yet have sufficient specificity to be of diagnostic value. A Bayesian approach has been proposed using two rapid immunoassays in succession, which decreased analytic turnaround time to 60 minutes. Such an approach has the potential to be a much-needed clinical advance in improving accuracy and speed in the diagnosis of HIT.

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.