Comparison of an IgG-Specific Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Cutoff of 0.4 Versus 0.8 and 1.0 Optical Density Units for Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in end-stage renal disease: Reliability of the PF4-heparin ELISA

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) can be difficult, as they are frequently exposed to heparin and have multiple etiologies for thrombocytopenia.

OBJECTIVE

To correlate 4T scores, IgG heparin-platelet factor 4 (PF4-heparin) ELISA results, and serotonin release assay (SRA) results in patients with ESRD.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with ESRD (creatinine clearance < 15 mL/min or on renal replacement therapy [RRT]) who underwent PF4-heparin ELISA testing from October 2015 to September 2019. True-positive PF4s required an intermediate to high 4T score (≥4), a positive SRA, and receipt of treatment for a HIT diagnosis. False-positive PF4s were defined as a positive PF4 with a negative SRA, low 4T score (<4), or lack of treatment for HIT. Indeterminant cases were classified on the basis of clinical assessment by the treating team (eg, hematology or vascular medicine).

RESULTS

Of 254 patients with ESRD (92% on RRT), 29 patients (11.4%) had a positive PF4. Eleven (37.9%) had a confirmed diagnosis of HIT: 10 patients who met all of the above criteria, and one who met the 4T criteria and was treated for HIT but did not have SRA testing due to high clinical suspicion and a positive PF4 test. False-positive PF4 values occurred in 8 patients (27.5%). Of 10 (34.5%) indeterminant cases of patients with a negative SRA but intermediate to high 4T and positive PF4, only 3 patients were treated for HIT, whereas the other 7 were judged not to have HIT as assessed by the treating clinician. In patients with an intermediate to high 4T score and PF4 optical density > 0.4 but negative SRA, who were not treated for HIT, there were no adverse outcomes documented such as new or progressive thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

In our ESRD population, 4T scores and PF4 testing were not predictive of a clinical diagnosis of HIT.

Prospective evaluation of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia expert probability and 4T scores in Chinese patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

Background

Diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is challenging. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of HIT expert probability (HEP) and 4T scores, and to evaluate the inter-observer reliability for the 4T score in a clinical setting.

Methods

This prospective study included HIT-suspected patients between 2016 and 2018. Three hematologists assessed the HEP and 4T scores. Correlations between scores and anti-platelet factor 4 (anti-PF4)/heparin antibodies were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve (AUC) were used to assess the predictive accuracy of these two scoring models. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the inter-observer agreement of 4T scores between residents and hematologists.

Results

Of the 89 subjects included, 22 (24.7%) were positive for anti-PF4/heparin antibody. The correlations between antibody titer and either HEP or 4T scores were similar (r = 0.392, P < 0.01 for the HEP score; r = 0.444, P < 0.01 for the 4T score). No significant difference in the diagnostic performance was displayed between these two scores (AUC for the HEP score: 0.778 vs. AUC for the 4T score: 0.741, P = 0.357). Only 72 4T scores were collected from the residents, with a surprisingly low percentage of observers (43.1%) presenting the four individual item scores which made up their 4T score. The AUC of 4T score assessed by residents and hematologists was 0.657 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 536–0.765) and 0.780 (95% CI: 0.667–0.869, P < 0.05), respectively. The ICC of 4T score between residents and hematologists was 0.49 (95% CI: 0.29–0.65, P < 0.01), demonstrating a fair inter-observer agreement.

Conclusions

The HEP score does not display a better performance for predicting HIT than the 4T score. With the unsatisfactory completion rate, the inter-observer agreement of 4T score in a tertiary hospital is fair, underscoring the necessity for continuing education for physicians.

Comparison of argatroban and fondaparinux for the management of patients with isolated heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a serious complication of the administration of heparin and its derivatives. Non-heparin anticoagulants such as argatroban and fondaparinux are widely used in the management of HIT to compare the effectiveness of argatroban and fondaparinux in the resolution of thrombocytopenia and to compare clinical outcomes in patients with isolated HIT. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed at King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC) on patients diagnosed with isolated HIT between 31 Jan, 2014 and 30 June, 2017. Demographics data, non-heparin anticoagulants, related laboratory results, and clinical outcomes were retrieved and analysed. The cohort comprised a total of 95 adult patients who received either argatroban (56 patients) or fondaparinux (39 patients) for isolated HIT. The median age and sex distribution were similar in both argatroban and fondaparinux groups. The mean (+ SD) time (in days) for the resolution of thrombocytopenia was 3.5 (± 1.8) for patients who received argatroban and 3.7 (± 1.7) for patients administered fondaparinux (p = 0.843). Thromboembolic events occurred in five patients (8.9%) administered argatroban and in three patients (7.7%) administered fondaparinux (p = 0.382). There was no significant difference in the rates of bleeding or death (p = 0.829); however, the small number of cases limits our ability to draw conclusions about these outcomes. In this retrospective study, fondaparinux and argatroban were similarly effective in resolving thrombocytopenia, preventing further thromboembolic events, and maintaining safety in patients with confirmed HIT. To confirm this observation, larger prospective studies are needed.

Is low serum albumin level a significant predictor for the development of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia-thrombosis?

The present study investigates the effect of albumin levels in patients who have developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia-thrombosis (HITT). A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at King Abudlaziz Medical City (KAMC), a university teaching hospital, on patients diagnosed with HIT between June 2013 and December 2014. Clinical and laboratory findings were used to confirm HIT. Albumin levels were reported on admission as baseline and during HIT occurrence. Twenty-eight patients were identified as HIT positive by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), with a cutoff value of ≥1 optical density units and pretest probability "4Ts" score of ≥4. Of the 28 patients, nine (32%) developed HITT. Demographic characteristics of the patients who developed HIT and HITT were similar. The mean albumin level for patients who developed HITT was significantly lower than that for patients who developed HIT (p < 0.001). Our findings suggest that patients with low serum albumin levels are at greater risk of developing HITT. This finding awaits confirmation in larger prospective clinical trials.