Development and Implementation of a Coagulation Factor Testing Method Utilizing Autoverification in a High-volume Clinical Reference Laboratory Environment

Short-Term (6 Weeks) Experience of a Modular Workcell for Hemostasis Testing Including an Intelligent Data Manager at a Tertiary Care Hospital

OBJECTIVE

Modular workcells could be a better solution than total laboratory automation (TLA) in hemostasis laboratories. Here, we evaluated the impact of implementing a modular workcell (HemoCell) with an intelligent data management facility (HemoHub).

METHODS

We compared the turnaround times (TATs), numbers of rerun samples, and rerun times pre- and postimplementation of the HemoCell at Gil Medical Center. Prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), D-dimer, and fibrinogen were evaluated.

RESULTS

The TAT standard deviations (SDs) and maximum TAT values decreased after HemoCell implementation, although the mean TATs for PT, aPTT, and D-dimer were increased. Numbers of rerun samples were increased (18.1/day vs 44.7/day). However, rerun times were reduced, and SDs were decreased during the post-HemoCell period compared with pre-HemoCell. Additionally, technologists needed smaller working space and less labor.

CONCLUSION

The modular workcell could improve quality and efficiency by providing more consistent TATs and shorter rerun times in the hemostasis laboratory.

How to assess parallelism in factor assays: coefficient of variation of results with different dilutions or slope ratio?

INTRODUCTION

Non-parallelism in factor assays can lead to incorrect factor activities. Parallelism can be assessed by calculating the coefficient of variation (CV) of results obtained on 3 dilutions of the same sample. Some authors have proposed that if there is <15% then the average activity is reportable. Some analysers use a slope ratio (SR) to calculate parallelism, with an acceptance range of approximately 0.9-1.1.

METHODS

We evaluated CV and SR in one stage FII-FXII assays on Sysmex CS5100i using Innovin or Actin FS. Frozen normal and pathological plasmas, plasmas containing Direct Oral Anticoagulants, Direct Thrombin Inhibitors or Lupus Anticoagulant were analysed to assess possible non-parallelism.

RESULTS

In plasmas with factor levels >25 IU/dl (plus no interfering substances) all CVs were < 15%. One sample (low factor activities 10-15 IU/dl), had CVs > 15% in FII, FVII and FXII assays only. SR outside of 0.9-1.1 were seen in FII and FXII assays at different levels of clotting factor including some within the normal range. Non-parallelism was detected more frequently with SR than CV for those with interfering substances.

CONCLUSIONS

SR outside of 0.9-1.1 were seen in different levels of clotting factors, including samples which did not contain interfering substances. The target of 15% CV was a better discriminator than a SR for acceptance. When factor levels were reduced to around 10-15 IU/dl, a target 20 %CV was more appropriate than 15%. It might be appropriate for laboratories to assess locally whether their acceptance criteria need to be wider at low levels of clotting factors.

Performance characteristics of 5 numerical indexes in mixing test interpretation under coexistence of lupus anticoagulant and coagulation factor deficiency

Background

The mixing test is useful to investigate the cause of unexpectedly prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT). Several indexes are available for distinguishing correction from non-correction (ie, factor deficiency from inhibitors), but their performance characteristics may differ because of their different formulas. Furthermore, it is unclear how each index performs under the coexistence of factor deficiency and inhibitors.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to examine the differences in indexes, depending on factor VIII activity (FVIII:C) levels and lupus anticoagulant (LA) titers in test samples.

Methods

APTT was measured in spiked samples with various FVIII:C levels and LA titers, normal pooled plasma (NPP), and their 4:1, 1:1, and 1:4 mixtures. The following 5 indexes were calculated: index of circulating anticoagulant, mixing test normalized ratio, 4:1 and 1:1 percent corrections, and an APTT difference between the 1:1 mixture and NPP. The samples with LA, showing correction, were measured for FVIII:C in a one-stage assay to check parallelism.

Results

All indexes showed correction under FVIII deficiency and non-correction under higher LA titers. However, under lower LA titers, some indexes showed non-correction but others showed correction because of dilution effects and variations in formulas and/or sample mix ratios. The differences among the indexes were more pronounced under coexistent FVIII deficiency and LA, even though LA titers were equal in the tested samples; samples with lower FVIII:C showed correction, whereas those with normal FVIII:C showed non-correction. The samples tested for FVIII:C showed non-parallelism.

Conclusion

Each index had different performance characteristics to LA samples, which were pronounced under low FVIII:C levels in test samples.

Automation in the Thrombosis and Hemostasis Laboratory

Automation continues to advance into hemostasis and thrombosis laboratories. Integration of hemostasis testing into an existing chemistry track systems and adoption of a separate hemostasis track systems are important considerations. Unique issues must be addressed to maintain quality and efficiency when automation is introduced. Among other challenges, this chapter discusses centrifugation protocols, incorporation of specimen-check modules in the workflow, and inclusion of tests amenable to automation.

Should multiple factor dilutions be performed for all patient coagulation factor assays? Let the debate begin!

Laboratory assessment of blood coagulation factors may be undertaken for various reasons, including investigating the possibility of hemophilia or unexpected prolongation in routine coagulation assays (eg, prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time). Several guidelines recommend performing multiple dilutions (usually 2-3) on all patient test samples to evaluate "parallelism" as a guide to the presence of potential "inhibitors," be they factor inhibitors, lupus anticoagulant, or related to the presence of anticoagulant therapy. The current Forum argues against mandating investigation of parallelism (or multiple dilutions) for all samples destined for testing, instead suggesting that a more targeted approach will likely provide better clinical utility and use of laboratory resources.