Clinical Features of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia Diagnosed By Lumi-Aggregometry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is associated with anti-platelet factor-4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies that activate platelets, resulting in thrombocytopenia and a pro-thrombotic state. At our institution antibody-mediated platelet activation is demonstrated by lumi-aggregometry, which is a method previously validated against the gold standard serotonin-release assay (SRA). Lumi-aggregometry does not involve radioactive isotopes, which is its major advantage over the SRA. The clinical course of HIT diagnosed via SRA and ELISA has been previously described, and clinical prediction tools such as the 4-T score were validated using these diagnostic tests. However, the clinical picture of HIT diagnosed by lumi-aggregometry has not been previously described. Aims: The objective of this study is to describe the clinical and laboratory presentation of patients diagnosed with HIT by lumi-aggregometry. Methods: Patients with clinically suspected HIT and quantitative anti-PF4 IgG-specific ELISA OD ≥0.400 (Gen-Probe, San Diego) received confirmatory HIT testing by lumi-aggregometry. Briefly, HIT antibody-induced activation of washed healthy donor platelets was tested at therapeutic (0.1U/mL and 0.5U/mL) and high (100U/mL) porcine heparin concentration. The degree of platelet activation was quantitated luminographically based on the light flash reaction of ATP (released from platelet dense-granules) with luciferin luciferase reagent. A ratio of therapeutic to high heparin luminescence amplitude of >5.0 and platelet aggregation at therapeutic, but not high, concentrations was considered a positive result. The results of assays performed by our regional HIT testing referral laboratory from June 2009 to July 2012 were reviewed to identify patients with positive HIT testing by lumi-aggregometry. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed to obtain predefined data on baseline patient characteristics, heparin exposure, platelet counts, and thrombotic events occurring in the 5 days preceding or the 30 days following the date of positive HIT testing. Results: We identified 43 patients diagnosed with HIT by lumi-aggregometry (median age 68.0, 49% male) while under the care of local academic (46%) or urban community hospitals (37.2% medical; 53.5% surgical; 9.3% intensive care). Median baseline platelet count was 187 (14-349). Median date of platelet drop post-heparin exposure was 6 days (range 3-14) in patients without prior heparin exposure or platelet transfusions (Figure 1). Platelet drop >50% and platelet nadir ≥20x109/L were present in the majority of patients (Table 1). Thrombocytopenia occurred prior to (70.5%) or the same day (23.5%) as thrombosis in 16/17 patients with serial platelet counts who developed HIT-associated thromboembolism. Conclusion: Patients diagnosed with HIT by lumi-aggregometry present with similar findings to those described in SRA-confirmed HIT. These findings lend support to the use of lumi-aggregometry as an accurate diagnostic assay for the clinico-pathologic syndrome of HIT. Figure 1 Figure 1. Table 1. Percentage platelet drop from baseline and platelet nadir Percent platelet drop Platelet nadir >50% 30-50% <30% ≥20 x 109/L 28 3 2 10-19 x 109/L 5 1 0 <10 x 109/L 1 1 0 Disclosures Szkotak: Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Sandhu:Celgene: Honoraria; Jansen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».