False-positive tests for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome and systemic lupus erythematosus

Summary.  Background : Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a severe complication of heparin therapy that can be associated with arterial or venous thrombosis and is caused by antibodies against platelet factor 4 (PF4)–heparin complex. Patients with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) have been reported with positive tests for PF4–heparin complex antibodies by antigen assay. Whether such patients can be treated with heparin is a dilemma. Objectives : To determine the incidence and nature of the HIT immune reaction in patients with APS and/or systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods : Antibodies against PF4–heparin complex were assayed by particle gel immunoassay (PaGIA), or enzyme immunoassay (EIA) with or without an excess of heparin. EIA for PF4 alone was also performed. Functional assays for HIT, that is, heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) and heparin-induced platelet aggregation, were also performed. Results : In 32 of 42 patients (76.2%) with APS, APS and SLE, SLE, or SLE with antiphospholipid antibodies, EIA IgG or PaGIA for PF4–heparin complex antibodies were positive. Of these 32 samples, 26 (81.3%) tested positive for anti-PF4 antibodies. All 24 samples that were positive for PF4–heparin complex by EIA IgG were also positive for EIA IgG in the presence of heparin excess, and all were negative by the HIPA and heparin-induced platelet aggregation tests. Conclusion : A large proportion of patients with APS and/or SLE give false-positive HIT antigen test results that are presumably related to autoantibodies against PF4, which can be distinguished from true HIT antibodies by EIA for PF4–heparin complexes tested with heparin excess, and by functional assays.     

Diagnosis and treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a major side effect secondary to the administration of heparin. This syndrome is serious and potentially life threatening. This response is the result of antibodies formed against the platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin complex. The incidence of this immune-mediated syndrome has been estimated to be 1-3% of all patients receiving heparin therapy. The occurrence of HIT in patients requiring full anticoagulation for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), therefore, presents a serious challenge to the cardiac surgery team. The diagnosis of HIT should be based on both clinical and laboratory evidence. While functional assays, platelet aggregation tests, and the serotonin release assay can be used to support the diagnosis, the negative predictive value of these tests is generally less than 50%. In contrast, although non-functional antibody detection assays are more sensitive, they have a low specificity. HIT can be treated in several ways, including cessation of all heparin and giving an alternative thrombin inhibitor, platelet inhibition followed by heparin infusion, and the use of low molecular weight heparins. In this presentation, the pathology and current diagnostic tests, as well as the successful management of patients with HIT undergoing CPB at New York Presbyterian Hospital, are reviewed.     

The use of flow cytometry in the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT)

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) affects some of the patients exposed to heparin. It is mediated by antibodies that recognize neoepitopes on platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin complexes. A HIT diagnosis requires both clinical and laboratory evaluation and remains a challenge. Since many patients develop antibodies in response to heparin, but only a few of them generate anti-PF4/heparin antibodies capable of activating platelets which consequently cause clinical complications, the performance of serologic assays is not enough to diagnose HIT. Functional assays can identify pathogenic antibodies capable of platelet activation, but they are more demanding and their limited availability contributes to the problem of diagnosing HIT. Restricted laboratories usually collect sera of multiple patients to perform functional assays only once or twice a week; hence, a HIT diagnosis can take several days. The use of flow cytometry appears to be a promising alternative in the confirmation of pathogenic anti-PF4/heparin antibodies. Flow cytometric assays detect either activation markers on a healthy donor’s platelet surfaces or platelet derived microparticles formed after platelet incubation with a patient’s serum. Flow cytometers are readily available in many clinical laboratories, so this technology introduces the possibility of an earlier HIT diagnosis. The objective of this review was to collect findings on flow cytometric HIT confirmations to the present date, and to review the currently available flow cytometric assays used in the diagnosis of HIT.     

肝素／血小板因子4抗体与肝素诱导的血小板减少症

肝素诱导的血小板减少症（heparin—induced thrombocytopenia，HIT）是肝素治疗引起的严重并发症，可导致血栓形成和栓塞。HIT的发病机制主要与肝素／血小板因子4抗体介导的免疫反应有关，IgG类是主要的致病抗体，能与肝素和血小板因子4结合形成复合物，引起血小板凝集和凝血反应增强，同时抗体还通过作用于血管内皮细胞和单核细胞参与HIT的形成。抗体相关的实验室检测包括功能性血小板试验和免疫学试验，临床表现结合实验室检测有助于本病的早期诊断和治疗，但是在检测方面目前尚没有理想的方法。本文就AHPF4抗体、HIT发病机制、临床实验室检测和免疫学试验检测等问题进行了综述。     

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a prospective study on the incidence, platelet-activating capacity and clinical significance of antiplatelet factor 4/heparin antibodies of the IgG, IgM, and IgA classes

INTRODUCTION: Platelet-activating antiplatelet factor 4/heparin (anti-PF4/heparin) antibodies are the major cause of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). However, the relative utility of functional (platelet activation) vs. antigen [enzyme-immunoassay (EIA)] assays, and the significance of assay discrepancies remain unresolved. METHODS: Consecutive patient sera (n = 1650) referred for diagnostic HIT testing were screened prospectively by both the heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) test and anti-PF4/heparin EIA - including individual classes (IgG, IgA, IgM) - with clinical correlations studied. Platelet microparticle and annexin-V-binding properties of the sera were also investigated. RESULTS: Only 205 (12.4%) sera tested positive in either the HIPA and/or EIA: 95 (46.3%) were positive in both, 109 (53.1%) were only EIA-positive, and, notably, only one serum was HIPA-positive/EIA-negative. Of 185 EIA-positive sera, only 17.6% had detectable IgM and/or IgA without detectable IgG. Among sera positive for EIA IgG, optical density values were higher when the sera were HIPA-positive (1.117 vs. 0.768; P < 0.0001), with widely overlapping values. Two HIPA-positive but EIA-IgG-negative sera became HIPA-negative following IgG depletion, suggesting platelet-activating antibodies against non-PF4-dependent antigens. Clinical correlations showed that HIPA-negative/EIA-positive patients did not develop thrombosis and had reasons other than HIT to explain thrombocytopenia. IgM/A antibodies did not increase microparticle penetration, but increased annexin-V binding. CONCLUSIONS: The anti-PF4/heparin EIA has high ( approximately 99%) sensitivity for HIT. However, only about half of EIA-positive patients are likely to have HIT. Anti-PF4/heparin antibodies of IgM/A class and non-PF4-dependent antigens have only a minor role in HIT.     

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in intensive care patients

OBJECTIVE: To summarize new information on frequency of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in patients treated in intensive care units (ICU), developments in the interpretation of assays for detecting anti-PF4/heparin antibodies, and treatment of HIT patients. STUDY SELECTION: All data on the frequency of laboratory-confirmed HIT in ICU patients were included; for laboratory testing of HIT and treatment of patients, this review focuses on recent data that became available in 2005 and 2006. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: HIT is a potentially life-threatening adverse effect of heparin treatment caused by platelet-activating antibodies of immunoglobulin G class usually recognizing complexes of platelet factor 4 and heparin. HIT is more often caused by unfractionated heparin than low-molecular-weight heparin and is more common in postsurgical than in medical patients. In the ICU setting, HIT is uncommon (0.3-0.5%), whereas thrombocytopenia from other causes is very common (30-50%). For laboratory diagnosis of HIT antibodies, both antigen assays and functional (platelet activation) assays are available. Both tests are very sensitive (high negative predictive value) but specificity is problematic, especially for the antigen assays, which also detect nonpathogenic immunoglobulin M and immunoglobulin A class antibodies. Detection of immunoglobulin M or immunoglobulin A antibodies could potentially lead to adverse events such as bleeding if a false diagnosis of HIT prompts replacement of heparin by an alternative anticoagulant. For treatment of HIT, three alternative anticoagulants are approved: the direct thrombin inhibitors, lepirudin and argatroban, and the heparinoid, danaparoid (not approved in the United States). Recent data indicate that the approved dosing regimens of the direct thrombin inhibitors are too high, especially in ICU patients. CONCLUSIONS: HIT affects <1% of ICU patients even though 30-50% develop thrombocytopenia. The choice of the optimal alternative anticoagulant depends on patient characteristics. Many ICU patients require lower doses of alternative anticoagulant than those recommended by the manufacturer.     

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

A summary of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is presented. HIT is an adverse drug reaction characterized by thrombocytopenia and a high risk for venous or arterial thrombosis. The frequency of HIT ranges from 1 to 5% of patients receiving heparin with exact frequencies ranging between specific agents. Interestingly, this immune-mediated syndrome is ironically associated with thrombosis, not bleeding, with thrombin formation playing a major role. It is caused by heparin-dependent, platelet-activating antibodies that identifies a self-protein, PF4, bound to heparin that results in an antibody formation. The resulting platelet activation is associated with increased thrombin generation. Typically, the platelet count fall begins 5–10 days after starting heparin, although a rapid platelet count fall can occur in a patient who has antibodies from recent heparin use. Typical causes of HIT as well as the best diagnostic studies and treatment are discussed in this review. HIT was reviewed using a pubmed? search; google scholar? using key words: “Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia”; “heparin”, and “drug AND thrombocytopenia.”     

Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia: towards standardization of platelet factor 4/heparin antigen tests

Summary. Background: Laboratory confirmation of heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is based on detection of heparin‐dependent platelet‐activating antibodies. Platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin enzyme‐immunoassays (EIA) are a widely available surrogate for platelet‐activating antibodies. Objective: Defining the optical density (OD) reactivity profiles of a PF4/heparin EIA in reference subject and patient populations and the correlation of the EIA results (expressed in OD units) with the prevalence of platelet‐activating antibodies. Patients/methods: Using quantile regression we determined the 97.5th percentile of PF4/heparin‐immunoglobulin G (IgG) EIA reactivities in non‐heparin‐treated individuals [blood donors (n = 935)] and patients before heparin therapy (n = 1207). In patients with suspected HIT, we compared the correlation of EIA‐IgG reactivities (Greifswald laboratory; n = 2821) and the heparin‐induced platelet activation assay (HIPA) with the correlation of reactivities of another EIA‐IgG (McMaster laboratory; n = 1956) with the serotonin‐release assay (SRA). Results: PF4/heparin‐IgG EIA OD reactivities had a lower OD 97.5th percentile in blood donors compared with patient groups before heparin treatment (P < 0.001). The percentage of sera testing positive in the functional assays strongly correlated with PF4/heparin‐IgG EIA OD reactivities in both laboratories with very similar results (correlation coefficient > 0.9) when normalized OD ranges (maximum OD divided by 10) were used instead of absolute OD values. Conclusions: Results of PF4/heparin‐IgG EIA should not be reported as only positive or negative as there is no single acceptable cut‐off value. Instead, reporting PF4/heparin‐IgG EIA OD results in ranges allows for risk‐stratified prediction for presence of platelet‐activating antibodies. Use of normalized OD ranges permits a standardized approach for inter‐laboratory comparisons.     

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Summary.  Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is not only a common but also a potentially serious drug adverse effect. Unlike other drug-induced thrombocytopenias, HIT does not usually cause bleeding, but instead causes thrombosis. Thrombosis in HIT can lead to limb gangrene (requiring leg amputation) or even death. HIT is mediated by an antibody that recognizes an epitope on the platelet factor 4 (PF4)–heparin complex. The antibody–PF4–heparin complex binds to FcγRII receptors on the platelet surface and cross-links the receptors. This induces intense platelet activation and platelet aggregation, and simultaneously activates blood-coagulation pathways. These changes are probably the basis of the thrombotic events in HIT. Diagnosis of HIT should be made mainly on clinical criteria but should be confirmed whenever possible by laboratory tests, particularly in patients with comorbid conditions, in whom the diagnosis of HIT cannot be made with certainty without testing. The tests for HIT antibodies are either immunoassays (e.g. ELISA), or functional tests, (e.g. ¹⁴C-serotonin release assay). Once a clinical diagnosis of HIT is made, heparin should be ceased immediately and treatment with an alternative anticoagulant (such as danaparoid, r-hirudin or argatroban) commenced. This should continue for at least 5 days unless the diagnosis of HIT is subsequently proven to be incorrect. Warfarin should also be commenced when the patient is clinically stable and thrombosis is under control. There should be an overlap of a few days between warfarin and the alternative anticoagulant therapy.     

Activation of platelets by heparin-induced thrombocytopenia antibodies in the serotonin release assay is not dependent on the presence of heparin

The serotonin release assay (SRA) tests for antibodies responsible for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). By definition, SRA-positive antibodies cause platelet serotonin release in vitro, in the presence of low concentrations of heparin, but not with excess heparin. Many SRA-positive sera activate platelets in the presence of saline without drug, either as a result of residual heparin in the specimen, or because of intrinsic features of the HIT antibodies. The present experiments show that neither exhaustive heparinase treatment, nor chromatographic removal of heparin abrogates the spontaneous platelet activation caused by these HIT antibodies. This is the first study to systematically demonstrate that in vitro activity of HIT antibodies can be independent of heparin. In addition, T-gel chromatography demonstrated differences among fractions of enzyme-linked-immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-positive HIT antibodies within individual specimens. Certain ELISA-positive fractions had SRA activity while others did not, and the SRA activity was not proportional to HIT antibody ELISA titer. These data suggest that antibodies formed as a result of heparin treatment are heterogeneous, and that some can contribute to the pathogenesis of HIT even when heparin is no longer present.     

Laboratory testing for the antibodies that cause heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: how much class do we need?

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is usually caused by platelet-activating antibodies of immunoglobulin G class that recognize platelet factor-4 (PF4) bound to heparin or certain other polyanions. Commercial enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) for PF4/polyanion-reactive antibodies detect two immunoglobulin classes (IgA and IgM) besides IgG. To investigate whether the additional detection of these antibody classes improves or worsens assay operating characteristics, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of EIAs that detect these 3 immunoglobulin classes individually with that of a commercial EIA (Genetic Testing Institute, GTI), as well as a platelet-activation assay, the serotonin-release assay (SRA). We compared the operating characteristics of these 5 assays by evaluating 448 patients, in 14 of whom clinical HIT developed, who received either unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin in prospective studies that included systematic platelet-count monitoring and serologic evaluation for anti-PF4/polyanion antibodies. We found that the SRA and IgG and commercial EIAs had similar high sensitivity for HIT; however, diagnostic specificity (for unfractionated and low molecular weight heparin, respectively) varied considerably, as follows: SRA (95.1%, 97.2%) > IgG EIA (89.0%, 93.7%) > GTI EIA (74.2%, 87.6%). Additional detection of IgA and IgM antibodies by the GTI EIA worsened test specificity by detecting numerous nonpathogenic antibodies. Moreover, the frequency and magnitude of IgA and IgM antibody formation in non-HIT immune responses did not differ from that exhibited by patients in whom clinical HIT developed. We conclude that an EIA that detects anti-PF4/polyanion antibodies of only the IgG class has greater diagnostic usefulness in revealing clinical HIT than does an assay that also detects IgA and IgM class antibodies.     

Intravenous immunoglobulin as an adjunct therapy in persisting heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a serious adverse drug reaction caused by transient antibodies against platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin complexes, resulting in platelet activation and potentially fatal arterial and/or venous thrombosis. Most cases of HIT respond to cessation of heparin and administration of an alternative non-heparin anticoagulant, but there are cases of persisting HIT, defined as thrombocytopenia due to platelet activation/consumption for greater than seven days despite standard therapy. These patients remain at high risk for thrombotic events, which may result in limb-loss and mortality. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) has been proposed as an adjunct therapy for these refractory cases based on its ability to saturate FcγRIIa receptors on platelets, thus preventing HIT antibody binding and platelet activation. We describe 2 cases of persisting HIT (strongly positive antigen and functional assays, and persisting thrombocytopenia >7 days) with rapid clinical response to IVIg. We performed in-vitro experiments to support IVIg response. Healthy donor platelets (1?×?10e6) were treated with PF4 (3.75?μg/mL) for 20?min followed by 1-hour incubation with patients’ sera. Platelet activation with and without addition of IVIg (levels equivalent to those reached in a patient after treatment with 2?gm/Kg) was evaluated in the PF4-dependent P-selectin expression assay (PEA). A significantly decreased platelet activation was demonstrated after the addition of IVIg to both patient samples, which correlated well with the rapid clinical response that each patient experienced. Thus, our study supports the use of IVIg as an adjunct therapy for persisting HIT.     

Cutaneous dalteparin reactions associated with antibodies of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

OBJECTIVE: To report widespread cutaneous lesions due to low-molecular-weight heparin therapy associated with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), but without evidence of thrombocytopenia, and to review previously reported cases of skin reactions related to heparin therapy. CASE SUMMARY: A 59-year-old white man with a subtotally resected glioblastoma developed febrile neutropenia and pneumonia secondary to chemotherapy. The development of an upper extremity thrombosis, following insertion of a peripherally inserted central venous catheter, was treated with subcutaneous dalteparin. Cutaneous lesions developed distant from the site of injection. The diagnosis of HIT was confirmed despite stable platelet counts. Dalteparin therapy was discontinued immediately, and anticoagulation was maintained with warfarin. The skin lesions resolved without further complications. DISCUSSION: Numerous cases of heparin-induced cutaneous reactions have been reported. The majority of these describe a local reaction at the heparin injection site with or without associated thrombocytopenia. The case presented here is unique in that the observed skin reaction was distant to the injection site and occurred without thrombocytopenia, but with detectable heparin-dependent antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Although a skin reaction is a rare complication of heparin therapy, it can be a clinical indicator of HIT despite normal platelet counts. Patients who develop skin lesions should have their heparin therapy discontinued and a diagnosis of HIT investigated.     

Testing for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia antibodies

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) has a distinct clinical profile and unique pathogenesis. It is caused by platelet-activating IgG antibodies that recognize multimolecular complexes of platelet factor 4 (PF4) bound to heparin or certain other polyanions. Although an immune response to PF4/heparin associated with heparin treatment is very common, clinical HIT occurs only among the minority of patients whose antibodies are capable of strongly activating platelets. This explains why certain platelet activation assays and anti-PF4/polyanion immunoassays have high sensitivity for HIT and why diagnostic specificity is highest for those assays that preferentially detect pathogenic antibodies, such as the washed platelet activation assays or immunoassays that detect only IgG antibodies. Negative results obtained in a solid-phase PF4/polyanion immunoassay generally exclude HIT (high negative predictive value), especially in a setting of a low pretest probability. In addition, because the magnitude of a positive test result correlates with greater likelihood of HIT, a Bayesian diagnostic approach that combines pretest probability and the magnitude of a positive test result is recommended. Recent studies suggest that presence of anti-PF4/polyanion antibodies in certain clinical settings confers an adverse prognosis, even without clinically evident HIT. Whether such antibodies impart "forme fruste" HIT or are simply a surrogate marker for a non-HIT adverse risk factor such as inflammation is unresolved.     

Bivalirudin use in carotid endarterectomy in a patient with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

OBJECTIVE: To describe the successful use of bivalirudin as the primary procedural anticoagulant in a patient with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). CASE SUMMARY: A 73-year-old white man presented for an elective CEA 3 weeks after emergent, on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Bivalirudin was used for procedural anticoagulation because of seropositivity for heparin-PF4 antibodies and a clinical history consistent with HIT. The dose was administered as a 0.75 mg/kg bolus and 1.75 mg/kg/h infusion as reported in percutaneous coronary intervention, based on review of the available bivalirudin literature. The dosage was adjusted for the patient's renal dysfunction. The outcome was successful, with the patient discharged home in 8 days without significant complications. DISCUSSION: During active HIT, when thrombocytopenia and heparin-PF4 antibodies are present, heparin therapy must be avoided. In patients with subacute HIT, when platelet counts have recovered but HIT antibodies are still present, it is also prudent to avoid heparin administration. In the case of a patient in whom anticoagulation is necessary but heparin use is contraindicated, a direct thrombin inhibitor, such as bivalirudin, may offer a viable alternative. Bivalirudin is not immunogenic and does not cross-react with the heparin-PF4 antibodies associated with HIT. To our knowledge, as of January 20, 2006, this is the first report of the use of bivalirudin for procedural anticoagulation during CEA in a patient with HIT antibodies and recent exposure to heparin. CONCLUSIONS: Further investigation is warranted to clarify the clinical benefits of bivalirudin for patients undergoing vascular surgery of the carotids, including potential advantages for vulnerable patient populations such as those with diagnosed or suspected HIT as well as those with renal dysfunction.     

Diagnostic score for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia after cardiopulmonary bypass.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) occurs in nearly 3% of patients treated with heparin after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). HIT carries a risk of severe thrombotic complications, and must be diagnosed rapidly. To identify simple criteria for estimating the probability of HIT after CPB, we retrospectively analyzed the files of 84 patients with suspected HIT after CPB and we analyzed the usefulness of several variables collected at the time of HIT suspicion to estimate HIT probability. HIT was confirmed in 35 cases and ruled out in 49 cases, on the basis of a platelet increment after heparin withdrawal, detection of heparin-dependent antibodies, and absence of other clear cause of thrombocytopenia. A biphasic platelet count from CPB to the first day of suspected HIT, an interval of >/= 5 days from CPB to the first day of suspected HIT, and a CPB duration of 相似文献   

Anticoagulation in extracorporeal circulation using recombinant hirudin: a case report

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a severe complication following the application of heparin; antibodies against complexes of heparin and PDF4 initiate activation of platelets. This may lead to massive thrombembolism, which is associated with a slight and transient drop of platelets in HIT I or a drop below 50% after approximately 5 days in HIT II. Further administration of heparin has to be strictly avoided in these patients. Immunologic evidence for HIT can easily be obtained by the heparin-induced platelet aggregation assay. If anticoagulation is necessary, different, alternative drugs are available. Recombinant hirudin (r-hirudin) is a well-established drug for safe anticoagulation. Monitoring is possible by estimating the plasma level of r-hirudin from the ecarin-clotting time. We report a case of a patient with prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis and HIT II who suffered from massive postoperative bleeding requiring massive substitution of blood components and coagulants caused by free circulating r-hirudin due to the use of a hemofilter.     

Use of plasma exchange in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a report of two cases and a review of the literature

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), which is characterized by thrombocytopenia and potentially serious thromboses, may develop in patients exposed to heparin anticoagulation. HIT is caused by antibodies to the heparin/platelet factor 4 (PF4) complex. Management of HIT involves discontinuation of heparin and anticoagulation with a nonheparin alternative such as a direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI). This poses a challenge in the management of patients who need to undergo cardiopulmonary bypass surgery (CPB), because CPB requires anticoagulation with heparin and standardized protocols for use of DTIs are not widely available. We report two patients with HIT who underwent successful CPB with heparin anticoagulation following plasma exchange (PE) to reduce heparin/PF4 antibody titers. Case 1 is a 46-year-old male with cardiac amyloidosis who needed urgent placement of a left ventricular assist device. Case 2 is a 34-year-old woman with acute myocarditis who needed placement of a biventricular assist device. Both patients had positive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay assays for heparin/PF4 antibodies and clinical evidence of HIT before PE. Following PE and subsequent CPB, neither patient had clinical or laboratory evidence of HIT. The literature regarding the use of PE for the treatment of complications of HIT and as prophylaxis before CPB is reviewed.     

Prospective observational evaluation of the particle immunofiltration anti-platelet factor 4 rapid assay in MICU patients with thrombocytopenia

Introduction

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) results from antibodies to PF4/heparin complexes and clinical diagnosis is difficult. We evaluated the particle immunofiltration anti-platelet factor 4 (PIFA) rapid assay, in conjunction with a clinical risk score, in the diagnosis of HIT.

Methods

We performed a prospective observational study in all patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) in a large academic medical center. Patients were screened daily for thrombocytopenia defined as either a platelet count that decreased by at least 33% or an absolute platelet count less than 150,000/μL. Patients with suspected HIT underwent PIFA and ELISA testing for anti-PF4/heparin antibodies. Available residual frozen sera were sent to a reference laboratory for serotonin release assay (SRA) testing.

Results

During the study period, 340 patients were admitted to the MICU, of which 143 patients met criteria for thrombocytopenia. Forty-three patients had no evidence of recent heparin exposure. PIFA and ELISA testing were performed on 100 patients, of which 92 had samples available for SRA analysis. PIFA results were negative in 62, positive in 28 and inconclusive in 2 patients. The 4Ts score showed low to intermediate risk in 57 of the PIFA negative patients. The ELISA results were negative in 86 and positive in 6 patients. SRA testing identified 3 patients with a positive SRA test and 89 patients with a negative result. All patients with a negative PIFA result also had a negative SRA result. In the one patient deemed to have clinical HIT, the pretest probability was high (4Ts score of 6) and the anti-PF4/heparin antibody testing revealed a positive SRA, inconclusive PIFA and a negative ELISA result.

Conclusions

While thrombocytopenia in our population is common, the prevalence of HIT is low. The combination of a low to intermediate pretest probability with a negative PIFA test can rapidly exclude the presence of platelet activating anti-PF4/heparin antibodies and, therefore, HIT as the cause of the thrombocytopenia. Since a positive PIFA result has a low positive predictive value, a positive PIFA is not diagnostic of HIT and additional evaluation is warranted.