Autoimmune heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia

Summary

Autoimmune heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (aHIT) indicates the presence in patients of anti‐platelet factor 4 (PF4)–polyanion antibodies that are able to activate platelets strongly even in the absence of heparin (heparin‐independent platelet activation). Nevertheless, as seen with serum obtained from patients with otherwise typical heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), serum‐induced platelet activation is inhibited at high heparin concentrations (10–100 IU mL^?1 heparin). Furthermore, upon serial dilution, aHIT serum will usually show heparin‐dependent platelet activation. Clinical syndromes associated with aHIT include: delayed‐onset HIT, persisting HIT, spontaneous HIT syndrome, fondaparinux‐associated HIT, heparin ‘flush’‐induced HIT, and severe HIT (platelet count of < 20 × 10⁹ L^?1) with associated disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). Recent studies have implicated anti‐PF4 antibodies that are able to bridge two PF4 tetramers even in the absence of heparin, probably facilitated by non‐heparin platelet‐associated polyanions (chondroitin sulfate and polyphosphates); nascent PF4–aHIT‐IgG complexes recruit additional heparin‐dependent HIT antibodies, leading to the formation of large multimolecular immune complexes and marked platelet activation. aHIT can persist for several weeks, and serial fibrin, D‐dimer, and fibrinogen levels, rather than the platelet count, may be helpful for monitoring treatment response. Although standard anticoagulant therapy for HIT ought to be effective, published experience indicates frequent failure of activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT)‐adjusted anticoagulants (argatroban, bivalirudin), probably because of underdosing in the setting of HIT‐associated DIC, known as ‘APTT confounding’. Thus, non‐APTT‐adjusted therapies with drugs such as danaparoid and fondaparinux, or even direct oral anticoagulants, such as rivaroxaban or apixaban, are suggested therapies, especially for long‐term management of persisting HIT. In addition, emerging data indicate that high‐dose intravenous immunoglobulin can interrupt HIT antibody‐induced platelet activation, leading to rapid platelet count recovery.

     

Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia – therapeutic concentrations of danaparoid,unlike fondaparinux and direct thrombin inhibitors,inhibit formation of platelet factor 4–heparin complexes

Summary. Background: Treatment of heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), a disorder in which anti‐platelet factor 4 (PF4)–heparin antibodies cause platelet activation and hypercoagulability, requires alternative (non‐heparin) anticoagulation. Treatment options include direct thrombin inhibitors [lepirudin and argatroban (approved), and bivalirudin], danaparoid (approved) (mixture of anticoagulant glycosaminoglycans), or fondaparinux (synthetic heparin‐mimicking pentasaccharide). PF4–heparin complexes form at optimal stoichiometric ratios. Objectives: To compare the effects of these various non‐heparin anticoagulants in disrupting the formation of PF4–heparin complexes, and PF4‐containing immune complexes. Patients/methods: Sera were obtained from patients with serologically confirmed HIT. The effects of the alternative anticoagulants on PF4 and PF4–heparin complex interactions with platelets, as well as HIT antibody binding and platelet activation, were investigated. Results: Danaparoid at very low concentrations increased PF4 binding to platelets. In therapeutic concentrations, however, it decreased PF4 binding to platelets (P = 0.0004), displaced PF4–heparin complexes from platelets (P = 0.0033) and PF4 from the surface of a PF4‐transfected HEK‐293 EBNA cell line expressing the PF4 receptor CXCR3‐B (P = 0.0408), reduced PF4–heparin complex size (P = 0.025), inhibited HIT antibody binding to PF4–heparin complexes (P = 0.001), and prevented platelet activation by HIT antibodies (P = 0.046). Although fondaparinux also interfered with PF4 binding to platelets, HIT antibody binding to PF4–heparin complexes, and activation of platelets by HIT antibodies, these effects occurred only at supratherapeutic concentrations. The direct thrombin inhibitors had no effect at any concentrations. Conclusions: Danaparoid uniquely interferes with the pathogenesis of HIT by disrupting PF4‐containing immune complexes at therapeutic dose concentrations. It is possible that these effects contribute to its therapeutic efficacy.     

Early-onset and persisting thrombocytopenia in post-cardiac surgery patients is rarely due to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, even when antibody tests are positive

See also Gruel Y, Pouplard C. Post‐operative platelet count profile: the most reliable tool for identifying patients with true heparin‐induced thrombocypenia after cardiac surgery. This issue, pp 27–29. Summary. Background: The high frequency of thrombocytopenia in post‐cardiac surgery patients makes it challenging to diagnose heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Two platelet count profiles are reported as indicating possible HIT in these patients: profile 1 describes a platelet count fall that begins between postoperative days 5 and 10, whereas profile 2 denotes early‐onset thrombocytopenia that persists beyond day 5. Objectives: To examine how these platelet count profiles correlate with antibody status and HIT post‐cardiac surgery. Methods: We prospectively screened 581 cardiac surgery patients for heparin‐dependent antibodies by platelet factor 4 (PF4)–heparin immunoassay and platelet‐activation test, and performed daily platelet counts (until day 10) with 30‐day follow‐up. Results: All three patients with platelet count profile 1 tested positive for platelet‐activating anti‐PF4–heparin IgG antibodies [odds ratio (OR) 521.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9–34 000, P = 0.002], and were judged to have HIT. In contrast, none of 25 patients with early‐onset and persisting thrombocytopenia (profile 2) was judged to have HIT, including five patients testing positive for platelet‐activating anti‐PF4–heparin IgG antibodies. In these patients, the frequency of heparin‐dependent antibodies did not differ from that in non‐thrombocytopenic controls, either for anti‐PF4–heparin IgG (OR 1.7, 95% CI 0.7–4.1, P = 0.31) or for platelet‐activating antibodies (OR 1.9, 95% CI 0.6–5.7, P = 0.20). Multivariate analysis revealed that type of cardiac surgery, but not HIT antibody status, predicted early‐onset and persisting thrombocytopenia. Together, these findings show that HIT was uncommon in this study population [overall frequency, 3/581 (0.5%), 95% CI 0.1–1.5%]. Conclusions: Thrombocytopenia that begins between 5 and 10 days post‐cardiac surgery is highly predictive for HIT. In contrast, early‐onset and persisting thrombocytopenia is usually caused by non‐HIT factors with coinciding heparin‐dependent antibody seroconversion.     

Anti‐PF4/heparin antibody formation postorthopedic surgery thromboprophylaxis: the role of non‐drug risk factors and evidence for a stoichiometry‐based model of immunization

Summary. Background: Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia is an antibody‐mediated disorder exhibiting variable frequency in different clinical settings. Antibodies recognize PF4/heparin complexes formed at optimal stoichiometric molar ratios. Objective: To identify clinical factors influencing risk of anti‐PF4/heparin immunization. Patients/methods: We performed observational studies and exploratory analyses of the frequency of anti‐PF4/heparin antibody formation in 6324 patients who received enoxaparin or fondaparinux in four randomized controlled trials of postorthopedic surgery thromboprophylaxis. Variables included surgery type (knee vs. hip), timing of first anticoagulant dose (pre‐ vs. postsurgery), circumstances of surgery (elective vs. hip fracture), anticoagulant (enoxaparin vs. fondaparinux) and body‐mass index (BMI). We applied a stoichiometry‐based model that predicts immunization risk based on expected differences in PF4/anticoagulant ratios in different settings, and specifically used this model to predict the effect of increasing BMI quartiles upon relative risk (RR) of immunization for fondaparinux vs. enoxaparin. Results: Anti‐PF4/heparin immunization was more frequent after knee vs. hip surgery (particularly for enoxaparin), and when enoxaparin was given post‐ rather than pre‐elective surgery; however, the opposite occurred with hip fracture surgery, that is, antibody formation was more frequent when enoxaparin or fondaparinux was given presurgery. The RR of immunization for fondaparinux vs. enoxaparin decreased significantly for increasing BMI quartiles, an effect predominantly because of increasing immunization with enoxaparin at increasing BMI quartiles. Conclusions: Several non‐drug factors – including type and circumstances of surgery, timing of first anticoagulant dose and BMI – influence risk of anti‐PF4/heparin antibody formation, consistent with a stoichiometry‐based immunization model of PF4 and anticoagulant ratios occurring during the early peri‐operative period.     

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.     

Fondaparinux treatment of acute heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia confirmed by the serotonin‐release assay: a 30‐month, 16‐patient case series

See also Greinacher A. Immunogenic but effective: the HIT‐fondaparinux brain puzzler. This issue, pp 2386–8; Goldfarb MJ, Blostein MD. Fondaparinux in acute heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia: a case series. This issue, pp 2501–3. Summary. Background: Fondaparinux is theoretically an attractive agent for the treatment of immune heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), a prothrombotic disorder caused by platelet‐activating anti‐platelet factor 4/heparin antibodies. Although reports of the use of fondaparinux for this indication have thus far been favorable, the diagnosis of HIT in most cases was not based on definitive laboratory confirmation of heparin‐dependent, platelet‐activating antibodies. Objectives: To report thrombotic and major bleeding outcomes with fondaparinux in patients with a high likelihood of having acute HIT based on clinical features and a positive result in the confirmatory platelet serotonin‐release assay (SRA), a sensitive and specific test for platelet‐activating HIT antibodies. Methods/Patients: We reviewed consecutive eligible patients with SRA‐positive HIT (mean peak serotonin release, 91% [normal, < 20%]; mean IgG‐specific PF4/heparin enzyme immunoassay result, 2.53 optical density units [normal, < 0.45 units]) in one medical center over a 30‐month period who received fondaparinux for anticoagulation during acute HIT (platelet count, < 150 × 10⁹ L^?1). Where available, plasma samples were used to measure thrombin–antithrombin (TAT) complex levels. Results: Sixteen patients with SRA‐positive HIT received fondaparinux: 14 surgical (11 after cardiac surgery; three after vascular surgery) and two medical (acute stroke). Fifty‐six per cent of patients had HIT‐associated thrombosis at the time of diagnosis. No patient developed new, recurrent or progressive thrombosis; one patient developed a major bleed (calf hematoma). One patient judged to have irreversible tissue necrosis before receiving fondaparinux therapy ultimately required limb amputation. TAT complex levels were reduced within 24 h of starting fondaparinux, and 13 of 13 patients were successfully switched to warfarin. Conclusion: Fondaparinux shows promise for the treatment of patients with SRA‐positive acute HIT.     

Variability of anti-PF4/heparin antibody results obtained by the rapid testing system ID-H/PF4-PaGIA

Summary. Background: Recent studies have shown that a low clinical pretest probability may be adequate for excluding heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia. However, for patients with intermediate or high pretest probability, laboratory testing is essential for confirming or refuting the diagnosis. Rapid assessment of anti‐PF4/heparin‐antibodies may assist clinical decision‐making. Objectives: To evaluate the performance of rapid ID‐H/PF4‐PaGIA. In particular, we verified reproducibility of results between plasma and serum specimens, between fresh and frozen samples, and between different ID‐H/PF4‐polymer lots (polystyrene beads coated with heparin/PF4‐complexes). Patients/Methods: The samples studied were 1376 plasma and 914 corresponding serum samples from patients investigated for suspected heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia between January 2000 and October 2008. Anti‐PF4/heparin‐antibodies were assessed by ID‐H/PF4‐PaGIA, commercially available ELISAs and heparin‐induced platelet aggregation test. Results: Among 914 paired plasma/serum samples we noted discordant results (negative vs. low‐titre positive) in nine instances (1%; 95%CI, 0.4–1.6%). Overall, agreement between titres assessed in plasma vs. serum was highly significant (Spearman correlation coefficient, 0.975; P < 0.0001). Forty‐seven samples tested both fresh and after freezing/thawing showed a good agreement, with one discordant positive/negative result (Spearman correlation coefficient, 0.970; P < 0.0001). Among 1376 plasma samples we noted a strikingly variable incidence of false negative results (none – 82%; 95%CI, 66–98%), depending on the employed ID‐H/PF4‐polymer lot. Faulty lots can be recognized by titrating commercial positive controls and stored samples of HIT‐patients. Conclusion: Laboratories performing the assay should implement stringent internal quality controls in order to recognize potentially faulty ID‐H/PF4‐polymer lots, thus avoiding false negative results.     

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: an autoimmune disorder regulated through dynamic autoantigen assembly/disassembly

Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is the most common drug‐induced, antibody‐mediated cause of thrombocytopenia and thrombosis. HIT is caused by IgG antibodies that bind to epitopes on platelet factor 4 (PF4) released from activated platelets that develop when it forms complexes with heparin. Anti‐PF4/antibodies develop in over 50% of patients undergoing surgery involving cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), an incidence 20‐fold higher than HIT. Why might this occur? Binding of HIT IgG occurs only over a narrow molar ratio of reactants, being optimal at 1 mol PF4 tetramer to 1 mol unfractionated heparin (UFH). At these ratios, PF4 and UFH form ultralarge (>670 kD) complexes that bind multiple IgG molecules/complex, are highly antigenic, and promote platelet activation. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), which is less antigenic, forms ultralarge complexes less efficiently and largely at supratherapeutic concentrations. In transgenic mice that vary in expression of human PF4 on their platelets, antigenic complexes form between PF4 and endogenous chondroitin sulfate. Binding of HIT IgG to platelets and induction of thrombocytopenia in vivo is proportional to PF4 expression. Heparin prolongs the duration and exacerbates the severity of the thrombocytopenia. High doses of heparin, as used in CPB, or protamine, which competes with PF4 for heparin, disrupts antigen formation and prevents thrombocytopenia induced by HIT antibody. These studies may help explain the disparity between the incidence of antibody formation and clinical disease and may help identify patients at risk for HIT (high platelet PF4). They also demonstrate that this autoimmune disease can be modulated at the level of autoantigen formation and point to rational means to intervene proximal to thrombin generation. J. Clin. Apheresis. 22:, 2007 © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

The utility of pre-test clinical scoring for clinical diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in cardiac surgery patients of a tertiary care centre in north India

Background: Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) should be diagnosed clinically as well as by laboratory assays for timely recognition, prevention and management of complications. Objective: To evaluate the clinical utility of pre‐test clinical scoring system in combination with two immunoassays for the diagnosis of HIT in cardiac surgery patients. Materials and methods: A total of 100 consecutive patients undergoing cardiac surgery were studied. Pre‐test clinical scoring was carried out in patients with thrombocytopenia and further tested by two immunoassays, i.e. Heparin platelet factor 4 (H‐PF4) enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and particle gel immunoassay (PaGIA). Results: Of the 100 patients studied, 42 patients developed thrombocytopenia post‐operatively. On pre‐test clinical scoring, low T‐score was observed in 6 patients, intermediate in 28 and high score in 8 patients, whereas 19 patients (45·2%) were positive by H‐PF4 ELISA and 10 (23·8%) by PaGIA for H‐PF4 antibody. The difference in the incidence of clinically significant HIT antibodies in the three categories was statistically significant. A good correlation was also observed with ELISA optical density, T‐scoring and PaGIA. Conclusions: Pre‐test clinical scoring correlates well with the development of H‐PF4 antibodies which are incriminated in the causation of thrombotic complications in patients with HIT. We also propose a protocol for diagnosing patients with clinical suspicion of HIT using pre‐test clinical scoring and immunoassay.     

Heparin‐induced non‐necrotizing skin lesions: rarely associated with heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia

See also Warkentin TE, Linkins L‐A. Non‐necrotizing heparin‐induced skin lesions and the 4T’s score. This issue, pp 1483–. Summary. Background: Recently, there has been an increasing number of reports regarding adverse skin reactions to subcutaneous heparin administration. Case series have implied that heparin‐induced skin lesions are predominantly associated with life‐threatening heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in at least 22% of patients. Skin lesions, therefore, have been included in clinical scores for HIT. Objectives: To determine the association of heparin‐induced skin lesions with HIT. This would have a pivotal impact on further anticoagulatory management in patients with heparin‐induced skin lesions. Patients/Methods: In our observational cohort study, 87 consecutive patients with heparin‐induced skin lesions (85 occurring during low‐molecular‐weight heparin administration) were evaluated using a standardized internal protocol, including HIT diagnostics (heparin‐platelet factor 4‐ELISA, heparin‐induced platelet activation assay), platelet count monitoring, clinical/sonographical screening for thrombosis, skin allergy testing and, if necessary, histology. Results: None of the observed heparin‐induced skin lesions was due to HIT; all lesions were caused by delayed‐type IV‐hypersensitivity reactions (DTH) instead. Even the cutaneous reaction in one patient with concomitant HIT could be classified histologically as DTH reaction, amounting to an association of heparin‐induced skin lesions and HIT in 1.2% (1/87; 95% confidence interval, 0.00–0.06). Conclusion: Heparin‐induced skin lesions associated with use of low‐molecular‐weight heparins do not seem to be strongly associated with a systemic immunologic reaction in terms of HIT and might rather be due to DTH reactions than due to microvascular thrombosis. Hence, we propose refining existing pretest probability scores for HIT, unless underlying causes have been clarified.     

Heparin is not required for detection of antibodies associated with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia/thrombosis.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), with or without thrombosis, is a common and often serious complication of heparin therapy. Platelet-activating, heparin-induced antibodies characteristic of HIT are thought to be specific for complexes formed between platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin, and such complexes are routinely used for antibody detection. We studied the binding of HIT antibodies to PF4 complexed with heparin fractions of uniform molecular size or linear polyanions other than heparin and found that many compounds other than heparin form complexes with PF4 that are suitable for antibody detection, provided they carry strong negative charges spaced about 0.5 nm apart along the molecular backbone and are of sufficient length to span about 40% of the circumference of the PF4 tetramer. Polyvinyl phosphonate was among the compounds that were equivalent to heparin. Thus neither a polysaccharide chain nor sulfate side groups--the hallmarks of heparin structure--are required for HIT antibody detection. The findings support the view that antibodies associated with HIT are specific for conformational changes that take place in the positively charged PF4 molecule when it reacts with a suitable, linear polyanion.     

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.     

The Syk‐kinase inhibitor R406 impairs platelet activation and monocyte tissue factor expression triggered by heparin‐PF4 complex directed antibodies

Summary. Background: Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare but severe complication of heparin therapy in which immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against the platelet factor 4–heparin complex activate platelets through the FcγRIIA receptor. Clustering of FcγRIIA initiates signaling cascades involving tyrosine kinases including the spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk). Moreover, besides the critical role of platelets, the expression of tissue factor (TF) by human monocytes triggered by HIT antibodies has been shown to contribute to the hypercoagulability and the thrombotic complications in HIT patients. Objectives: We investigated the effect of R406, a small molecule inhibitor of Syk developed as a potential treatment of autoimmune diseases, allergic disorders and B‐cell related hematological malignancies, on FcγRIIA‐mediated platelet activation. To further assess the potential activity of Syk inhibitors in HIT treatment, the effect of R406 was also evaluated on HIT antibodies‐induced expression of TF and procoagulant activity of monocytic cells. Results: We show that R406 is a potent inhibitor of platelet signaling and functions initiated by FcγRIIA cross‐linking by specific antibodies or by sera from HIT patients. Syk inhibition efficiently prevents FcγRIIA‐induced LAT phosphorylation and activation of phosphoinositide 3‐kinase, Akt, phospholipase Cγ2 and p38 MAP‐kinase. As a consequence, FcγRIIA‐induced platelet aggregation, granule secretion and microparticles production are strongly inhibited by R406. Moreover, the Syk inhibitor efficiently impairs the expression of TF and the procoagulant activity of human monocytes triggered by HIT antibodies. Conclusion: Syk inhibitors may be of therapeutic interest in the treatment of HIT by reducing HIT antibodies‐mediated platelet activation and monocyte procoagulant activity.     

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.     

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。     

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.     

The HIT Expert Probability (HEP) Score: a novel pre‐test probability model for heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia based on broad expert opinion

Summary. Background: The diagnosis of heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is challenging. Over‐diagnosis and over‐treatment are common. Objectives: To develop a pre‐test clinical scoring model for HIT based on broad expert opinion that may be useful in guiding clinical decisions regarding therapy. Patients/methods: A pre‐test model, the HIT Expert Probability (HEP) Score, was constructed based on the opinions of 26 HIT experts. Fifty patients referred to a reference laboratory for HIT testing comprised the validation cohort. Two hematology trainees scored each patient using the HEP Score and a previously published clinical scoring system (4 T’s). A panel of three independent experts adjudicated the 50 patients and rendered a diagnosis of HIT likely or unlikely. All subjects underwent HIT laboratory testing with a polyspecific HIT ELISA and serotonin release assay (SRA). Results: The HEP Score exhibited significantly greater interobserver agreement [intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.88 (95% CI 0.80–0.93) vs. 0.71 (0.54–0.83)], correlation with the results of HIT laboratory testing and concordance with the diagnosis of the expert panel (area under receiver‐operating curve: 0.91 vs. 0.74, P = 0.017) than the 4 T’s. The model was 100% sensitive and 60% specific for determining the presence of HIT as defined by the expert panel and would have allowed for a 41% reduction in the number of patients receiving a direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI). Conclusion: The HEP Score is the first pre‐test clinical scoring model for HIT based on broad expert opinion, exhibited favorable operating characteristics and may permit clinicians to confidently reduce use of alternative anticoagulants. Prospective multicenter validation is warranted.     

Comparative effects of two synthetic oligosaccharides on platelet activation induced by plasma from HIT patients

Summary.  Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a serious secondary event encountered in the clinical use of heparin. HIT results from the consumption of platelets that are immunologically activated by antibodies directed against complexes formed by platelet factor 4 (PF4) and sulfated polysaccharides that activate platelet aggregation, leading to paradoxical, life-threatening thrombosis. There is strong evidence that the ability of heparin and related compounds to induce HIT is closely linked to the structure of the polysaccharide, and particularly to its negative charge and to the length of the molecule. To test this hypothesis, we synthesized two sulfated oligosaccharides: SanOrg123781, a 16-mer, presenting two terminal charged domains separated by a 7-mer neutral linker, and SR121903, a highly sulfated 17-mer. Both of them displayed strong anti-factor (F) Xa and anti-FIIa activities but their affinities for PF4 were markedly different. SR121903 displaced PF4-bound heparin, whereas SanOrg123781 did not, underlining the importance of the charge of the molecule for the interaction with PF4. Platelet studies, in the presence of HIT serum, showed that SR121903 induced the secretion of platelet-dense granules (measured by the release of serotonin) whereas SanOrg123781 did not, a result in accordance with an absence of affinity of this molecule for PF4. These results were confirmed by measurements of platelet activation by flow cytometry (measured by annexin V binding, CD62 detection and activation of the GpIIb–IIIa complexes). In conclusion, we have demonstrated the importance of the charge of the polysaccharides in the HIT-induced platelet reactions measured by diverse methods, of which some are described for this purpose for the first time.     

Low-density lipoprotein apheresis reduces platelet factor 4 on the surface of platelets: a possible protective mechanism against heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis

BACKGROUND: Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (HITT) is characterized by thrombocytopenia due to the formation of antibodies against heparin : platelet factor 4 (PF4) complexes. Despite the exposure to heparin during treatment and predisposition of patients with atherosclerosis to HITT, HITT in patients undergoing low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis is rare. We investigated the possibility that LDL apheresis decreases PF4 on platelet (PLT) surfaces and/or plasma HITT antibody levels, either of which would disfavor HITT. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We enrolled 25 patients undergoing LDL apheresis at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. Blood samples were drawn before and after treatment. Plasma samples were drawn proximal and distal to the LA‐15 treatment column. PF4, HITT antibodies, heparin levels, and P‐selectin were measured. RESULTS: No patient had clinical symptoms of HITT. The LA‐15 column was found to efficiently remove PF4. PF4 levels in peripheral blood plasma did not change significantly after LDL apheresis. However, PLT surface PF4 significantly decreased after treatment. HITT antibodies were found in only two patients and were nonfunctional. PLT surface P‐selectin did not change during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that LDL apheresis via dextran sulfate absorption removes plasma PF4 and reduces the amount of PF4 on the surface of circulating PLTs. Reduced surface PF4 may decrease antibody formation and/or recognition by HITT antibodies. These data provide a potential explanation for the near lack of HITT in hypercholesterolemic patients undergoing LDL apheresis. They also suggest the possibility that LDL apheresis using dextran sulfate adsorption may have therapeutic value in the treatment of HITT.     

Low-molecular-weight heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in a child

OBJECTIVE: To report a case of probable acute venous thrombosis caused by heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in a pediatric patient with a normal platelet count after prolonged enoxaparin therapy. CASE SUMMARY: An 11-year-old African American female with Crohn's disease developed extensive vena cava thrombosis. Her deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was treated with intravenous unfractionated heparin followed by extended outpatient warfarin therapy. Four months later, the warfarin was stopped and subcutaneous enoxaparin 1.5 mg/kg once daily was substituted prior to an elective colonoscopy. She was readmitted 6 weeks later with acute DVT with a platelet count of 233 x 10(3)/mm3, significantly lower than the count of 550-700 x 10(3)/mm3 5 months previously and the count of 433 x 10(3)/mm3 3 months earlier. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for heparin-platelet factor 4 antibodies was strongly positive and a d-dimer was elevated at 2.9 mg/L (normal <1.5). She was treated with lepirudin followed by warfarin when repeat d-dimer on day 3 was normal. An ultrasound at that time showed no clot extension, and the platelet count had risen to >300 x 10(3)/mm3. Over the next 4 months, there was no further thrombosis. DISCUSSION: HIT appears to be rare in the pediatric population, and only a few cases treated with a direct thrombin inhibitor have been reported. This is the first case report to our knowledge of a pediatric patient developing HIT secondary to enoxaparin. An interesting feature of this case is the development of HIT in the face of a normal platelet count, which is rare but has been reported in adults. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patients receiving low-molecular-weight heparin are still at risk for developing HIT. Treatment of HIT should involve the initial use of a direct thrombin inhibitor to manage thrombosis until the platelet count returns to higher values. Once the platelet count returns, warfarin can be used for long-term thrombosis management.