Assays for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Tests for the presence of heparin-dependent antibodies (heparin-Ig) have evolved in parallel with improved understanding of the pathophysiology of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). The first group of tests relied upon platelet aggregation or activation. Among tests in this group, the serotonin release assay has been reported to demonstrate the best performance characteristics. However, this test has not been widely adopted outside a few specialized laboratories owing to its complexity and need for radioactive materials. As a result, the less sensitive and specific platelet aggregation test is more commonly used for the diagnosis of heparin-Ig. The literature suggests that test sensitivity can be improved by the use of the patient’s own platelets, platelets from selected donors known to be reactive in the assay, or washed platelets. Test specificity has been enhanced by the use of two point assays that include neutralization of the reaction by a high dose of heparin. A second group of assays have focused on detection of heparin-dependent binding of immunoglobulins to the platelet membrane. Most of these tests are hampered by the fact that platelets in patients with suspected HIT and in conditions that are in the differential diagnosis of HIT frequently express high levels of platelet-associated immunoglobulin. The most recent tests for heparin-Ig are based on the recognition that patient antibodies are directed against the heparin-PF4 complex. This has led to the development of the PF4/heparin EIA assay. Because whole platelets are not used in this assay, problems related to under-reactivity or nonspecific reactivity are avoided. In addition, the ability of the test to predict clinical complications may be improved because the test can distinguish IgM from IgG heparin-Ig. Currently the laboratory diagnosis of heparin-Ig remains inexact. The sensitivity and specificity of laboratory assays cannot be firmly established. Much like the diagnosis of the phospholipid syndrome — where use of both the cardiolipin EIA and the lupus anticoagulant test offer overlapping advantages — the combination of the heparin-PF4 EIA plus either a test of platelet activation or a heparin-dependent antibody binding assay may prove to be a more sensitive and specific approach to the diagnosis of heparin-Ig. Despite the progress that has been made in the area of laboratory diagnosis of heparin-Ig, further improvement is needed. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is not rare and may be associated with devastating morbidity as well as mortality. Low-molecular-weight heparins usually cross-react with heparin-Ig. Therapy with Org 10172 appears to be the most promising alternative for patients with HIT. Because the clinical diagnosis is uncertain in sick hospitalized patients, further improvements in laboratory assays for heparin-Ig allowing earlier and more accurate diagnosis of patients at risk for HIT will be welcome.