Search

Laboratory tests for lupus anticoagulants (LA) are commonly performed to evaluate thrombosis or suspected phospholipid antibody syndromes. To determine current LA testing practices, and if they conform to published recommendations, two questionnaires were distributed to clinical laboratory members of the North American Specialized Coagulation Laboratory Association (NASCOLA) and the ECAT Foundation (ECAT). The first and second questionnaires were completed by 113 and 96 laboratories, respectively. Commonly performed LA tests included the dilute Russell's viper venom time, LA sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time and hexagonal phospholipid test. Although some laboratories did single LA tests if requested, the majority complied with published recommendations: to use platelet poor plasma for LA tests; to use two or more screening tests, representing different assay principles, and one assay having a low phospholipid concentration to exclude LA; to confirm LA phospholipid dependency by the method giving an abnormal LA screen; to document the inhibitor activity on pooled normal plasma; and not to use phospholipid antibodies to confirm LA. A minority (<35%) followed the recommendations to exclude factor deficiencies and factor inhibitors as the cause of an abnormal LA test. After participating, 32% of laboratories had changed practices and 20% indicated that they would be changing practices. While most laboratories generally follow published guidelines for LA testing, few follow recommendations to evaluate for other coagulation abnormalities. Questionnaires may be helpful quality initiatives to improve compliance with laboratory testing guidelines and recommendations.

Disorders of platelet function are important causes of abnormal bleeding that require laboratory tests for diagnosis. Currently there are limited guidelines on how to perform clinical testing for these disorders. The goal of our study was to obtain information on how disorders of platelet function are currently evaluated in clinical laboratories. Two patterns-of-practice surveys were distributed to laboratories of the North American Specialized Coagulation Laboratory Association (NASCOLA). The information collected was analyzed to determine practices and common problems. Forty-seven NASCOLA laboratories participated and 54% completed both surveys. The majority of the laboratories that responded performed more than 50 aggregation tests per year, mainly using platelet rich plasma based methodologies. A minority performed testing for platelet secretion and dense granule abnormalities. While platelet aggregation results were reviewed in various ways, laboratories most commonly issued a combined report containing quantitative values (% aggregation and/or slope) and a qualitative interpretation. Although laboratories used similar agonists for aggregation testing, the final agonist concentrations varied widely. Several approaches were also used to obtain reference intervals. Comments offered by the participants indicated that performing, and interpreting platelet function tests were challenging for many clinical laboratories. Although common practices have evolved, there is considerable variability in the diagnostic test procedures used by clinical laboratories to evaluate disorders of platelet function. These patterns-of-practice surveys illustrate a need for guidelines and recommendations for clinical laboratories performing tests of platelet function.

The PFA-100 instrument (Platelet Function Analyzer, Dade Behring) has been reported to be superior to the bleeding time (BT) as a screening test of primary hemostasis. However evaluation of this device has been principally limited to selected populations. The study's aim was to determine testing performance in clinical practice, by comparing the PFA-100 to the BT for the identification of von Willebrand disease (VWD) and intrinsic platelet hypofunction. From 1998-2000, PFA-100 closure time (CT) for epinephrinecollagen (EPI) and ADP-collagen (ADP) cartridges and modified Ivy BTs were performed on outpatients referred for testing for suspected or known hemorrhagic diathesis (n = 346). Evaluation included assays of von Willebrand factor and platelet aggregometry in addition to platelet flow cytometry and electron microscopy when indicated. The normal distribution of PFA-100 CTs was determined using blood samples from 61 normal donors studied on 155 occasions. Results show that thirty-four patients met the diagnostic criteria for VWD and 31 patients were diagnosed with congenital or acquired intrinsic platelet hypofunction. The sensitivity of the PFA-100 for identification of VWD was significantly better (p < 0.01) than the BT with similar specificity. In contrast, the PFA-100 was comparable, but not superior to the BT for detecting platelet hypofunction. We conclude that the PFA-100 performance compares favorably to the BT for the identification of intrinsic platelet hypofunction in clinical practice with superior sensitivity for detecting VWD. Therefore, the PFA-100 could replace the BT for purposes of screening for VWD and intrinsic platelet hypofunction. When clinical suspicion is strong, testing should be supplemented with assays of von Willebrand factor and platelet aggregometry.