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.

To assess current laboratory practice and the performance of different reagent-instrument combinations for protein S testing, protein S results from the North American Specialized Coagulation Laboratory Association (NASCOLA) proficiency testing surveys for 2002 and the first half of 2003 were analyzed. A written survey of NASCOLA laboratories also was performed to further assess current laboratory practices for protein S testing. The free protein S antigen assays and the Diagnostica Stago Staclot protein S assay were extremely accurate in detecting a heterozygous type I protein S deficiency. Another functional protein S assay and most total protein S assays were less reliable, depending to some extent on the instrument. All assays used by NASCOLA laboratories appropriately identified normal protein S specimens. NASCOLA laboratories performed at least as well as European Concerted Action on Thrombosis laboratories in the proficiency tests. The results suggest that the diagnosis of heterozygous protein S deficiency may be problematic with some currently available assays. Many total protein S antigen assays do not add to the diagnosis and can be unreliable for protein S deficiency subtyping. Better standardization of functional and antigenic assays is needed.

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.