Evaluate the diagnostic performance of three methods in testing heparin induced thrombocytopenia antibodies / 中华检验医学杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective@#Evaluate the diagnostic performance of three methods in testingheparin induced thrombocytopenia antibodies the clinical diagnosis performance of the three heparin induced thrombocytopenia(HIT) antibody testing.@*Methods@#143 patients were collected from the Tianjin Medical university general hospital and China-Japan friendship hospital from the 2017 Sep to 2018 Dec, 67 males and 76 females, with a mean age of (56.1±11.4) years, the pretest probability is estimated to be low (1-3 points) with 24 patients, intermediate (4-5 points) with 79 patients and high(6-8 points) with 40 patients. According to therapeutic regimen, the intermediate and high probability patients were divided into two groups 31 cases in the heparin discontinuing group and 88 cases in the continuing heparin group. The three methods includingthe particle immunofiltration assay to detect the plasma whole HIT antibody; the particle gel immunoassayto detect the plasma whole HIT antibody by ACL TOP 700 coagulation analyzer,; the chemiluminescent immunoassay to detect the plasma IgG-specific HIT antibody by ACL AcuStar chemiluminescent analyzer.@*Results@#There was no significant difference between the high and intermediate probability patients for particle immunofiltration assay, particle gel immunoassay and chemiluminescent immunoassay(χ2 was 3.15, 2.89 and 1.31 respectively, P>0.05). The positive rate with three assays were higher in the heparin discontinuing group than the continuing heparin group(χ2 was 16.09, 43.37 and 26.94 respectively, P<0.01), the positive results of the chemiluminescent immunoassay only in the heparin discontinuing group. All of the patients with three assays positive simultaneousin the heparin discontinuing group(χ2=26.94, P<0.01); more patients in heparin discontinuing group with positive resultsby two assays (particle immunofiltration assay and particle gel immunoassay) than in the continuing heparin group(χ2=10.95, P<0.01); there was no obvious difference(χ2=1.80, P>0.05) between the continuing heparin group and the heparin discontinuing group for positive results with particle immunofiltration assay; all of the patients with there assays negative simultaneous in the continuing heparin group with a significant difference between the two groups(χ2=14.27, P<0.01).@*Conclusions@#Whole HIT antibodies had high sensitivity, and was especially suitable for excluding diagnosis, andthe diagnositic performance withtheparticle gel immunoassay precede the particle immunofiltration assay.For the patients with intermediate or high pretest probability and whole antibodies positive, even if they had been treated with alternative anticoagulant therapy, the IgG specific antibodies(chemiluminescent immunoassay) should be detected for definite diagnosis(if the conditions was appropriate), to verify the rationality of alternative anticoagulant therapy and to avoid overtreatment.