Antocoagulante Lupico Evaluacion
Antocoagulante Lupico Evaluacion
Antocoagulante Lupico Evaluacion
mx
A
E-mail:
ntiphospholipid antibodies are a heteroge- the work of Moore in 1952, which showed the
coordpostanalitica@
labechavarria.com neous family of auto- and alloantibodies. occurrence of false-positive tests for syphilis
Detection is performed through coagulation or serology. Indeed, false-positive occurred in
immunological tests. Their presence is not al- the VDRL using phospholipids, while specific
Recibido: ways pathological. Associated with thrombotic treponemal gave negative reactions (TPHA,
28/05/2014.
Aceptado:
events, they define a specific clinical entity: the Nelson).2 The main types of antiphospholipid
30/05/2014. Antiphospholipid Syndrome (APS), which may antibodies are lupus anticoagulant (LA), anti-
Rev Latinoam Patol Clin Med Lab 2014; 61 (3): 145-149 www.medigraphic.com/patologiaclinica
146 Saldarriaga-Saldarriaga M et al. Determination of cut-off values in healthy donors for lupus anticoagulant detection protocol
cardiolipin antibodies (aCA), and anti-2 glycoprotein I medical history of obstetric complications, early and/or
(anti-2GP1). LA is a heterogeneous group of antibodies late fetal losses.
directed against negatively charged phospholipids or
against complexes formed between phospholipids and Selection of reference population
proteins (2 GP1 or coagulation factors such as prothrom-
bin). These anticoagulants interfere with coagulation tests The study included healthy male and female donors,
in which phospholipids participate, such as the activated which did not submit the exclusion criteria specified
partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and dilute Russell viper by a survey of risk; those who met the inclusion criteria
venom time (dRVVT), among others.3 were required to fill out an informed consent form, which
LA has been documented in various medical articles, unveiled all about the study.
in association with clinical findings of thrombosis, recur-
rent fetal losses, and thrombocytopenia.4 Procedure for sampling
There are variables that can affect the interpretation of
the results for the diagnosis of LA, including the incorrect 1. Sample collection: Sample taking was performed in
selection of patients according to clinical features, the one of the LME service points in the morning. Samples
partial ordering of laboratory tests without prior suspen- were collected mostly without tourniquet use to pre-
sion of oral anticoagulation therapy, the high variability vent microscopic hemolysis, release of tissue factor
regarding the sensitivity and specificity of tests, such as and platelet aggregation. For healthy donors, two
the content and type of phospholipid reagents, activators, tubes of 4 mL sodium citrate anticoagulant to 3.2%
preparation of Normal Plasma Pool (NPP), expression of were taken in a 9:1 ratio, through the vacuum tube
the results and the cut-off values.5 system in the ulnar region of the arm. Following the
The ideal procedures for LA assay are those sensitive protocol for obtaining blood samples from LME, which
enough to detect weak LA and those specific enough to is adjusted according to the CLSI recommendations
avoid incorrect conclusions.6 for this type of test.8
The aim of this study was to determine the cut-off 2. Sample analysis: Each sample obtained was centri-
values in a population of healthy donors for the group fuged at 2,000 g for 15 minutes at room temperature;
of tests required to detect LA in Laboratorio Mdico the plasma was removed with a plastic pipette and
Echavarra (LME), in order to improve the specificity of centrifuged again at 2,500 g for 10 minutes. After
the test5 and provide a detailed protocol that serves as separating plasma, we proceeded to make the NPP
a reference to those laboratories wishing to implement from samples of healthy donors. Platelet count, aPTT
their own cut-off values for this test, as recommended by and percentage of activity of factor VIII were deter-
international guidelines. mined in NPP.
The analyses required for LA testing were performed
METHODS with ACL TOP 300, equipment of Instrumentation
Laboratory, with reagents: HemosIL dRVVT Screen
A prospective study was conducted, determining the cut- (dRVVTs) -0020301500/dRVVT Confirm (dRVVTc)
off values for LA test in a population of healthy donors, - 0020301600, aPTT SP - 0020006300, and Factor
according to the Scientific Standardization Committee VIII deficient Plasma - 0020011800.
(SSC) for this test.5 For quality control, material of the same trading house
Exclusion criteria: Clinical and demographic factors was used in normal, low and high concentrations (Lots:
that could affect the results in the measurement of the N1021609, N0228997, N1121957, respectively) for
parameters for determining the cut-off values, according aPTT test. For Factor VIII, normal control was used
to the C28 -A2 CLSI guide,7 such as: living outside the alone (Lot N1021609). For dRVVTs and dRVVTc tests,
www.medigraphic.org.mx
metropolitan area, subjects older than 50 years of age,
being under special medical treatment; having viral, bac-
they were controlled with positive (0020012500)
and negative (0020012600) controls for LA (Lots
terial, parasitic, malignant and/or hematologic diseases; N0329326 and N0329327, respectively).
being under oral anticoagulation therapy; having personal 3. Measured parameters: Baseline aPTT, aPTT 1:1 mix
or family history of autoimmune or thrombotic diseases, with NPP, dRVVTs and dRVVTc
thrombocytopenia; personal history of venous and arte- For each dRVVTs and dRVVTc reagent, a new normal
rial thrombosis, having skin ulcers on the legs, consuming range was determined according to CLSI C28- A2
any actual medications, and in the case of women past document. The reference range was expressed as
Rev Latinoam Patol Clin Med Lab 2014; 61 (3): 145-149 www.medigraphic.com/patologiaclinica
Saldarriaga-Saldarriaga M et al. Determination of cut-off values in healthy donors for lupus anticoagulant detection protocol 147
normal mean 2 SD. The mean was used as constant An Excel 2010 matrix was constructed for recording
denominator in the calculation of ratios. and calculating the results of the mean, standard
3.1 dRVVTs deviation, normal range 2 SD and cut-off values.
3.1.1 For each healthy donor, the result in seconds The cut-off values were obtained from the 99th
was obtained and then this was divided by the percentile (99% Confidence Interval) for screening,
average of dRVVTs of all donors. study of mixtures, and confirmatory tests, follow-
3.2 dRVVTc ing the SSC recommendations for LA detection
3.2.1 For each healthy donor, the result in seconds protocol.
was obtained and then this was divided by the
average of dRVVTc of all donors. RESULTS
3.3 Normalized dRVVT ratio: DRVVTs ratio was di-
vided by dRVVTc ratio. Voluntarily, 46 adults signed up; six of them were ex-
3.4 Other calculations: Rosner Index (RI) or Index of cluded (medication use, family history of thrombosis,
Circulating Anticoagulant (ICA) and the percentage autoimmune diseases and fetal losses). Four healthy
of correction were calculated from the following volunteers had altered results on tests, which did not
formulas: allow their participation in the study.
In total, 36 healthy adults participated: 8 (22.2%)
male and 28 (77.7%) female, with average ages of 30.3
ACI or RI = [CT (aPTT) of mix 1:1 - CT (aPTT) NPP/CT
and 32.8 years, respectively.
(aPTT) patient]* 100
Platelet count, aPTT, dRVVTs, dRVVTc, and factor
Percentage of correction: (dRVVt screen dRVVt confirm/
VIII tests were performed in NPP, with results of: 7,000
dRVVT screen)* 100
platelets/uL, 30.6 seconds, 31.8 seconds, 28.5 seconds
CT = coagulation time. and 85% activity, respectively.
The cut-off values obtained from the 99th percentile
to the screen and confirmatory tests of LA detection
4. Interpretation: The final result was expressed as nor- protocol are described in table I.
malized dRVVT ratio. The percentage of correction for The cut-off values suggested by the trading house and
dRVVT was applied, which was previously suggested some references were compared with those obtained in
for Kaolin clotting time.9 This percentage takes into the LME, which are described in table II.
account the degree of relative correction on normal The results of screening and confirmatory tests for
initial values. This calculation method is recommended LA obtained directly from the NPP and obtained as a
by the British Society for Haematology (BCSH) and the statistical average of the healthy donors included in the
SSC LA Guidelines.5,10 study are described in table III.
Table I. Cut-off values for screen and confirmatory test for lupus anticoagulant.
aPTT % correc-
mix1:1 dRVVt dRVVt s dRVVt dRVVt c Final CAI tion /confir-
Parameters Age aPTT seg seg s seg ratio c seg ratio ratio % matory test
Mean 32.3 29.1 30.0 32.2 1.00 28.8 1.00 1.00 -0.3 10.0
www.medigraphic.org.mx
SD 8.4 2.5 1.8 3.0 0.09 1.5 0.05 0.09 6.0 7.5
Min 23.8 24.4 26.5 26.1 0.80 25.9 0.80 0.82
Max 40.6 34.2 33.5 38.8 1.20 31.9 1.10 1.18
2 SD 8.4 24.4 - 34.2 26.5 - 33.5 26.1- 38.8 0.80 - 1.20 25.9 - 31.9 0.80 - 1.10 0.80 - 1.20 12.0 27.0
Range
99th 48.7 34.3 34.0 38.4 1.19 32.1 1.11 1.24 12.2 27.6
Percentile
Rev Latinoam Patol Clin Med Lab 2014; 61 (3): 145-149 www.medigraphic.com/patologiaclinica
148 Saldarriaga-Saldarriaga M et al. Determination of cut-off values in healthy donors for lupus anticoagulant detection protocol
Table II. Diferences between manufacturer Cut-off values and Laboratorio Mdico Echavarra.
Este documento
Reference es elaborado
values por Medigraphic
% correction/confi rmatory test ICA dRVVt s ratio dRVVt c ratio Final ratio
Ref. 1 ND >15.0 ND ND ND
Manufacturer ND ND 1.20 1.20 1.20
Ref. 2 >10.0 ND 1.10 1.10 1.10
LME 27.6 12.2 1.19 1.11 1.24
ND = No data; Ref. 1:8; Trading House:3; Ref. 2:10; ICA = Index of Circulating Anticoagulant.
Rev Latinoam Patol Clin Med Lab 2014; 61 (3): 145-149 www.medigraphic.com/patologiaclinica
Saldarriaga-Saldarriaga M et al. Determination of cut-off values in healthy donors for lupus anticoagulant detection protocol 149
3. Instrumentation Laboratory Company. dRVVT Screen - 0020301500 tion Assays and Molecular Hemostasis Assays; Approved Guideline.
/ dRVVT Confirm 0020301600.Tradehouse Insert. July, 2012. Fifth Edition H21-A5. Vol. 28 Number 5.
4. Triplett DA. Diagnosis of antiphospholipid antibodies (APA). Hamo- 9. Rosner E, Pauzner R, Lusky A, Modan M, Many A. Detection and
staseologie. 2001; 21: 54-59. quantitative evaluation of lups circulating anticoagulant activity. J
5. Pengo V, Tripodi A, Reber G, Rand JH, Ortel TL, Galli M et al. Update Thromb Haemost. 1987; 57: 144-1447.
of the Guidelines for Lupus Anticoagulant Detection. International 10. BCSH Guidelines on testing for the Lupus Anticoagulant. British
Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. J Thromb Haemost. 2009;
Society for Haematology; Haemostasis and Thrombosis Task Force.
4: 295-306.
J Clin Pathol. 1999; 44: 885-889.
6. Kershaw G, Suresh S, Orellana D, Nguy YM. Laboratory Identifica-
11. Kottke-Marchant K. An algorithmic approach to hemostasis testing.
tion of Lupus Anticoagulants. Semin Thromb Hemos. 2012; 38:
375-384. College of American Pathologists (CAP). 2008; 93-112.
7. Clinical and Laboratory Standars Institute. How to Define and De- 12. Gardiner C, Mackie IJ, Malia RD, Jones DW, Winter M, Leeming
termine Reference Intervals in The Clinical Laboratory; Approved D et al. The Importance the Locally Derived Reference Ranges and
Guideline. Second Edition C28-A2 Vol. 20 Number 13, 2000. Standardized Calculation of Diluted Russells Viper Venom Time
8. Clinical and Laboratory Standars Institute. Collection, Transport, and Results in Screening for Lupus Anticoagulant. British J Haematol.
Processing of Blood Specimens for Testing Plasma-Based Coagula- 2000; 111: 1230-1235.
www.medigraphic.org.mx
Rev Latinoam Patol Clin Med Lab 2014; 61 (3): 145-149 www.medigraphic.com/patologiaclinica