Our current “quick question” was provided by Dr. Michael Blechner:
“When performing ELISA testing for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), how do you report the results?
Answers from twenty reponses are below…
a. Positive, negative, equivocal, confirmed by saturating heparin dose: 8 (40%)
b. Positive, negative, equivocal, unconfirmed by heparin: 5 (25%)
c. Positive, negative, equivocal with optical density: 5 (25%)
d. Optical density alone: 2 (10%)
This is a remarkable diversity, and it reflects comments from the 2007 report of the Platelet Immunology subcommittee of the SCIENTIFIC SUBCOMMITTEE SESSION 6 July 2007 Palexpo, Geneva, Switzerland:
Zehnder J, Price EA, Hayward C, Warkentin T, Moffat K, Moore J. NASCOLA Survey of laboratory practices regarding testing for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia .
In this survey of 44 specialized labs that perform testing for HIT antibodies, two objectives were stated: to determine current practice in laboratory diagnosis of HIT, and to identify areas in need of standardization and improvement. A wide variety of specimen types/pre-analytic variables were accepted, with two “concerns” being heparin contamination within samples (78%) and that the timing of the blood draw could be too early for antibody detection (75%). Antigen assays (e.g. EIA [ELISA]) are most commonly performed, especially the assay from GTI (71%) versus the one from Stago (27%), with a wide variety of reporting strategies and test cutoffs utilized. A minority of labs had tried the “rapid” assays (particle gel immunoassay and particle immunofiltration assay). Platelet activation assays were performed in only about 1/3 of labs, with similar numbers using “washed platelets” as platelet-rich plasma. Most labs used prescreened donors known to react well in the activation assays. Again, a wide variety of test conditions (e.g., heparin concentrations) were used. The most common pattern of practice (55% of labs) involved screening with a commercial EIA, and referring out of samples to a reference lab for platelet activation assays. A number of items that might benefit from standardization were presented.
You may wish to go to the subcommittee discussion to review some of the controversies associated with HIT assays
No comments here.