ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2023
Laboratory diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: A retrospective experience.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia in pulmonary thromboendarterectomy: retrospective cohort.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Laboratory diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: A retrospective experience.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHeparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a severe complication of heparin therapy associated with thrombosis that requires a quick diagnosis. Therefore, laboratory assays must provide an accurate and swift answer. This work aims to evaluate the performances of an ELISA assay, especially when combined with 4T risk score, and a functional assay.
methodsData were collected for 894 patients treated by heparin who underwent anticoagulant switch because of HIT suspicion and were examined by a multidisciplinary expert team who confirmed or ruled out HIT diagnosis. All patients were tested for anti-PF4 IgG with Asserachrom HPIA IgG (ELISA), and 307 were tested with a platelet aggregation test done on platelet-rich plasma (PRP-PAT). The 4T risk score was available for 607 of them.
resultsHIT was diagnosed in 232 patients. 4T risk score had a 94.2% negative predictive value (NPV) for risk scores ≤3 and 77.3% for risk scores ≤5. The sensitivity of ELISA was 90.9%, its specificity 79.0%, and its NPV 96.1%. When combined with 4T risk score, its NPV reached 100% and 97% for risk scores ≤3 and ≤5, respectively. PRP-PAT sensitivity was 70.4%, and its specificity was 92.3%. Combination of ELISA and PRP-PAT had a 0.7% false-negative rate.
conclusionThis study shows that ELISA can rule out HIT with an excellent NPV, especially when combined with the 4T risk score. Nonetheless, it has low specificity; hence, it needs to be associated with a functional assay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.