ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Update on the Laboratory Diagnosis of Lupus Anticoagulant: Current Challenges and Clinical Involvement.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. 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.
- Subclinical ocular microvascular involvement in primary antiphospholipid syndrome and antiphospholipid antibody carriers.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Lupus Anticoagulant Testing for Diagnosis of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Perspective Informed by Local Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lupus anticoagulant (LAC) is a heterogeneous mix of autoimmune antibodies that prolongs phospholipid-dependent clotting assays. Its diagnosis can be a real challenge in the hemostasis laboratory. In this review, the author describes the main pitfalls affecting the preanalytical phase and how to proceed to reduce interferences. Because of the heterogeneity of these autoantibodies, two assays with different mechanism of action should be performed to detect the majority of LACs. The dilute Russell's viper venom test and the use of a reagent very sensitive to LAC derived from the activated partial thromboplastin time, using silica as the activator, are the most frequent techniques. The algorithms for LAC detection are reported here, and every laboratory is encouraged to introduce its own diagnostic procedure. Results should be expressed in ratio to reduce inter- and intravariability. In addition, the effect of anticoagulation in LAC assays and possible strategies for a correct diagnosis are provided.
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.