Platelet Mapping by Thromboelastography and Whole Blood Aggregometry in Adult Patients Supported by Mechanical Circulatory Support Device on Aspirin Therapy.

Patients on mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are placed on aspirin and may require platelet function testing (PFT) to monitor the adequacy of therapy. Routine laboratory PFT is performed using whole blood aggregation (WBA) which typically has a long turnaround time (4-5 hours) and may not be readily available. By contrast, platelet mapping by thromboelastography (TPM) can provide results within 45 minutes. The objective of this study was to compare the results of TPM with WBA. We compared platelet mapping maximal amplitude (MA) by TPM with that of arachidonic acid (AA) to WBA with AA by impedance. We analyzed paired samples where both TPM and WBA were available. Of 45 paired samples, 34 were from 29 MCS patients and 11 were from non-MCS patients. When applying institutional interpretation guidelines with an MAActivator cutoff of ≤40 mm, WBAAA vs TPM MAAA in non-MCS and MCS patients correlated well with an accuracy of 100 and 94.4%, respectively. MAActivator >40 had poor correlation with an accuracy of 37.5%. Irrespective of MAActivator value, TPM AA inhibition expressed in percent of inhibition had poor accuracy. When used with proper guidelines for interpretation, specifically when MAActivator ≤ 40 mm, TPM is a suitable and reliable test to use for MCS patients on aspirin.

The TEG 6s System: System Description and Protocol for Measurements.

A new generation of thromboelastography, TEG 6s (Haemonetics, Boston, MA), that assesses blood viscoelastic properties by resonance technology has recently been developed. This newer methodology represents a cartridge-based, automated assay aimed to improve on historical TEG performance and precision. In a previous chapter, we reviewed the advantages and limitations of TEG 6s as well as factors that affect TEG 6s and which must be considered when interpreting tracings. In the present chapter, we provide a description of the TEG 6s principle and its operation protocol.

The TEG 5000 System: System Description and Protocol for Measurements.

The thromboelastograph (TEG) has undergone several modifications, but the concept on which the original TEG was based (cup and pin technology) remained up to the TEG 5000 analyzer (Haemonetics, Braintree, MA). In a previous chapter, we reviewed the advantages and limitations of TEG 5000 as well as factors that affect TEG and which must be considered when interpreting tracings. In the present chapter, we provide a description of the TEG 5000 principle and its operation protocol.

Measurement of Blood Viscoelasticity Using Thromboelastography.

Thromboelastography (TEG) was the first viscoelastic test (VET), invented in Germany in 1948 by Dr. Hartert, and which evaluates the hemostatic competence of whole blood. Thromboelastography was introduced before the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), which was devised in 1953. TEG was not widely used until the introduction of a cell-based model of hemostasis (1994) showing the importance of platelets and tissue factor in hemostasis. Nowadays, VET has become an essential method for assessing hemostatic competence in cardiac surgery, liver transplantation, and trauma. TEG has undergone several modifications, but the concept on which the original TEG was based (cup and pin technology) remained in up to the TEG 5000 analyzer (Haemonetics, Braintree, MA). A new generation of thromboelastography, TEG 6s (Haemonetics, Boston, MA), that assesses blood viscoelastic properties by resonance technology has recently been developed. This newer methodology represents a cartridge-based, automated assay aimed to improve on historical TEG performance and precision. In the present chapter, we will review the advantages and limitations of TEG 5000 and TEG 6s systems as well as factors that affect TEG and which must be considered when interpreting TEG tracings.

Consultative Interpretation for Lupus Anticoagulant by Expert Pathologist Reduces False-Positive Rates in the Era of Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome requires detection of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). A retrospective review of our testing practices revealed that societal recommendations for lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing as part of aPL testing are largely not followed by clinicians, and there was a high proportion of positive LA results. Increasing direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) usage creates additional challenges in identifying LA. This prompted us to establish an order set with pathologist consultation ("LA panel") and testing algorithm to reduce false-positive LA and to ensure optimal LA identification and best practices for interpretation and follow-up. METHODS: The laboratory database was reviewed to determine the number of LA tests ordered and rate of LA positivity before and after the LA panel was instituted. We assessed the impact of pathologist consultation to minimize false-positive findings and on following diagnostic guidelines. RESULTS: LA panels were ordered for 1146 patients. LA was detected in 10% (111 of 1146) by dilute Russel viper venom time (dRVVT) normalized ratio [includes dRVVT screen (dRVVTs) positive/lupus-sensitive partial thromboplastin time (PTT-LA) positive and dRVVTs positive/PTT-LA negative] and 20% (228 of 1146) by Staclot-LA (includes dRVVTs negative/PTT-LA positive and dRVVTs positive/confirm negative). There was a reduction of false-positive LA by Staclot-LA; previously, 48% positive. We saw increased cancellation of LA testing for interfering anticoagulants [6.8% (16 of 236) vs 14.4% (55 of 383); P = 0.0061]. There was also increased adherence to follow-up LA testing [3% (8 of 236) vs 13.8% (53 of 383); P ≤ 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Creating a predetermined order set and testing algorithm with pathologist consultation improved LA testing interpretation and diagnostic follow-up testing.