Pearls and Pitfalls in the Measurement of Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Due to their widespread use, testing for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has become urgent in certain clinical situations. Screening based on widely available, rapid, and simple hemostasis assays such as prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, or even diluted Russel Viper venom time may provide sufficient evidence of "over-coagulation" and could be used "in small/peripheral/spoke laboratories" as an emergency strategy, but is not thought to be reliable for driving clinical decision making. Given their good correlation with plasma concentration, urine dipsticks may be considered a valuable alternative for emergency screening, although their performance is dependent on renal function, may vary depending on the time since the last urination, and there may be problems of interfacing with the laboratory/hospital information system. Separation methods based on liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry may be clinically questionable, since they measure the concentration rather than the actual inhibitory effect of DOACs, are relatively expensive, cumbersome and time consuming, and therefore seem unsuitable for most conditions requiring urgent clinical decision making. A proposed approach therefore involves establishing a network of routine clinical laboratories, designating a reference center where DOAC tests could be available 24/7, establishing a clear diagnostic care pathway for ordering the tests from the laboratory and standard operating procedures for performing them, the use of the diluted thrombin time for dabigatran and anti-FXa assays (drug-calibrated) for rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, as well as providing expert advice throughout the testing process, from ordering to interpretation of results.

Variable Performance of D-dimer Testing by Hemostasis Laboratories: The Australasian/Asia-Pacific Experience.

D-dimers represent the breakdown products of fibrin. Thus, elevated plasma D-dimers will arise following a thrombotic event, such as a deep vein thrombosis or a pulmonary embolism, and therefore, a nonelevated D-dimer is used to effectively exclude such events. D-dimers are also elevated in a range of other conditions, for example, during disseminated intravascular coagulation. D-dimer levels may also be associated with prognostic value. For example, highly raised D-dimer levels can be associated with worsening clinical features in coronavirus disease 2019. Thus, D-dimer testing represents a commonly requested hemostasis test, often performed in 24/7 laboratories. Unfortunately, D-dimer testing is neither standardized nor harmonized across manufacturers or laboratories. Indeed, considering reporting units and the magnitude of units, up to 28 different combinations may be reported by laboratories. We provide updated findings for D-dimer testing in our geographic region, using recent data from the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs, an international external quality assessment program, currently with over 450 participants in the D-dimer module. Data show a wide variety of assays in use and variable outcomes in reported numerical values when assessing proficiency samples. D-dimer testing mostly comprised reagents from three main manufacturing suppliers, with a small number of users of reagents from other manufacturers. Reported results showed important differences in numerical values for the same homogeneous tested samples when normalized to a single reporting unit (e.g., mg/L). Nevertheless, despite using different test reagents and reporting, most participants uniformly identified D-dimer values as below or above a "detection" cut-off for samples that were constructed to be below or above most cut-off values. As expected, mixed findings were reported for samples containing levels around expected cut-off values. We hope that our findings, reflecting on the heterogeneity of test reagents and test data, help improve diagnostic testing for D-dimer testing and facilitate harmonization and standardization, in the future.

Venous Thrombosis in Airborne Viral Infections: Is Coronavirus Disease 2019 now Any Different from Influenza?

One of the hallmarks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), particularly in complicated cases (i.e., requiring hospitalization or intensive care support), is persistent hemostasis activation, which may be associated with a vast array of thrombotic episodes involving both the arterial and venous systems. The renewed emphasis on the relationship between viral infections and venous thrombosis paves the way for determining whether a more common and often underestimated infection disease, such as influenza, may also be associated with a significant burden of venous thrombotic episodes, and how this eventual thrombotic risk compares to that seen in COVID-19, both in the past and with newer variants. Our review of studies comparing the burden of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with COVID-19 or influenza revealed that the thrombotic risk appears to be significantly higher in patients with COVID-19 but remains certainly not meaningless in those with influenza, particularly in subjects infected by highly virulent strains (i.e., H1N1), in those who develop pneumonia and require intensive care support. In these specific clinical settings, the adoption of tailored thromboprophylaxis may be indicated though more studies are compellingly needed on this matter. As COVID-19 variants emerge, there is a possibility that the VTE burden of COVID-19 will decrease, and progress to that of other respiratory viruses.

EFLM Task Force Preparation of Labs for Emergencies (TF-PLE) recommendations for reinforcing cyber-security and managing cyber-attacks in medical laboratories.

The healthcare systems are a prime target for cyber-attacks due to the sensitive nature of the information combined with the essential need for continuity of care. Medical laboratories are particularly vulnerable to cyber-attacks for a number of reasons, including the high level of information technology (IT), computerization and digitization. Based on reliable and widespread evidence that medical laboratories may be inadequately prepared for cyber-terrorism, a panel of experts of the Task Force Preparation of Labs for Emergencies (TF-PLE) of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) has recognized the need to provide some general guidance that could help medical laboratories to be less vulnerable and better prepared for the dramatic circumstance of a disruptive cyber-attack, issuing a number of consensus recommendations, which are summarized and described in this opinion paper.

Routine Coagulation.

The term 'routine coagulation' typically applies to hemostasis tests routinely performed in hematology laboratories, often available 24/7, and potentially ordered urgently. These tests would comprise of the prothrombin time (PT), the PT converted to an international normalized ratio, the activated partial thromboplastin time (often called partial thromboplastin time in North American laboratories) and potentially the thrombin time, the D-dimer assay, and fibrinogen assays. Although other tests could feasibly be offered (testing feasible), there are good reasons for not including all of these other tests in all routine coagulation laboratories.

D-dimer diagnostics: can I use any D-dimer assay? Bridging the knowledge-to-action gap.

A State of the Art lecture titled "D-dimer Diagnostics: Can I use any D-dimer assay? Bridging the Knowledge-to-Action gap" was presented at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Congress in 2023, included in the session on the clinical impact of variability in commonly used coagulation assays. Here, we review the role of D-dimer, primarily in the outpatient diagnosis of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) when combined with clinical decision rules. We focus on the recent large management trials that have studied adjustments of VTE exclusion thresholds for D-dimer based on either prior clinical probability of VTE or patient age, and the resultant benefit of reduced imaging for VTE and improved diagnostic efficiency. In this context, we report on the significant variability between D-dimer results and the multiple D-dimer assays in use worldwide using data from international external quality assurance programs. This variability is particularly high at typical VTE exclusion thresholds. We discuss the potential clinical impact of D-dimer assay substitution on accuracy of diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with VTE. Finally, we summarize relevant new data on this topic presented during the 2023 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Congress and outline future priorities urgently needed to harmonize D-dimer results and reporting that will require international collaboration among multiple stakeholders with an overall goal to close this knowledge-to-action gap.

Artificial intelligence in the pre-analytical phase: State-of-the art and future perspectives.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) has become widespread in many areas of science and medicine, including laboratory medicine. Although it seems obvious that the analytical and post-analytical phases could be the most important fields of application in laboratory medicine, a kaleidoscope of new opportunities has emerged to extend the benefits of AI to many manual labor-intensive activities belonging to the pre-analytical phase, which are inherently characterized by enhanced vulnerability and higher risk of errors. These potential applications involve increasing the appropriateness of test prescription (with computerized physician order entry or demand management tools), improved specimen collection (using active patient recognition, automated specimen labeling, vein recognition and blood collection assistance, along with automated blood drawing), more efficient sample transportation (facilitated by the use of pneumatic transport systems or drones, and monitored with smart blood tubes or data loggers), systematic evaluation of sample quality (by measuring serum indices, fill volume or for detecting sample clotting), as well as error detection and analysis. Therefore, this opinion paper aims to discuss the state-of-the-art and some future possibilities of AI in the preanalytical phase.

Testing for the lupus anticoagulant: the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Lupus anticoagulant (LA) represents 1 of the laboratory criteria for classification of patients as having definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). The other 2 laboratory criteria are anticardiolipin antibodies and anti-beta2-glycoprotein I antibodies. At least 1 of these antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) tests need to be positive, with evidence of persistence, together with evidence of at least 1 clinical criterion for APS, before a patient can be classified as having definite APS. LA and other aPL assays are also important for diagnosis or exclusion of APS, as well as for risk stratification, with triple-positive patients carrying the greatest risk. Whereas LA is identified through "uncalibrated" clot-based assays, the other aPL assays (anticardiolipin and anti-beta2-glycoprotein I antibodies) represent immunological assays, identified using calibrated solid-phase methods. Because LA is identified using clot-based assays, it is subject to considerable preanalytical and analytical issues that challenge accurate detection or exclusion of LA. In this narrative review, we take a look at the good, the bad, and the ugly of LA testing, primarily focusing on the last 10 years. Although harmonization of LA testing as a result of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis guidance documents and other international activities has led to improvements in LA detection, many challenges remain. In particular, several anticoagulants, especially direct oral anticoagulants and also vitamin K antagonists, given as therapy to treat the pathophysiological consequences of aPL, especially thrombosis, interfere with LA assays and can generate false-positive or false-negative LA findings. Overcoming these diagnostic errors will require a multifaceted approach with clinicians and laboratories working together.

Simplified Method for Removing Direct Oral Anticoagulant Interference in Mechanical Coagulation Test Systems-A Proof of Concept.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) cause unwanted interference in various hemostasis assays, including lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing, where false positive and false negative identification may occur. DOAC Stop (DS) is an activated charcoal (AC) product used to specifically and effectively adsorb DOACs from test plasma. This process normally requires plasma treatment, centrifugation and plasma separation prior to tests, but inexperienced operators may also inadvertently transfer residual AC particles, thereby potentially adversely affecting clot detection. METHODS: We hypothesized that residual DS might not be problematic for mechanical clot detection. We therefore investigated the potential impact of DS and a new DS liquid (DS-L) product on clotting tests using a mechanical clot detection system. Varying concentrations of DS were added to normal and abnormal plasmas with and without DOAC presence. Clotting tests including PT, APTT and dRVVT were performed directly in the analyzer without plasma/DS centrifugation. RESULTS: DS up to double the recommended treatment level had only minor effects on all test results, despite completely obscuring visibility in the plasma/reagent mix. This confirms that the centrifugation step may be able to be omitted when using mechanical detection systems. CONCLUSIONS: Should DS carryover into treated plasmas occur, this should not cause issues with testing performed on mechanical clot-sensing devices. Moreover, we hypothesize that DS can be used directly in these systems, without the need for centrifugation, thereby simplifying its many potential applications.

D-dimer Levels for the exclusion of pulmonary embolism: making sense of international guideline recommendations.

Several international guidelines provide recommendations around the use of D-dimer testing for exclusion of pulmonary embolism, including the appropriate D-dimer threshold (or cutoff), but there is no consensus among them. We briefly discuss guideline variation, performance characteristics, and limitations of commercially available D-dimer assays in this setting, referencing the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines that recommend immunoassays with high sensitivity (≥97%) and negative predictive value (≥98%). While age-adjusted D-dimer and pretest-adjusted D-dimer are considered a safe strategy across predefined patient subgroups, clinicians need to recognize the different performance characteristics of D-dimer assays to enable safe clinical decisions for their patients. Importantly, D-dimer values must be correlated not only to clinical findings but also interpreted within the context of the accuracy and precision of the specific testing modality, adhering to manufacturer specifications that are approved by regulatory authorities.