Preanalytical issues that may cause misdiagnosis in haemophilia and von Willebrand disease.

von Willebrand disease (VWD) and haemophilia represent common inherited or acquired bleeding disorders, but many laboratories and clinicians continue to struggle with their diagnosis or exclusion. Difficulties in achieving a correct diagnosis or exclusion of VWD or haemophilia might be due to analytical issues. Sometimes assays may generate a wrong result (ie an analytical error) or may have limitations in their dynamic range of measurement and/or their level of low analytical sensitivity. Less well recognized is the influence of preanalytical issues on the diagnosis of VWD or haemophilia. Therefore, this narrative review aims to provide an overview of some important preanalytical aspects that may affect the diagnosis of VWD or haemophilia, as well as a range of solutions that may help in mitigating or abrogating their influence. The review includes discussion of the more commonly noted preanalytical issues, such as haemolysis/icterus/lipaemia, and sample collection, processing and transport. However, we also extensively discuss other less well-recognized preanalytical issues, including clinical requests, anticoagulants and anticoagulant therapy, and laboratory test choices to name a few.

Potential misdiagnosis of von Willebrand disease and haemophilia caused by ineffective mixing of thawed plasma.

INTRODUCTION: von Willebrand disease (VWD) reflects a loss or dysfunction in von Willebrand factor (VWF), while haemophilia represents a loss or dysfunction of clotting factors such as factor VIII (FVIII) or FIX. Their diagnosis requires laboratory testing, with this potentially compromised by preanalytical events, including poor sample quality. This study assessed the effect of inadequate mixing as a potential cause of VWD and haemophilia misdiagnosis. METHODS: After completion of requested testing, 48 consecutive patient samples comprising separate aliquots from single collections were individually pooled, appropriately mixed, then frozen in separate aliquots, either at -20°C or -80°C for 2-7 days. Each sample set was then thawed and the separate aliquots subjected to separate mixing protocols (several inversions, blood roller, vortex) vs a non-mix sample, and all aliquots then tested for various VWF and factor assays. RESULTS: Non-mixing led to substantial reduction in VWF and factors in about 25% of samples, that in some cases could lead to misdiagnosis of VWD or haemophilia. Interestingly, there were also some differences observed with respect to different mixing protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified ineffective or variable mixing of thawed plasma samples as potential causes of misdiagnosis of VWD or haemophilia. Further education regarding the importance of appropriate mixing appears warranted.

Type 2M von Willebrand disease - more often misidentified than correctly identified.

INTRODUCTION: Appropriate diagnosis of von Willebrand disease (VWD), including differential identification of qualitative vs. quantitative von Willebrand factor (VWF) defects has important management implications, but remains problematic. AIM: The aim of the study was to assess whether 2M VWD, defining qualitative defects not associated with loss of high molecular weight (HMW) VWF, is often misidentified, given highly variable reported frequency ranging from 0 to ~60% of all type 2 VWD. METHODS: A comparative evaluation of laboratory ability to appropriately identify 2M VWD (n = 4) vs. HMW VWF reduction (n = 4), as sent to participants of an international external quality assessment programme. RESULTS: Laboratories had considerably greater difficulty identifying type 2M VWD, correctly identifying these on average only 29.4% of occasions, with the 70.6% error rate representing use of insufficient test panels (41.7%), misinterpretation of test results (10.0%) and analytical errors (13.3%). One type 2M case, giving a median of 49 U dL(-1) VWF:Ag, was more often misidentified as type 2A/2B VWD (46.7%) than 2M (34.8%). Another 2M case, giving a median of 189 U dL(-1) VWF:Ag, was instead often misidentified as being normal (non-VWD) (36.4%), with identifications of type 2A/2B VWD (13.6%) also represented. In comparison, errors in identification of HMW VWF reduced samples only averaged 11.5%, primarily driven by use of insufficient test panels (6.3%) or misinterpretation of results (4.2%) and infrequently analytical errors (1.0%). CONCLUSION: Type 2M VWD is more often misidentified (70.6%) than correctly identified as 2M VWD (29.4%), and potentially explaining the relative under-reported incidence of 2M VWD in the literature.

The effect of hyperglycaemia on haemostasis testing--a volunteer study.

We investigated whether the contamination of samples with glucose subsequently tested for haemostasis affected the results, including prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time and fibrinogen concentration. Venous blood was collected from 12 healthy subjects and divided into four aliquots, which were subjected to different degrees of contamination with standard glucose solution (0%, 5%, 10%, 20%). With increasing glucose contamination, prothrombin time increased from mean (SD) 11.0 (0.7) s to 11.2 (0.7) s, 11.5 (0.7) s and 12.2 (0.8) s, all p < 0.001. Activated partial thromboplastin time decreased from 32.3 (0.9) s to 30.9 (0.8) s, 30.8 (0.8) s, and 29.7 (0.7) s, all p < 0.001. Fibrinogen concentration decreased from 3.8 (0.7) g.l(-1) to 3.7 (0.6) g.l(-1), 3.6 (0.6) g.l(-1), and 3.4 (0.6) g.l(-1), all p < 0.001. Bias was clinically meaningful from 5% contamination for activated partial thromboplastin time, 10% contamination for prothrombin time and 20% contamination for fibrinogen concentration. We conclude that if glucose contamination of haemostasis samples is suspected or has occurred, the specimens should not be analysed.

Laboratory testing for factor inhibitors.

Inhibitor assays are performed when patients present with unexplained prolonged routine coagulation test times and unexpected and/or unusual bleeding (potential for acquired haemophilia) as well as being a part of normal congenital haemophilia management and monitoring, particularly when bleeding occurs on therapy, or when increments in factor levels post-factor replacement remain lower than expected. In this article, we will describe the assays used, as well as their development, pitfalls in testing such as inter-laboratory variability and false negative/positive results, as well as some strategies for overcoming these pitfalls and potential alternative test approaches. The inter-laboratory coefficient of variation often approaches (and sometimes exceeds) 50%, as evidenced by various external quality assessment groups, and this variability has not improved over recent years. Additional important considerations include appropriate interpretation of test results, repeat testing for confirmation, and assessment of recovery as part of the diagnostic process.

von Willebrand disease and platelet disorders.

The diagnosis and management of bleeding disorders is made difficult by the complexity and variety of disorders, clinical symptoms and bleeding type and severity. von Willebrand disease (VWD) and platelet disorders are disorders of primary haemostasis and together represent the most common inherited bleeding disorders. In this article, we describe the diagnosis of VWD and platelet disorders and the treatment options for VWD.

Difficulties and pitfalls in the laboratory diagnosis of bleeding disorders.

von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder, but variable severity and several classification types mean that diagnosis is often not straightforward. In many countries, the assays are not readily available and/or are not well standardized. The latest methods and the basis of VWD are discussed here, together with information from the international quality assessment programme (IEQAS). Factor XIII deficiency is a rare, but important bleeding disorder, which may be missed or diagnosed late. A discussion and update on this diagnosis is considered in the final section of our review.

Clinical audit of antiphospholipid antibody testing in tertiary practice: towards improved relevance in thrombophilia investigations.

BACKGROUND: The antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune condition characterised by vascular thromboses and/or pregnancy morbidity. Diagnosis of APS typically requires laboratory evidence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Depending on their clinical presentation, affected individuals might be seen by a variety of clinical specialities. AIM: To evaluate clinical ordering patterns for aPL/APS at a tertiary level public facility. METHODS: We performed an audit of internal clinical requests for aPL tests at our institution for a 6-month period. RESULTS: We identified a wide variety of clinical ordering background for aPL, of predominantly obstetric (72/268; 26.9%) or thrombophilic (78/268; 29.1%) patients. Only 11/268 samples (4.1%) were positive for lupus anticoagulant (LA) and 14/268 (5.2%) were positive for anticardiolipin antibody (aCL). The percentage of aCL positivity in the LA-positive group was 46% (5/11). None of the 72 obstetric patients tested was identified to have aPL. Of the 11 LA-positive patients, the reasons identified for testing comprised: prolonged Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (assay) (n= 3), thrombosis (n= 3), APS (n= 2), systemic lupus erythematosus (n= 2), vasculitis (n= 1). CONCLUSION: We determined a wide variety of clinical ordering background for aPL at a tertiary level institution, with an overall low rate (<10%) of aPL positivity among a hospital population of predominantly obstetric or thrombophilic patients. That no positive obstetric aPL cases were identified suggests local clinical ordering guidelines may need review, as also potentially practised at other institutions. We also observed a moderate rate (46%) of coincidence of aCL and LA, in agreement with guidelines indicating that multiple tests are required to identify APS.

'Criteria' aPL tests: report of a task force and preconference workshop at the 13th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies, Galveston, Texas, April 2010.

Current classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) mandate the use of one or more of three positive 'standardized' laboratory assays to detect antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) (viz: anticardiolipin [aCL] IgG and IgM; anti-ß(2)glycoprotein I [anti-ß(2)GPI] antibodies IgG and IgM; and/or a lupus anticoagulant [LAC]), when at least one of the two major clinical manifestations (thrombosis or pregnancy losses) are present. Although, efforts of standardization for these 'criteria' aPL tests have been conducted over the last 27 years, reports of inconsistencies, inter-assay and inter-laboratory variation in the results of aCL, LAC, and anti-ß(2)GPI, and problems with the interpretation and the clinical value of the tests still exist, which affect the consistency of the diagnosis of APS. A Task Force of scientists and pioneers in the field from different countries, subdivided in three working groups, discussed and analyzed critical questions related to 'criteria' aPL tests in an evidence-based manner, during the 13(th) International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies (APLA 2010, April 13-16, 2010, Galveston, TX). These included: review of the standardization and the need for international consensus protocol for aCL and anti-ß(2)GPI tests; the use of monoclonal and/or polyclonal standards in the calibration curve of those tests; and the need for establishment of international units of measurement for anti-ß(2)GPI tests. The group also reviewed the recently updated guidelines for LAC testing, and analyzed and discussed the possibility of stratification of 'criteria' aPL tests as risk factors for APS, as well as the clinical value of single positive vs. multiple aPL positivity. The group members presented, discussed, analyzed data, updated and re-defined those critical questions at a preconference workshop that was open to congress attendees. This report summarizes the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this Task Force.

Direct-to-consumer testing: more risks than opportunities.

As a result of incessant genetic discoveries and remarkable technological advancements, the availability and the consequent consumer's request for genetic testing are growing exponentially, leading to the development of a 'parallel' market, i.e. the direct-to-consumer (DTC) testing, also known as 'direct access testing' (DAT). Analogous to the traditional laboratory diagnostics, drawbacks of DTC testing might arise from any step characterising the total testing process, and include poor control of both appropriateness and preanalytical requirements, potential operation outside national or international regulation for in vitro diagnostic testing, little evidence of quality as well as the risk of transfer of genetic materials from the companies to other entities. Another important issue is the test panels offered to consumers, which are often based on preliminary, speculative or unsupported scientific information. Finally, the potential of this type of testing to generate anxiety or false reassurance should also be carefully considered. Although DTC testing carries some theoretical advantages (e.g. greater consumer autonomy and empowerment), solid clinical studies and costs vs. benefit analyses are needed to definitely establish whether DTC testing might be effective for decreasing the burden of diseases, delay their onset or modify their progression and therefore the clinical outcome.

Characterization of GMP-140 (P-selectin) as a circulating plasma protein.

GMP-140 is a 140-kD granule membrane protein, found in the alpha granules of platelets and the Weibel-Palade bodies of endothelial cells, that is surface expressed on cell activation and mediates neutrophil attachment. Cloning data for GMP-140 from an endothelial library predict a soluble form of the protein, the transcription message for which is also found in platelets. In this study, we report the detection by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay of soluble GMP-140 in plasma centrifuged for 3 h at 100,000 g (to remove platelet microparticles) and confirm its identity by purification from plasma. Plasma concentrations were found to be 0.251 +/- 0.043 micrograms/ml (means +/- SD, n = 10) in normal male controls and 0.175 +/- 0.063 micrograms/ml (means +/- SD, n = 10) in normal female controls. The purified protein had an identical molecular mass (nonreduced) to platelet membrane GMP-140 (approximately 3 kD lower, reduced) and was immunoblotted by polyclonal anti-GMP-140, and the anti-GMP-140 monoclonal antibodies AK4 and AK6. Analytical gel filtration studies indicated that the plasma GMP-140 eluted as a monomer whereas detergent-free, platelet membrane GMP-140 eluted as a tetramer consistent with plasma GMP-140 lacking a transmembrane domain. Purified plasma GMP-140 bound to the same neutrophil receptor as the membrane-bound form, and when immobilized on plastic, bound neutrophils equivalently to immobilized platelet membrane GMP-140. Since it has been shown that fluid-phase GMP-140 is antiinflammatory and downregulates CD18-dependent neutrophil adhesion and respiratory burst, its presence in plasma may be of major importance in preventing the inadvertent activation of neutrophils in the circulation.

Laboratory identification of factor VIII inhibitors in the real world: the experience from Australasia.

The laboratory has a key role in the initial detection of factor inhibitors and an ongoing role in the measurement of inhibitor titres during the course of inhibitor eradication therapy. The most commonly seen factor inhibitors are those directed against factor VIII (FVIII), usually detected either using the original or Nijmegen-modified Bethesda assay. In view of previously demonstrated high variability in laboratory results for inhibitor assays, we have more extensively examined laboratory performance in the identification of FVIII inhibitors. Over the past 3 years, we conducted two questionnaire-based surveys and two wet-challenge surveys utilizing eight samples comprising no FVIII inhibitor (n = 1), or low-titre (n = 2), medium-titre (n = 3) or high-titre (n = 2) FVIII inhibitor. Four samples were tested by 42 laboratories in 2007, and four by 52 laboratories in 2009. High inter-laboratory variation was evident, with CVs around 50% not uncommon, and some 10% of all laboratories (or around 15% of laboratories using Bethesda method) failed to detect low-level inhibitors of around 1 BU mL(-1). Laboratories using the Nijmegen method appeared to perform better than those using a standard Bethesda assay, with lower evident assay variation and no false negatives. There was a wide variety of laboratory practice, with no two laboratories using exactly the same process for testing and interpretation of factor inhibitor findings. In conclusion, our study indicates that there is still much need for standardization and improvement in factor inhibitor detection, and we hope that our findings provide a basis for future improvements in this area.

Tirofiban and activated protein C synergistically inhibit the Instant Blood Mediated Inflammatory Reaction (IBMIR) from allogeneic islet cells exposure to human blood.

Instant blood mediated inflammatory reaction (IBMIR) occurs when islets are exposed to blood and manifests clinically as portal vein thrombosis and graft failure. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC) and platelet inhibition on IBMIR in order to develop a better targeted treatment for this condition. Five thousand human islet cell equivalents (IEQ) were mixed in a PVC loop system with 7 mL of ABO compatible human blood and incubated with rhAPC, either alone or in combination with tirofiban. Admixing human islets and blood caused rapid clot formation, consumption of platelets, leukocytes, fibrinogen, coagulation factors and raised d-dimers. Islets were encased in a fibrin and platelet clot heavily infiltrated with neutrophils. Tirofiban monotherapy was ineffective, whereas rhAPC monotherapy prevented IBMIR in a dose-dependent manner, preserving islet integrity while maintaining platelet and leukocyte counts, fibrinogen and coagulation factor levels, and reducing d-dimer formation. The combination of tirofiban and low-dose rhAPC inhibited IBMIR synergistically with an efficacy equal to high dose rhAPC. Tirofiban and rhAPC worked synergistically to preserve islets, suggesting that co-inhibition of the platelet and coagulation pathways' contribution to thrombin generation is required for the optimal anti-IBMIR effect.

Consensus guidelines on anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I testing and reporting.

Consensus guidelines on anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I (anti-beta2GPI) testing have been developed to help minimise laboratory variation in the performance and reporting of assays for these antibodies. These guidelines include minimum and optional recommendations for the following aspects of anti-beta2GPI testing and reporting: (1) isotype of anti-beta2GPI tested; (2) specimen type; (3) controls and assay precision; (4) calibrators; (5) patient samples; (6) rheumatoid factors and IgM anti-beta2GPI testing; (7) reporting of results; (8) cutoff values; and (9) interpretative comments. Issues related to inter-kit/assay standardisation and the manufacturing process of commercial anti-beta2GPI kits/assays have not been addressed in the current guidelines.