Cited by 31Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsHeparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis

Optimisation of lupus anticoagulant tests: should test samples always be mixed with normal plasma?

Pennings, Maarten, de Groot, Philip, Meijers, Joost, Huisman, Albert, Derksen, Ronald, Urbanus, Rolf·2014·Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Abstract

Coagulation factor deficiencies are thought to interfere with the detection of the phospholipid-dependent coagulation inhibitor known as lupus anticoagulant (LA). Treatment with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in particular, is thought to preclude accurate LA assessment. For this reason, the procedure to detect LA includes a mixing test, in which coagulation factor deficiencies are corrected by mixing samples with an equal volume of normal plasma. Despite these mixing tests, interpretation of LA test results is considered difficult in patients receiving high intensity VKA treatment. As a result, VKA treatment is often temporarily discontinued to allow LA assessment. However, whether coagulation factor deficiencies influence LA test results is unclear. We found that neither deficiency of a single coagulation factor, nor a functional coagulation factor deficiency due to high intensity VKA treatment, resulted in false positive dRVVT- or APTT-based (silica clotting time; SCT) LA test results. LA was readily detected in unmixed samples from VKA-treated LA-positive patients with both dRVVT and SCT reagents. VKA treatment caused an underestimation of the strength of the LA with SCT reagents, but did not lead to misclassification of LA status. Although mixing with normal plasma during both screen and confirm tests allowed more accurate assessment of the strength of the LA with SCT reagents in samples with an international normalised >2.5, the mixing procedure itself lead to misclassifica…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1160/th14-02-0122

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pennings, M., de Groot, P., Meijers, J., Huisman, A., Derksen, R., & Urbanus, R.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Published
2014
Volume
112
Issue
10
Pages
736-742
ISSN
  • 0340-6245 (ISSN-L)
  • 2567-689X
OpenAlex
W1993111202
Cited by
31
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3
FWCI
4.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Thrombosis and Haemostasis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Dutch Arthritis Foundation (10–1–307)
  • Dutch Heart Foundation (2010T068)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Blood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis
Keywords
lupus anticoagulant, mixing test, vitamin K antagonists, coagulation factor deficiency, activated partial thromboplastin time, anticoagulation
MeSH terms
Blood Coagulation, Blood Coagulation Disorders, Blood Coagulation Factors, Blood Coagulation Tests, False Positive Reactions, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Vitamin K, Lupus Coagulation Inhibitor, Antiphospholipid Syndrome, Clinical Laboratory Techniques, International Normalized Ratio

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review