Key result
Lupus anticoagulant detection using APTT and dRVVT after DOAC Remove showed 90% agreement (Cohen kappa 0.12) compared to TSVT/ET on untreated plasma in patients on direct factor Xa inhibitors.
Why the study?
The optimal method of detecting a lupus anticoagulant in patients taking direct factor Xa inhibitor direct oral anticoagulants remains controversial.
Does APTT and dRVVT analysis following DOAC Remove treatment differ from TSVT/ET on untreated plasma for detecting lupus anticoagulant in patients taking direct factor Xa inhibitors?
Cross-Sectional (n=284)
Does APTT and dRVVT analysis following DOAC Remove treatment differ from TSVT/ET on untreated plasma for detecting lupus anticoagulant in patients taking direct factor Xa inhibitors?
There is poor agreement beyond chance (kappa 0.12) between DOAC Remove-treated APTT/dRVVT and neat TSVT/ET for detecting lupus anticoagulant in patients on direct factor Xa inhibitors, highlighting significant diagnostic uncertainty.
DOAC Remove may yield inconsistent LA results by APTT/dRVVT; leaves open validated testing protocols for patients on factor Xa inhibitors.
BACKGROUND: The optimal method of detecting a lupus anticoagulant (LA) for patients taking direct factor Xa inhibitor (DFXaI) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) remains controversial. Methods include charcoal adsorption of the DOACs to allow testing with the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and dilute Russell viper venom time (dRVVT), or use of the DFXaI-insensitive Taipan snake venom time (TSVT) and Ecarin time (ET) assays on neat plasma. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to compare the utility of APTT and dRVVT analysis following DOAC Remove against TSVT/ET on untreated plasma for LA detection in spiked plasmas and routine clinical samples for patients on DFXaIs. PATIENTS/METHODS: Various LA-negative and LA-positive samples were assayed by APTT, dRVVT, and TSVT/ET, and then separately spiked with rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban calibrators to a concentration of ~190 ng/ml and the assays repeated on spiked plasma before and after DOAC Remove treatment. Testing of 284 consecutive samples from DFXaI-anticoagulated patients by APTT/dRVVT and TSVT/ET before and after DOAC Remove treatment was undertaken. RESULTS: In the spiking model, we found that both TSVT/ET and DOAC Remove strategies generally distinguished LA-negative and LA-positive samples, but some false-positive LA results occurred. In the investigation of 284 consecutive patient samples on DFXaIs, the percentage agreement for LA detection in neat samples tested by TSVT/ET versus APTT and dRVVT after DOAC Remove treatment was 90% (Cohen kappa 0.12). CONCLUSION: Our data highlight uncertainty and disagreement for testing LA in patients on DFXaI. Further studies are required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
White et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Lupus anticoagulant detection in patients taking direct factor Xa inhibitors (n=284). APTT and dRVVT analysis following DOAC Remove vs. TSVT/ET on untreated plasma was evaluated on Percentage agreement for LA detection (Cohen kappa 0.12). Lupus anticoagulant detection using APTT and dRVVT after DOAC Remove showed 90% agreement (Cohen kappa 0.12) compared to TSVT/ET on untreated plasma in patients on direct factor Xa inhibitors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: