Key result
Diagnostic approaches for von Willebrand disease varied significantly among laboratories, with 6 to 60% of participants indicating an incorrect classification for external quality assessment samples.
Why the study?
Multiple tests and correct interpretation are needed to diagnose von Willebrand disease, but insight into laboratory approaches toward diagnosis was needed.
Cross-Sectional
Yes
There is significant heterogeneity in diagnostic approaches and cutoff values for von Willebrand disease among laboratories, highlighting the need for harmonization to improve diagnostic accuracy.
Refined VWF test interpretation may aid VWD subtyping; leaves open need for standardized diagnostic algorithms.
Background Reduced or dysfunctional von Willebrand factor (VWF) may lead to von Willebrand disease (VWD), which is a common inherited bleeding disorder. VWD is classified into three major types: type 1 is a partial quantitative deficiency of VWF, type 3 is a complete quantitative deficiency of VWF, and type 2 consists of qualitative abnormalities of VWF. To arrive at a correct VWD diagnosis, multiple tests and a correct interpretation of these tests are needed. Aim The aim of the present study was to gain insight into the approach of laboratories toward VWD diagnosis. Methods Data from four samples of the external quality assessment (EQA) VWF surveys of the ECAT (External Quality Control for Assays and Tests) were evaluated. Furthermore, results were analyzed of a questionnaire that was sent to hemostasis laboratories about VWD diagnostic approaches. Results For most EQA samples, the majority of participants indicated the correct classification. However, 6 to 60% indicated another classification. For all samples, significant differences in VWF results were observed between the correct and incorrect classifications. The questionnaire demonstrated that the testing approach varied between the laboratories, especially for parameters that were essential for discrimination between VWD type 1 and healthy individuals, as well as the cutoff values used to discriminate VWD types 1 and 2. Conclusions Diagnosis of VWD is heterogeneous in diagnostic approach, guidelines, and cutoff values within large ranges of VWF results between laboratories. Harmonization of approaches and increased accuracy of VWF measurements may help to establish a correct diagnosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hollestelle et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in von Willebrand disease (VWD). Diagnostic approaches and classification of VWD was evaluated on Correct classification of VWD. Diagnostic approaches for von Willebrand disease varied significantly among laboratories, with 6 to 60% of participants indicating an incorrect classification for external quality assessment samples.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: