How Trustworthy is Light Transmittance Platelet Aggregometry With Low Platelet Count Samples? Insights From Test Replicates and Retrospective Analysis of Several Decades of Diagnostic Samples.

Catherine P M Hayward, Rabab Al Dawood, Lindsay Wice, Karen A Moffat
{"title":"How Trustworthy is Light Transmittance Platelet Aggregometry With Low Platelet Count Samples? Insights From Test Replicates and Retrospective Analysis of Several Decades of Diagnostic Samples.","authors":"Catherine P M Hayward, Rabab Al Dawood, Lindsay Wice, Karen A Moffat","doi":"10.1111/ijlh.14518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Light transmission platelet aggregometry (LTA) is useful to diagnose platelet function disorders (PFD). We evaluated the precision and reproducibility of LTA with low platelet count platelet-rich plasma (LPRP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>LPRP maximal aggregation (MA) precision for informative agonists and LTA reproducibility were assessed using multiple replicates for adjusted control LPRP (CLPRP) and retrospective analysis of several decades of consecutive patient LPRP (PLPRP) and CLPRP tests with replicates between and/or within tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intra-subject CLPRP had acceptable MA CVs and tracings unless platelets were ≤ 25 × 10<sup>9</sup>/L. Among tests with replicates, PLPRP with ≤ 25 × 10<sup>9</sup> platelets/L were uncommon (6/247 samples) and 5/6 showed pathognomonic Bernard-Soulier syndrome (BSS) findings. Among evaluated patients (n = 195; diverse diagnoses), 44.6% had abnormal LTA findings on ≥ 1 tests after excluding single, within-test MA outliers in 21/194 PLPRP and 2/27 CLPRP tests. Median, intra-subject, within-test coefficients of variation (CVs) for PLPRP and CLPRP MA responses to informative agonists were acceptable for most agonists, with higher CV for 0.5 mg/mL ristocetin, weak agonists, and impaired responses, and only small differences between MA estimates across agonists. Between-test agreement was good for MA responses, with 80.5% of patients and 98.1% of controls having consistent overall LTA findings, with significantly more patients than controls having consistently abnormal LTA findings (46.3% vs. 0%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Diagnostic LTA with LPRP has acceptable precision and reproducibility when evaluated with informative agonists. Nonetheless, caution is warranted when testing samples with ≤ 25 × 10<sup>9</sup> platelets/L, which often show BSS findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":94050,"journal":{"name":"International journal of laboratory hematology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of laboratory hematology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.14518","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Light transmission platelet aggregometry (LTA) is useful to diagnose platelet function disorders (PFD). We evaluated the precision and reproducibility of LTA with low platelet count platelet-rich plasma (LPRP).

Methods: LPRP maximal aggregation (MA) precision for informative agonists and LTA reproducibility were assessed using multiple replicates for adjusted control LPRP (CLPRP) and retrospective analysis of several decades of consecutive patient LPRP (PLPRP) and CLPRP tests with replicates between and/or within tests.

Results: Intra-subject CLPRP had acceptable MA CVs and tracings unless platelets were ≤ 25 × 109/L. Among tests with replicates, PLPRP with ≤ 25 × 109 platelets/L were uncommon (6/247 samples) and 5/6 showed pathognomonic Bernard-Soulier syndrome (BSS) findings. Among evaluated patients (n = 195; diverse diagnoses), 44.6% had abnormal LTA findings on ≥ 1 tests after excluding single, within-test MA outliers in 21/194 PLPRP and 2/27 CLPRP tests. Median, intra-subject, within-test coefficients of variation (CVs) for PLPRP and CLPRP MA responses to informative agonists were acceptable for most agonists, with higher CV for 0.5 mg/mL ristocetin, weak agonists, and impaired responses, and only small differences between MA estimates across agonists. Between-test agreement was good for MA responses, with 80.5% of patients and 98.1% of controls having consistent overall LTA findings, with significantly more patients than controls having consistently abnormal LTA findings (46.3% vs. 0%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Diagnostic LTA with LPRP has acceptable precision and reproducibility when evaluated with informative agonists. Nonetheless, caution is warranted when testing samples with ≤ 25 × 109 platelets/L, which often show BSS findings.

低血小板计数样本的透光血小板聚集法可信度如何?从测试重复和回顾性分析几十年的诊断样本的见解。
简介:光透射血小板聚集测定(LTA)是诊断血小板功能障碍(PFD)的有效方法。我们评估了低血小板计数富血小板血浆(LPRP) LTA的精度和再现性。方法:通过调整对照LPRP (CLPRP)的多个重复,以及对数十年连续患者LPRP (PLPRP)和CLPRP试验的回顾性分析(试验之间和/或试验内重复),评估LPRP信息激动剂的最大聚集(MA)精度和LTA重现性。结果:除非血小板≤25 × 109/L,否则受试者内CLPRP具有可接受的MA cv和示图。在重复试验中,血小板≤25 × 109 /L的PLPRP少见(6/247份),5/6份呈病理型Bernard-Soulier综合征(BSS)。在评估的患者中(n = 195;在排除21/194次PLPRP和2/27次CLPRP试验中单个、试验内MA异常值后,44.6%的LTA在≥1次试验中出现异常。PLPRP和CLPRP对信息激动剂的MA反应的中位、受试者内、试验内变异系数(CV)对于大多数激动剂来说是可以接受的,0.5 mg/mL的利司汀、弱激动剂和受损反应的CV更高,并且不同激动剂之间的MA估计只有很小的差异。MA反应的检验间一致性良好,80.5%的患者和98.1%的对照组具有一致的总体LTA结果,明显多于对照组具有一致的异常LTA结果(46.3%对0%;结论:LPRP诊断LTA与信息性激动剂评估时具有可接受的准确性和可重复性。尽管如此,当检测≤25 × 109血小板/L的样本时,需要谨慎,这通常显示BSS的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信