4.6 Article

Effect of subcutaneous administration of dalteparin on lupus anticoagulant assays

Journal

THROMBOSIS RESEARCH
Volume 115, Issue 6, Pages 509-517

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2004.11.013

Keywords

lupus anticoagulant assays; low-motecutar weight heparin; heparin neutralization; normalized screening/confirm ratio

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Treatment with unfractionated heparin (UH) is known to affect screening tests for lupus anticoagulant (LA). False positive test results are common because confirmatory steps lack sufficient specificity to distinguish between LA and the presence of heparin. In this study, we wanted to see if therapeutic levels of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) may cause false positive tests for LA or alter the LA test results in LA-positive patients. We also wanted to evaluate the need to include heparin-neutralizing agents in the reagents. Materials and methods: Six healthy subjects without LA and six LA-positive patients were given 100 IU/kg dalteparin subcutaneously (s.c.). Samples for three in-house and two commercially available LA tests were taken before and 4 h after the injection. LA test results were calculated as normalized screening/confirm ratios or as recommended by the manufacturers. Results: With both healthy subjects and LA patients, only small and clinically unimportant differences in mean clotting times and final test results were seen 4 h after subcutaneous dalteparin injections, at anti-FXa activities within the therapeutic range. Conclusions: Our study with dalteparin suggests that LMWH therapy with plasma concentrations within the therapeutic range does not cause false positive tests for LA when normalized screening/confirm ratios are applied; nor do test results for LA-positive patients seem to be significantly altered. Heparin-neutralizing agents did not influence test performance. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available