4.6 Article

Recommendations for clinical laboratory testing for protein C deficiency, for the subcommittee on plasma coagulation inhibitors of the ISTH

期刊

JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 271-277

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1111/jth.14667

关键词

antigen assay; chromogenic assay; clotting assay; guideline; hypercoagulability; protein C; venous thromboembolism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inherited protein C (PC) deficiency increases risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) by 5 to 10-fold in thrombosis-prone families; however, heterozygous PC deficiency alone does not determine that a subject has thrombophilia. Protein C deficient subjects, who lack additional inherited risk factors such as factor V Leiden or have no major acquired risk factors, may not suffer from VTE. In addition, PC deficiency may be acquired, often due to vitamin K antagonist treatment or liver disease. In contrast, homozygous or compound heterozygous PC deficiencies are rare and serious disorders, and affected infants are often in families with no history of PC deficiency or thrombosis. Laboratories commonly use the chromogenic PC assay to diagnose deficiency. Chromogenic assay is recommended due to its good specificity, but this assay fails to detect the rare type 2b deficiency where the defect is due to poor interaction with calcium ions, phospholipid, protein S, and factor Va and factor VIIIa. The clotting-based assay of PC is capable of detecting type 2b deficiency but it has reduced specificity. Importantly, PC level varies with age, adult reference ranges cannot be applied to babies or children and levels may not reach those of adults even in adolescence. Pre-analytical variables in the specimen affect measurement of PC, and can be assay-dependent; for example, a partially clotted sample will have falsely raised PC level by chromogenic assay but reduced level by clotting-based assay. Direct oral anticoagulants falsely raise PC level in the clotting-based assay but the standard chromogenic assay is unaffected.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据