4.7 Review

Laboratory Diagnosis of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Insights and Hindrances

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 11, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11082164

关键词

anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I antibodies; anticardiolipin antibodies; antiphospholipid anti-bodies; antiphospholipid syndrome; interference; lupus anticoagulant; non-criteria antiphospholipid antibodies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The diagnosis and risk stratification of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) are complex and require various laboratory tests. Efforts to standardize and optimize these tests are ongoing to improve diagnostic accuracy and repeatability. There are challenges in laboratory testing, such as interference by anticoagulation therapy for LAC detection and high variability due to different reagents and detection techniques.
Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) requires the presence of a clinical criterion (thrombosis and/or pregnancy morbidity), combined with persistently circulating antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Currently, laboratory criteria aPL consist of lupus anticoagulant (LAC), anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL) IgG/IgM, and anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I antibodies (a beta 2GPI) IgG/IgM. Diagnosis and risk stratification of APS are complex and efforts to standardize and optimize laboratory tests have been ongoing since the initial description of the syndrome. LAC detection is based on functional coagulation assays, while aCL and a beta 2GPI are measured with immunological solid-phase assays. LAC assays are especially prone to interference by anticoagulation therapy, but strategies to circumvent this interference are promising. Alternative techniques such as thrombin generation for LAC detection and to estimate LAC pathogenicity have been suggested, but are not applicable yet in routine setting. For aCL and a beta 2GPI, a lot of different assays and detection techniques such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent and chemiluminescent assays are available. Furthermore, a lack of universal calibrators or standards results in high variability between the different solid-phase assays. Other non-criteria aPL such as anti-domain I beta 2 glycoprotein I and antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies have been suggested for risk stratification purposes in APS, while their added value to diagnostic criteria seems limited. In this review, we will describe laboratory assays for diagnostic and risk evaluation in APS, integrating applicable guidelines and classification criteria. Current insights and hindrances are addressed with respect to both laboratory and clinical implications.

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

4.7
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