Analysis of Clinical Characteristics and Diagnostic Indicators in Patients With Heparin-induced Thrombocytopenia After Cardiac Surgery

WANG Guoqiang, YUE Pinli, ZHU Guoyan, XU Qiang, WANG Ximing, SONG Danyu, GAO Zhangwei, WANG Yue, LIU Jianru, ZHAN

Abstract

Objective 

To investigate the diagnosis rate of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), the incidence of new thrombosis, the dynamic evolution pattern of platelets, and the clinical characteristics in patients with suspected HIT after cardiac surgery; and to evaluate the diagnostic value of HIT antibodies (HIT-Ab), 4T's score, and Lillo-Le Louet (LLL) score for HIT.

Methods 

A retrospective cohort study was conducted. A total of 307 patients with suspected HIT after cardiac surgery at Fuwai Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from April 2023 to December 2024 were included. Clinical and laboratory data were collected. All patients underwent 4T's score, LLL score, and HIT-Ab testing. Patients were divided into the non-HIT group (n = 269) and the HIT group (n = 38) based on the final clinical diagnosis. The platelet evolution patterns and other clinical characteristics of the two groups were compared. HIT-Ab concentration was divided into four groups: negative (< 1.0 U/mL, n = 257), weakly positive (1.0-4.9 U/mL, n = 34), moderately positive (5.0-9.9 U/mL, n = 11), and strongly positive (≥ 10 U/mL, n = 5). Differences in the incidence of new thrombosis and the diagnosis rate of HIT among the groups were analyzed, and the diagnostic efficacy of HIT-Ab concentration, 4T's score, and LLL score for HIT was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

Results 

The diagnosis rate of HIT was 12.38% (38/307), and the incidence of new thrombosis in the HIT group was 63.16%, higher than the 34.57% in the non-HIT group (P < 0.001). Among HIT patients, 76.32% showed a biphasic decline pattern of platelets (pattern A), and their risk of HIT was significantly higher than that of patients with pattern B (odds ratio [OR] = 10.32, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.64-22.95). The incidence of new thrombosis increased stepwise with higher HIT-Ab concentration (32.7% in the negative group to 100% in the strongly positive group, P < 0.001), and the diagnosis rate of HIT increased from 0 in the negative group to 64.71% in the weakly positive group, reaching 100% in the moderate/strong positive group. The areas under the ROC curves for HIT-Ab concentration, 4T's score, and LLL score for diagnosing HIT were 0.996 (95% CI: 0.991-1.000), 0.799 (95% CI: 0.727-0.870), and 0.860 (95% CI: 0.811-0.908), respectively. When the HIT-Ab concentration was 1 U/mL, the diagnostic sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) were both 100%. Compared with the traditional diagnostic criteria for high-risk HIT populations (4T's score cutoff of 4, LLL score cutoff of 2), the optimal cutoff value of 4T's score selected by the maximum Youden index was 5, and the optimal cutoff value of LLL score was 3.

Conclusion 

The incidence of new thrombosis in patients with suspected HIT after cardiac surgery increases stepwise with higher HIT-Ab levels. The diagnostic value of the LLL score for HIT is superior to that of the 4T's score. HIT-Ab testing has high sensitivity and negative predictive value, making it a reliable tool for guiding early discontinuation of heparin and excluding HIT. Combining HIT-Ab concentration, platelet evolution pattern, and clinical scores helps more accurately identify HIT risk, initiate alternative anticoagulation therapy, and optimize anticoagulation management strategies.

 

Keywords: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, Cardiac surgery, Thrombosis, HIT antibodies. Thrombocytopenia 

 

References


FINCKH A, GILBERT B, HODKINSON B, et al. Global epidemiology of rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol, 2022, 18(10): 591-602. doi: 10. 1038/s41584-022-00827-y.

WANG P, ZHANG Y, LEI H, et al. Hyaluronic acid-based M1 macrophage targeting and environmental responsive drug releasing nanoparticle for enhanced treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Carbohydr Polym, 2023, 316: 121018. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2023.121018.

Di MATTEO A, BATHON J M, EMERY P. Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet, 2023, 402(10416): 2019-2033. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23) 01525-8.

ALETAHA D, SMOLEN J S. Diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis: a review. JAMA, 2018, 320(13): 1360-1372. doi: 10.1001/jama. 2018.13103.

SMOLEN J S, ALETAHA D, MCINNES I B. Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet, 2016, 388(10055): 2023-2038. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16) 30173-8.

MARCUCCI E, BARTOLONI E, ALUNNO A, et al. Extra-articular rheumatoid arthritis. Reumatismo, 2018, 70(4): 212-224. doi: 10.4081/reumatismo.2018.1106.

RIDGLEY L A, ANDERSON A E, PRATT A G. What are the dominant cytokines in early rheumatoid arthritis? Curr Opin Rheumatol, 2018, 30(2): 207-214. doi: 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000470.

MCINNES I B, SCHETT G. Cytokines in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Immunol, 2007, 7(6): 429-442. doi: 10. 1038/nri2094.

MATEEN S, ZAFAR A, MOIN S, et al. Understanding the role of cytokines in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Chim Acta, 2016, 455: 161-171. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2016.02.010.

WEN J, LI H, DAI H, et al. Intra-articular nanoparticles based therapies for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis management. Mater Today Bio, 2023, 19: 100597. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2023.100597.

GUO R, WANG L, HUANG J, et al. Ultrasound-targeted microbubble destruction-mediated cell-mimetic nanodrugs for treating rheumatoid arthritis. ACS Biomater Sci Eng, 2023, 9(6): 3670-3679. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.3c00475.

AMAN R M, ZAGHLOUL R A, ELSAED W M, et al. In vitro-in vivo assessments of apocynin-hybrid nanoparticle-based gel as an effective nanophytomedicine for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Drug Deliv Transl Res, 2023, 13(11): 2903-2929. doi: 10.1007/s13346-023-01360-5.

DING Q, HU W, WANG R, et al. Signaling pathways in rheumatoid arthritis: implications for targeted therapy. Signal Transduct Target Ther, 2023, 8(1): 68. doi: 10.1038/s41392-023-01331-9.

SMOLEN J S, ALETAHA D, BIJLSMA J W J, et al. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis, 2010, 69(4): 631-637. doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.123919.

PINCUS T, YAZICI Y, SOKKA T, et al. Methotrexate as the "anchor drug" for the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol, 2003, 21(5 Suppl 31): S179-S185.

DOUMEN M, PAZMINO S, BERTRAND D, et al. Glucocorticoids in rheumatoid arthritis: balancing benefits and harm by leveraging the therapeutic window of opportunity. Joint Bone Spine, 2023, 90(3): 105491. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2022.105491.

GRAUDAL N, JÜRGENS G. Similar effects of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, glucocorticoids, and biologic agents on radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis: meta-analysis of 70 randomized placebo-controlled or drug-controlled studies, including 112 comparisons. Arthritis Rheum, 2010, 62(10): 2852-2863. doi: 10. 1002/art.27592.

WASSENBERG S, RAU R, STEINFELD P, et al. Very low-dose prednisolone in early rheumatoid arthritis retards radiographic progression over two years: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum, 2005, 52(11): 3371-3380. doi: 10.1002/art.21421.

WANG W, ZHOU H, LIU L. Side effects of methotrexate therapy for rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review. Eur J Med Chem, 2018, 158: 502-516. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2018.09.027.

GUPTA A, LEE J, GHOSH T, et al. Polymeric hydrogels for controlled drug delivery to treat arthritis. Pharmaceutics, 2022, 14(3): 540. doi: 10. 3390/pharmaceutics14030540.

TANG Y, WU Z, GUO R, et al. Ultrasound-augmented anti-inflammatory exosomes for targeted therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. J Mater Chem B, 2022, 10(38): 7862-7874. doi: 10.1039/d2tb01219g.

HUA C, BUTTGEREIT F, COMBE B. Glucocorticoids in rheumatoid arthritis: current status and future studies. RMD Open, 2020, 6(1): e000536. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2017-000536.

HOES J N, JACOBS J W, BOERS M, et al. EULAR evidence-based recommendations on the management of systemic glucocorticoid therapy in rheumatic diseases. Ann Rheum Dis, 2007, 66(12): 1560-1567. doi: 10.1136/ard.2007.072157.

EMERY P, POPE J E, KRUGER K, et al. Efficacy of monotherapy with biologics and JAK inhibitors for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. Adv Ther, 2018, 35(10): 1535-1563. doi: 10.1007/s12325-018-0757-2.

SMOLEN J S, LANDEWÉ R B M, BERGSTRA S A, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2022 update. Ann Rheum Dis, 2023, 82(1): 3-18. doi: 10.1136/ard-2022-223356.

WANG F, SUN L, WANG S, et al. Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc, 2020, 95(7): 1404-1419. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.01.039.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.