Cargando…

Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice

The updated international consensus criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) are useful for scientific clinical studies. However, there remains a need for diagnostic criteria for routine clinical use. We audited the results of routine antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) in a cohort of 19...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gardiner, C, Hills, J, Machin, SJ, Cohen, H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22988029
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0961203312460722
_version_ 1782327732664795136
author Gardiner, C
Hills, J
Machin, SJ
Cohen, H
author_facet Gardiner, C
Hills, J
Machin, SJ
Cohen, H
author_sort Gardiner, C
collection PubMed
description The updated international consensus criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) are useful for scientific clinical studies. However, there remains a need for diagnostic criteria for routine clinical use. We audited the results of routine antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) in a cohort of 193 consecutive patients with aPL positivity-based testing for lupus anticoagulant (LA), IgG and IgM anticardiolipin (aCL) and anti-ß(2)glycoprotein-1 antibodies (aß(2)GPI). Medium/high-titre aCL/aβ(2)GPI was defined as >99th percentile. Low-titre aCL/aβ(2)GPI positivity (>95(th )< 99(th) percentile) was considered positive for obstetric but not for thrombotic APS. One hundred of the 145 patients fulfilled both clinical and laboratory criteria for definite APS. Twenty-six women with purely obstetric APS had persistent low-titre aCL and/or aβ(2)GPI. With the inclusion of these patients, 126 of the 145 patients were considered to have APS. Sixty-seven out of 126 patients were LA-negative, of whom 12 had aCL only, 37 had aβ(2)GPI only and 18 positive were for both. The omission of aCL or aβ(2)GPI testing from investigation of APS would have led to a failure to diagnose APS in 9.5% and 29.4% of patients, respectively. Our data suggest that LA, aCL and aβ(2)GPI testing are all required for the accurate diagnosis of APS and that low-titre antibodies should be included in the diagnosis of obstetric APS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4108293
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41082932014-07-28 Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice Gardiner, C Hills, J Machin, SJ Cohen, H Lupus Papers The updated international consensus criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) are useful for scientific clinical studies. However, there remains a need for diagnostic criteria for routine clinical use. We audited the results of routine antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) in a cohort of 193 consecutive patients with aPL positivity-based testing for lupus anticoagulant (LA), IgG and IgM anticardiolipin (aCL) and anti-ß(2)glycoprotein-1 antibodies (aß(2)GPI). Medium/high-titre aCL/aβ(2)GPI was defined as >99th percentile. Low-titre aCL/aβ(2)GPI positivity (>95(th )< 99(th) percentile) was considered positive for obstetric but not for thrombotic APS. One hundred of the 145 patients fulfilled both clinical and laboratory criteria for definite APS. Twenty-six women with purely obstetric APS had persistent low-titre aCL and/or aβ(2)GPI. With the inclusion of these patients, 126 of the 145 patients were considered to have APS. Sixty-seven out of 126 patients were LA-negative, of whom 12 had aCL only, 37 had aβ(2)GPI only and 18 positive were for both. The omission of aCL or aβ(2)GPI testing from investigation of APS would have led to a failure to diagnose APS in 9.5% and 29.4% of patients, respectively. Our data suggest that LA, aCL and aβ(2)GPI testing are all required for the accurate diagnosis of APS and that low-titre antibodies should be included in the diagnosis of obstetric APS. SAGE Publications 2013-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4108293/ /pubmed/22988029 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0961203312460722 Text en © The Author(s), 2012. Reprints and permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (http://www.uk.sagepub.com/aboutus/openaccess.htm).
spellingShingle Papers
Gardiner, C
Hills, J
Machin, SJ
Cohen, H
Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice
title Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice
title_full Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice
title_fullStr Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice
title_full_unstemmed Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice
title_short Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice
title_sort diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome in routine clinical practice
topic Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22988029
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0961203312460722
work_keys_str_mv AT gardinerc diagnosisofantiphospholipidsyndromeinroutineclinicalpractice
AT hillsj diagnosisofantiphospholipidsyndromeinroutineclinicalpractice
AT machinsj diagnosisofantiphospholipidsyndromeinroutineclinicalpractice
AT cohenh diagnosisofantiphospholipidsyndromeinroutineclinicalpractice