Assay validity of point-of-care platelet function tests in thrombocytopenic blood samples

INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care (POC) platelet function tests are faster and easier to perform than in-depth assessment by flow cytometry. At low platelet counts, however, POC tests are prone to assess platelet function incorrectly. Lower limits of platelet count required to obtain valid test results were defined and a testing method to facilitate comparability between different tests was established. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed platelet function in whole blood samples of healthy volunteers at decreasing platelet counts (> 100, 80-100, 50-80, 30-50 and < 30 x10(9)/L) using two POC tests: impedance aggregometry and in-vitro bleeding time. Flow cytometry served as the gold standard. The number of platelets needed to reach 50% of the maximum function (ED(50)) and the lower reference limit (ED(ref)) were calculated to define limits of test validity. RESULTS: The minimal platelet count required for reliable test results was 100 x10(9)/L for impedance aggregometry and in-vitro bleeding time but only 30 x10(9)/L for flow cytometry. Comparison of ED(50) and ED(ref) showed significantly lower values for flow cytometry than either POC test (P value < 0.05) but no difference between POC tests nor between the used platelet agonists within a test method. CONCLUSION: Calculating the ED(50) and ED(ref) provides an effective way to compare values from different platelet function assays. Flow cytometry enables correct platelet function testing as long as platelet count is > 30 x10(9)/L whereas impedance aggregometry and in-vitro bleeding time are inconsistent unless platelet count is > 100 x10(9)/L.