1.
The Pitfalls of Global Hemostasis Assays in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms and Future Challenges
Tiu A, Chiasakul T, Kessler CM
Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis. 2023
Abstract
Venous and arterial thromboembolism are major complications of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), comprising polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF). Global hemostasis assays, including thrombin generation assay (TGA), rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), and thromboelastography (TEG), have been proposed as biomarkers to assess the hypercoagulability and thrombotic risk stratification in MPNs. We performed a systematic literature review on the parameters of TGA, ROTEM, and TEG and their association with thrombotic events and treatment strategies in MPNs. Thirty-two studies (all cross-sectional) were included, which collectively enrolled 1,062 controls and 1,608 MPN patients. Among the 13 studies that reported arterial or venous thrombosis, the overall thrombosis rate was 13.8% with 6 splanchnic thromboses reported. Out of the 27 TGA studies, there was substantial heterogeneity in plasma preparation and trigger reagents employed in laboratory assays. There was a trend toward increased peak height among all MPN cohorts versus controls and higher endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) between ET patients versus controls. There was an overall trend toward lower ETP between PV and PMF patients versus. controls. There were no substantial differences in ETP between JAK2-positive versus JAK2-negative MPNs, prior history versus negative history of thrombotic events, and among different treatment strategies. Of the three ROTEM studies, there was a trend toward higher maximum clot firmness and shorter clot formation times for all MPNs versus controls. The three TEG studies had mixed results. We conclude that the ability of parameters from global hemostasis assays to predict for hypercoagulability events in MPN patients is inconsistent and inconclusive. Further prospective longitudinal studies are needed to validate these biomarker tools so that thrombotic potential could be utilized as a primary endpoint of such studies.
2.
Postoperative bleeding in essential thrombocytosis patients with colorectal cancer: Case report and literature review
Varela C, Nassr M, Razak A, Yang SY, Kim NK
International journal of surgery case reports. 2021;86:106374
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE Essential thrombocythemia (ET) is a myeloproliferative disorder characterized by increased platelet count and a high risk of bleeding or thrombotic events due to platelet dysfunction. Patients with ET are treated according to their risk of complications with cytoreductive or anti-aggregant treatment. Neither guidelines for oncologic patients nor perioperative management of patients with ET have been determined. CASE PRESENTATION A 41-year-old female patient with ET who had alternating constipation and diarrhea was referred after a screening colonoscopy diagnosing a locally advanced rectosigmoid junction colon adenocarcinoma with liver metastases. Systemic preoperative chemotherapy was indicated. The patient underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection plus volume-preserving right lobectomy of the liver. Postoperative bleeding of the internal iliac artery (IIA) associated with hematoma at the lower pelvic cavity was diagnosed and treated by interventional radiology; the patient was discharged without other complications 16 days after surgery. CLINICAL DISCUSSION ET has been related to the development of hematologic complications or second non-hematologic malignancies. A systematic review was conducted to seek guidance for the management of such patients in the perioperative period. Special perioperative care must be taken, and complications management should avoid further hemorrhages or cloth formation. CONCLUSION Under oncologic and hematological guidance, minimally invasive surgery and non-invasive management of complications are advised in the lack of published perioperative management guidelines of ET patients with colorectal cancer.
3.
Perioperative laboratory monitoring in congenital haemophilia patients with inhibitors: a systematic literature review
Hart, D. P., Hay, C. R. M., Liesner, R., Tobaruela, G., Du-Mont, B., Makris, M.
Blood Coagulation & Fibrinolysis : An International Journal in Haemostasis and Thrombosis. 2019;30(7):309-323
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Although the use of clotting factor concentrates is the mainstay of haemophilia care, the development of inhibitors complicates disease management. Perioperative management of patients with inhibitors is therefore a challenge. A systematic literature review was performed to identify literature reporting on the perioperative monitoring and management of haemophilia. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched from database inception to 26 March 2018. Recent congress proceedings were also searched. Titles and abstracts, then full texts, were screened for relevance by two reviewers. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Of the 2033 individual entries identified, 86 articles met the inclusion criteria. The identified studies were screened again to find articles reporting perioperative laboratory monitoring in patients with congenital haemophilia A or B, resulting in 24 articles undergoing data extraction. Routine perioperative assay monitoring practices were the most commonly reported (n = 20/24); thrombin generation assay was the least commonly reported (n = 2/24). Other monitoring practices described were factor VII and factor VIII coagulation activity (n = 8/24, n = 5/24, respectively), and thromboelastography or rotational thromboelastometry assessments (n = 3/24). The impact of monitoring on treatment decisions was, however, rarely reported. In conclusion, many methods of perioperative monitoring of haemophilia patients with inhibitors have been identified in this review, yet there is a lack of reporting in larger scale cohort studies. More detailed reporting on the impact of monitoring outcomes on treatment decisions is also needed to share best practice, particularly as new therapeutic agents emerge.
4.
Intra-patient variability of thromboelastographic parameters following in vivo and ex vivo administration of recombinant activated factor VII in haemophilia patients. A multi-centre, randomised trial
Kenet G, Stenmo CB, Blemings A, Wegert W, Goudemand J, Krause M, Schramm W, Kirchmaier C, Martinowitz U
Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2010;103((2):):351-9.
Abstract
Thromboelastography methods have been used to predict or monitor treatment of haemophilia patients with recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa). However, neither of the two thromboelastographic methods (ROTEM and TEG) has as yet been validated. This multi-centre, randomised trial compared both methods in terms of intra- and inter- patient variability following in vivo and ex vivo rFVIIa administration to haemophilia A and B patients with and without inhibitors. Patients ((3)16 years old) received the same intravenous rFVIIa dose (45, 90 or 180 microg/kg) twice, 1-12 weeks apart. Blood samples were collected pre-dose and 15, 60, 120 and 240 minutes post-dose for ROTEM and TEG analysis. Pre-dose samples were also spiked ex vivo with rFVIIa (0. 6, 1. 2 or 2. 4 microg/ml), to correspond to the three in vivo doses. Twenty-six haemophilia A and four haemophilia B patients were enrolled. A significant treatment effect was observed with in vivo rFVIIa (p<0. 05) with more pronounced effects in inhibitor (n=14) versus non-inhibitor (n=16) patients. There was a strong positive correlation between ROTEM and TEG parameters. Intra- and inter-patient variation was large for all thromboelastography parameters at all time points and rFVIIa doses. Intra-patient variation was generally lower for non-inhibitor than inhibitor patients, and lower following ex vivo spiking versus in vivo rFVIIa administration. In conclusion, there was a clear effect of rFVIIa on all thromboelastography parameters, but the large intra- and inter-patient variability following in vivo rFVIIa administration renders the use of our method unsuitable for dose-response prediction for haemophilia patients in the clinical setting.
