Difficulties and controversies in biological diagnosis of antiphospholipidic syndromes of pregnancy

Authors

  • Ana María Otero Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Hematología, Ex Profesor Agregado
  • Datevig Attarian Licenciada en Laboratorio Clínico
  • Enrique Pons Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Ginecológica y Obstetricia, Profesor
  • Ricardo Pou Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Ginecología y Obstetricia, Ex Profesor Agregado
  • Eduardo Storch Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Ginecología y Obstetricia, Ex Profesor Agregado
  • Elena De Lisa Especialista en Hematología
  • Inés Sevrini Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Medicina, Profesora Adjunta
  • Cecilia Carrizo Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Medicina, Profesora Adjunta

Keywords:

ANTIPHOSPHOLIPID SYNDROME, PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS

Abstract

There are difficulties and controversies in biological diagnosis of antiphospholipidic syndromes of pregnancy. Diagnosis in women with a history of suspicious antiphos-pholipidic syndromes is of great importance in order to indicate an adequate treatment.
The aims of this study were:
1. To compare the results of different laboratory techniques in a population of women referred for confirmation or rejection of a pregnancy antiphospholipidic syndrome;
2. To establish if the performance of more than one technique in a same patient increases the chance to achieve an accurate diagnosis.
Materials and methods: In 607 patients referred to the Specialized Center on Hemostasis Disorders and Thrombosis (CEAHT) that presented different obstetric complications, antiphospholipidic antibodies were measured using available commercial reagents (ACA and APA). In 407 of these patients the lupus anticoagulant (AL) was also determined.
Results: 102 (16%) patients showed at least one positive test confirmed by more than two different ways. The ACA (anticardiolipin antibodies) resulted positive in 78.4% followed by the APA, 29.4% (antibodies against a mixture of phospholipids) and the AL, showing a very low frequency of 8%. Only in 18.4% of the cases the coincidence of two or more techniques was observed.
Conclusion: It is advisable, according to these data, to perform at least two immunological techniques apart from AL, before confirming the absence of occurrence of an antiphospholipidic syndrome of pregnancy.

References

1) Kutteh WH, Rote NS, Silver R. Antiphospholipid antibodies and reproduction: the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome. Am J Reprod Immunol 1999; 41(2): 133-52.
2) Yetman DL, Kutteh WH. Antiphospholipid antibody panels and recurrent pregnancy loss: prevalence of anticardiolipin antibodies compared with other antiphospholipid antibodies. Fertil Steril 1996; 66(4): 540-6.
3) Branch DW, Silver RM, Pierangeli SS, van-Leeuwen I, Harris EN. Antiphospholipid antibodies in women with recurrent pregnancy loss, fertile controls, and antiphospholipid syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 89(4): 549-55.
4) Roubey RA. Autoantibodies to phospholipid-binding plasma proteins: a new view of lupus anticoagulants and other "antiphospholipid" antibodies. Blood 1994; 84(9): 2854-67.
5) Levine JS, Branch DW, Rauch J. The antiphospholipid syndrome. N Engl J Med 2002; 346(10): 752-63.
6) International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific Standardization Subcommitee Lupus Anticoagulant Phospholipid dependent antibodies. Boston: International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 2002.
7) Tincani A, Allegri F, Sanmarco M, Cinquini M, Taglietti M, Balestrieri G, et al. Anticardiolipin antibody assay: a methodological analysis for a better consensus in routine determinations. A cooperative projet of the European Antiphospholipid Forum. Thromb Haemost 2001; 86(2): 575-83.
8) Kutteh WH, Wester R, Kutteh CC. Multiplies of the median: alternate methods for reporting antiphospholipid antibodies in women with recurrent pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84(5): 811-5.
9) Peaceman AM, Silver RK, MacGregor SN, Socol ML. Interlaboratory variations in antiphospholipid antibody testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 166(6 Pt 1): 1780-4.
10) Favaloro EJ, Silvestrini R. Assessing the usefulness of anticardiolipin antibody assays: a cautious approach is suggested by high variation and limited consensus in multilaboratory testing. Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 118(4): 548-57.
11) Wilson WA, Gharavi AE, Koike T, Lockshin MD, Branch DW, Piette JC, et al. Intentional consensus statement on preliminary classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome: report of an international workshop. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42(7): 1309-11.
12) Otero AM, Pou-Ferrari R, Pons E, Lens D, De-Lisa E, Dellepiane M, et al. Trombofilia y pérdida recurrente de embarazo. Rev Med Urug 2004; 20(2): 106-13.
13) Horkko S, Miller E, Dudl E, Reaven P, Curtiss LK, Zvaifler NJ, et al. Antiphospholipid antibodies are directed against epítopes of oxidized phospholipids: Recognition of cardiolipin by monoclonal antibodies to epitopes of oxidized low density lipoprotein. J Clin Invest 1996; 98(3): 815-25.
14) Rand JH. The antiphospholipid syndrome. Annu Rev Med 2003; 54: 409-24.
15) Viard JP, Amoura Z, Bach JF. Association of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I antibodies with lupus-type circulating anticoagulant and thrombosis in systemic lupus erythematosus. Am J Med 1992; 93(2): 181-6.
16) Levine JS, Branch DW, Rauch J. Antiphospholipid syndrome. N Engl J Med 2002; 346(10): 752–63.
17) Schlame M, Haller I, Sammaritano LR, Blanck TJ. Effect of cardiolipin oxidation on solid-phase immunoassay for antiphospholipid antibodies. Thromb Haemost 2001; 86(6): 1475-82.
18) Roberts JM, Macara LM, Chalmers EA, Smith GC. Inter-assay variation in antiphospholipid antibody testing. BJOG 2002; 109(3): 348-9.
19) Nash MJ, Camilleri RS, Kunka S, Mackie IJ, Machin SJ, Cohen H. The anticardiolipin assay is required for sensitive screening for antiphospholipid antibodies. J Thromb Haemost 2004; 2(7): 1077-81.
20) Derksen RH, de Groot PG. Clinical consequences of antiphospholipid antibodies. Neth J Med 2004; 62(8): 273-8.
21) Kutteh WH, Franklin RD. Assessing the variation in antiphospholipid antibody (APA) assays: comparison of results from 10 centers. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191(2): 440-8.
22) Ben-Hadj-Slama F, Nagara M, Slama A, Braham-Jmili N, Monastiri K, Laouani-Kechrid C, et al. Antiphospholipid antibodies in 146 women with repeated pregnancy losses. Ann Biol Clin (Paris) 2004; 62(2): 217-21.
23) Carp, HJ. Antiphospholipid syndrome in pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2004; 16(2): 129-35.
24) Harris EN, Pierangeli SS. Revisiting the anticardiolipin test and its standardization. Lupus 2002; 11(5): 269-75.
25) Tincani A, Allegri F, Sanmarco M, Cinquini M, Taglietti M, Balestrieri G, et al. Anticardiolipin antibody assay, a methodological analysis for a better consensus in routine determinations: A cooperative project of the European Antiphospholipid Forum. Thromb Haemost 2001; 86(2): 575-83.

Published

2006-05-31

How to Cite

1.
Otero AM, Attarian D, Pons E, Pou R, Storch E, De Lisa E, et al. Difficulties and controversies in biological diagnosis of antiphospholipidic syndromes of pregnancy. Rev. Méd. Urug. [Internet]. 2006 May 31 [cited 2024 Nov. 21];22(2):122-7. Available from: https://revista.rmu.org.uy/index.php/rmu/article/view/771

Most read articles by the same author(s)