External validation of the HIT Expert Probability (HEP) score

Summary

The diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) can be challenging. The HIT Expert Probability (HEP) Score has recently been proposed to aid in the diagnosis of HIT. We sought to externally and prospectively validate the HEP score. We prospectively assessed pretest probability of HIT for 51 consecutive patients referred to our Consultative Service for evaluation of possible HIT between August 1, 2012 and February 1, 2013. Two Vascular Medicine fellows independently applied the 4T and HEP scores for each patient. Two independent HIT expert adjudicators rendered a diagnosis of HIT likely or unlikely. The median (interquartile range) of 4T and HEP scores were 4.5 (3.0, 6.0) and 5 (3.0, 8.5), respectively. There were no significant differences between area under receiver-operating characteristic curves of 4T and HEP scores against the gold standard, confirmed HIT [defined as positive serotonin release assay and positive anti-PF4/heparin ELISA] (0.74 vs 0.73, p = 0.97). HEP score ≥ 2 was 100 % sensitive and 16 % specific for determining the presence of confirmed HIT while a 4T score > 3 was 93 % sensitive and 35 % specific. In conclusion, the HEP and 4T scores are excellent screening pretest probability models for HIT, however, in this prospective validation study, test characteristics for the diagnosis of HIT based on confirmatory laboratory testing and expert opinion are similar. Given the complexity of the HEP scoring model compared to that of the 4T score, further validation of the HEP score is warranted prior to widespread clinical acceptance.

Keywords

Heparins - thrombocytopenia - thrombosis

• References

• 1 Oliveira GB CE, Becker RC, Honeycutt EF. et al. Incidence and prognostic significance of thrombocytopenia in patients treated with prolonged heparin therapy. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168: 94-102.
• 2 Lo GK SC, Warkentin TE. What is the potential for overdiagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia?. Am J Hematol 2007; 82: 1037-1043.
• 3 Lo GK JD, Warkentin TE, Sigouin CS. et al. Evaluation of pretest clinical score (4 T s) for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in two clinical settings. J Thromb Haemost 2006; 4: 759-765.
• 4 Crowther MA CD, Albert M, Williamson D. et al. The 4Ts scoring system for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in medical-surgical intensive care unit patients. J Crit Care 2010; 25: 287-293.
• 5 Denys B SV, Phillippe’ J, Devreese K. A clinical-laboratory approach contributing to a rapid and reliable diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Thromb Res 2008; 123: 137-145.
• 6 Pouplard C GP, Fouassier M, Ternisien C. et al. Prospective evaluation of the 4Ts score and particle gel immunoassay specific to heparin/PF4 for the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5: 1373-1379.
• 7 Bryant A LJ, Austin S, Joseph JE. Timely diagnosis and management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in a frequent request, low incidence single centre using clinical 4T_s score and particle gel immunoassay. Br J Haematol 2008; 143: 721-726.
• 8 Lillo-Le Loue’t A BP, Alhenc-Gelas M, Le Beller C. et al. Diagnostic score for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia after cardiopulmonary bypass. J Thromb Haemost 2004; 2: 1882-1888.
• 9 Cuker A, Arepally G, Crowther MA. et al. The HIT Expert Probability (HEP) Score: a novel pretest probability model for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia based on broad expert opinion. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8: 2642-2650.
• 10 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R. et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-- a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42: 377-381.
• 11 Warkentin TE, Greinacher A, Gruel Y. et al. Laboratory testing for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a conceptual framework and implications for diagnosis. J Thromb Haemost 2011; 9: 2498-2500.
• 12 Schulman S, Angeras U, Bergqvist D. et al. Definition of major bleeding in clinical investigations of antihemostatic medicinal products in surgical patients. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8: 202-204.
• 13 Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Antman EM. et al. Evaluation of the novel factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: design and rationale for the Effective aNticoaGulation with factor xA next GEneration in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction study 48 (ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48). Am Heart J 2010; 160: 635-641.
• 14 Schulman S, Kearon C. Definition of major bleeding in clinical investigations of antihemostatic medicinal products in non-surgical patients. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3: 692-694.