Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2023
Validation of immunofluorescence analysis of blood smears in patients with inherited platelet disorders.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zaninetti Carlo, Leinøe Eva, Lozano María Luisa, Rossing Maria, Bastida Jose Maria, Zetterberg Eva, Rivera Jose, Greinacher Andreas
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Inherited platelet disorders (IPDs) are rare diseases characterized by reduced blood platelet counts and/or impaired platelet function. Recognizing IPDs is advisable but often challenging. The diagnostic tools include clinical evaluation, platelet function tests, and molecular analyses. Demonstration of a pathogenic genetic variant confirms IPDs. We established a method to assess the platelet phenotype on blood smears using immunofluorescence microscopy as a diagnostic tool for IPDs.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to validate immunofluorescence microscopy as a screening tool for IPDs in comparison with genetic screening.
METHODS: We performed a blinded comparison between the diagnosis made using immunofluorescence microscopy on blood smears and genetic findings in a cohort of 43 families affected with 20 different genetically confirmed IPDs. In total, 76% of the cases had inherited thrombocytopenia.
RESULTS: Immunofluorescence correctly predicted the underlying IPD in the vast majority of patients with 1 of 9 IPDs for which the typical morphologic pattern is known. Thirty of the 43 enrolled families (70%) were affected by 1 of these 9 IPDs. For the other 11 forms of IPD, we describe alterations of platelet structure in 9 disorders and normal findings in 2 disorders.
CONCLUSION: Immunofluorescence microscopy on blood smears is an effective screening tool for 9 forms of IPD, which include the most frequent forms of inherited thrombocytopenia. Using this approach, typical changes in the phenotype may also be identified for other rare IPDs.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to validate immunofluorescence microscopy as a screening tool for IPDs in comparison with genetic screening.
METHODS: We performed a blinded comparison between the diagnosis made using immunofluorescence microscopy on blood smears and genetic findings in a cohort of 43 families affected with 20 different genetically confirmed IPDs. In total, 76% of the cases had inherited thrombocytopenia.
RESULTS: Immunofluorescence correctly predicted the underlying IPD in the vast majority of patients with 1 of 9 IPDs for which the typical morphologic pattern is known. Thirty of the 43 enrolled families (70%) were affected by 1 of these 9 IPDs. For the other 11 forms of IPD, we describe alterations of platelet structure in 9 disorders and normal findings in 2 disorders.
CONCLUSION: Immunofluorescence microscopy on blood smears is an effective screening tool for 9 forms of IPD, which include the most frequent forms of inherited thrombocytopenia. Using this approach, typical changes in the phenotype may also be identified for other rare IPDs.