Seminars in Hematology
Volume 44, Issue 2 , Pages 114-125, April 2007

Quality Assurance Issues and Interpretation of Assays

  • Ian Mackie

      Affiliations

    • Haemostasis Research Unit, Haematology Department, University College London, London, UK.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to Ian Mackie, PhD, Haemostasis Research Unit, UCL Haematology Department, First Floor, 51 Chenies Mews, London WC1E 6HX, UK.
  • ,
  • Peter Cooper

      Affiliations

    • Department of Coagulation, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
  • ,
  • Steve Kitchen

      Affiliations

    • Department of Coagulation, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.

The consequences of an erroneous thrombophilia diagnosis may be serious if it is used to determine clinical management. Therefore careful selection, assessment, and control of laboratory tests for thrombophilia are essential. As for other coagulation tests, the pre-analytical phase must be carefully controlled with attention to the specific problems associated with each type of assay. The investigator must then recognize that for most laboratory tests of thrombophilia, there are a number of assay types available, often based on different principles of analysis. This creates the potential for different users to obtain varying results depending on the technique employed. Such problems can occur in assays of antithrombin activity, depending on whether the assay employs factor Xa, human thrombin, or bovine thrombin. In clot-based assays of protein C and protein S, there can be specificity problems related to interference by factor V Leiden (FVL), antiphospholipid antibodies, and other substances. Even genetic tests can give erroneous results and should not automatically be seen as absolute without supporting evidence and careful quality-control measures. Whatever technique is selected, it is mandatory to incorporate sufficient concurrent quality-control samples to validate the results of thrombophilia tests. These should include assessment of the parameter at normal and abnormal levels to give confidence in results across the measurement range that would normally be encountered in routine practice. This should be used in conjunction with regular participation in external quality assessment (EQA) (which has been linked to improved laboratory performance in thrombophilia testing). Larger EQA programs can provide information concerning the relative performance of analytical procedures, including the method principle, reagents, and instruments. Herein, we describe many of the methodologic effects in detail. We use specific examples to illustrate the general principle that, in performing laboratory testing for thrombophilia, one must always consider the performance characteristics and limitations of the assay in use.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0037-1963(07)00002-9

doi:10.1053/j.seminhematol.2007.01.001

Seminars in Hematology
Volume 44, Issue 2 , Pages 114-125, April 2007