RESUMO
The best-known inherited mild bleeding disorders (MBDs), i.e. type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD), platelet function disorders (PFDs), and mild to moderate clotting factor deficiencies, are characterized clinically by mucocutaneous bleeding, and, although they are highly prevalent, still pose difficult diagnostic problems. These include establishing the pathological nature of bleeding, and the uncertainties surrounding the clinical relevance of laboratory results. Furthermore, the high frequency of bleeding symptoms in the normal population and the subjective appraisal of symptoms by patients or parents makes elucidating the pathological nature of bleeding difficult. Standardized bleeding assessment tools and semiquantitative bleeding scores (BSs) help to discriminate normal from abnormal bleeding. However, as most MBDs have similar bleeding patterns, for example, bleeding sites, frequency, and severity, BSs are of little help for diagnosing specific diseases. Global tests of primary hemostasis (bleeding time; PFA-100/200) lack sensitivity and, like BSs, are not disease-specific. Problems with the diagnosis of type 1 VWD and PFD include assay standardization, uncertain definition of von Willebrand factor cut-off levels, and the lack of universal diagnostic criteria for PFD. Regarding clotting factor deficiencies, the bleeding thresholds of some coagulation factors, such as factor VII and FXI, are highly variable, and may lead to misinterpretation of the clinical relevance of mild to moderate deficiencies. Remarkably, a large proportion of MBDs remain undiagnosed even after comprehensive and repeated laboratory testing. These are tentatively considered to represent bleeding of undefined cause, with clinical features indistinguishable from those of classical MBD; the pathogenesis of this is probably multifactorial, and unveiling these mechanisms should constitute a fertile source of translational research.
Assuntos
Transtornos Herdados da Coagulação Sanguínea/diagnóstico , Testes de Coagulação Sanguínea , Coagulação Sanguínea/genética , Transtornos Plaquetários/diagnóstico , Testes de Função Plaquetária , Animais , Transtornos Herdados da Coagulação Sanguínea/sangue , Transtornos Herdados da Coagulação Sanguínea/genética , Transtornos Plaquetários/sangue , Transtornos Plaquetários/genética , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Humanos , Fenótipo , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Doença de von Willebrand Tipo 1/sangue , Doença de von Willebrand Tipo 1/diagnóstico , Doença de von Willebrand Tipo 1/genéticaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Only ± 50% of patients with type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD) have recognized molecular defects and diagnosis still rests on demonstrating low plasma von Willebrand factor (VWF) protein/function. However, no generalized consensus exists regarding the type and number of VWF variables that should be considered for diagnosis. AIM: To compare the quantitative impact of four different criteria to diagnose type 1 VWD. METHODS: We tested four laboratory criteria on 4298 laboratory studies during a 5-year period. The first was the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute recommendation, which diagnoses type 1 VWD with plasma VWF antigen (VWF:Ag) and VWF ristocetin cofactor (VWF:RCo) < 30 IU dL(-1) and possible VWD/'low VWF' with values between 30 and 50 IU dL(-1) . Second, diagnosis was established when two of three variables, VWF:Ag, VWF:RCo, VWF collagen binding assay (VWF:CB), were ≤ 2.5th percentile. Diagnostic criterion for possible VWD/'low VWF' using percentiles was also described. The third criterion (European Group on von Willebrand Disease, EUVWD), uses a plasma level of VWF:RCo (or VWF:CB) ≤ 40 IU dL(-1) for diagnosis. Finally, the Zimmerman Program for the Molecular and Clinical Biology of VWD (ZPMCBVWD) diagnoses VWD if VWF:Ag or VWF:RCo are ≤ 40 IU dL(-1) . RESULTS: The three assays had high correlation and excellent agreement at levels < 120 IU dL(-1) . The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute recommendation was followed to diagnose 122 (2.8%) patients with type 1 VWD and 704 (16.4%) with possible VWD/'low VWF.' Using percentiles, the diagnosis of type 1 VWD increased to 280 (6.5%) patients; 169 (3.9%) patients had possible VWD and 180 (4.2%) patients had 'low VWF.' Diagnoses using EUVWD and ZPMCBVWD criteria increased to 339 (7.9%) and 357 (8.3%) patients, respectively. DISCUSSION: Identical data, analyzed using different criteria, led to almost three-fold difference (2.8-8.3%) in diagnostic rate. This increase is mostly explained by increasing the cut-off values of VWF measurements from < 30 to ≈ 40 IU dL(-1) . Further refinement of the laboratory diagnosis of type 1 VWD is a priority.