Survey on antiphospholipid syndrome diagnosis and antithrombotic treatment in patients with ischemic stroke, other brain ischemic injury, or arterial thromboembolism in other sites: communication from ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies

Cohen H., Werring D. J., Chandratheva A., Mittal P., Devreese K. M., Isenberg D. A., ...Daha Fazla

Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, cilt.21, sa.10, ss.2963-2976, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 21 Sayı: 10
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.jtha.2023.06.020
  • Dergi Adı: Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.2963-2976
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: antiphospholipid syndrome, cerebral infarcts, ischemic stroke, survey, transient ischemic attack, white matter hyperintensities
  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: The optimal strategy for diagnosis and antithrombotic treatment of patients with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS)–associated acute ischemic stroke (AIS), transient ischemic attack (TIA), or other brain ischemic injury is poorly defined. Objectives: The survey goal was to capture variations in diagnosis and antithrombotic treatment of APS-associated ischemic stroke and related disorders to inform guidance and clinical trials to define optimal management. Methods: Professional colleagues, including key opinion leaders, were invited to complete a REDCap survey questionnaire initiated by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardisation Committee Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies. The survey data were tallied using simple descriptive statistics. Results: There was generally good agreement on several aspects, including which patients to test for antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), use of a lifelong vitamin K antagonist for AIS or recurrent TIA, and formal cognitive assessment for suspected cognitive impairment. There was less agreement on other aspects, including aPL testing for brain ischemic injury other than AIS/TIA or if an alternative cause for AIS or TIA exists; choice of aPL tests, their timing, and age cutoff; the aPL phenotype to trigger antithrombotic treatment; management for patent foramen ovale; antithrombotic treatment for first TIA or white matter hyperintensities; head magnetic resonance imaging specifications; and low-molecular-weight heparin dosing/anti-Xa monitoring in pregnancy. The survey highlighted that approximately 25% practice at dedicated APS clinics and <50% have a multidisciplinary team structure for patients with APS. Conclusion: Much of the variation in practice reflects the lack of evidence-based recommendations. The survey results should inform the development of a more uniform multidisciplinary consensus approach to diagnosis and antithrombotic treatment.