Preoperative screening for von Willebrand disease type 1: Low yield and limited ability to predict bleeding

38Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Type 1 von Willebrand disease (vWd) is the most common hereditary bleeding disorder. The objective of this study was to measure the von Willebrand factor antigen (vWf:Ag) in a large cohort of patients who underwent surgery to assess the role of a new rapid immunoassay in a screening procedure for vWd in preoperative conditions. We studied 832 consecutive patients (540 children, 292 adults) referred to the surgical departments. For each patient we determined the vWf:Ag level with two different assays, an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)(Asserachrom vWf:Ag; Diagnostica Stago, France) and a rapid immunoassay (Liatest vWf:Ag; Diagnostica Stago). Using the reference test, we found 30 of 832 patients with a vWf:Ag value below the lower limits (21 U/dL to 46 U/dL). The coefficient of correlation between the two tests was 0.77 (P = .001). When receiver operating characteristic curves were used, the cutoff value calculated to detect vWf:Ag defect with the rapid assay was 68.5 U/dL, leading to 0.36% false negatives and 9.7% false positives. Thus the rapid immunoassay appears to be a useful and easy method that is adaptable to urgent situations. Among the 30 patients with low values in ELISA, 8 had personal or familial bleeding history. Repeat blood samples confirmed the diagnosis of vWd in 5 cases, leading to a prevalence of vWd type 1 of 0.6%. However, in our series the absence of severe bleeding complications raises the question of the screening and the management of patients bearing a type 1 Willebrand disease during surgery.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Biron-Andréani, C., Mahieu, B., Rochette, A., Capdevila, X., Castex, A., Amiral, J., … Schved, J. F. (1999). Preoperative screening for von Willebrand disease type 1: Low yield and limited ability to predict bleeding. Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine, 134(6), 605–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2143(99)90100-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free