Comparative evaluation of Rosner’s index (ICA) Vs Chang’s (% correction) as a screening test (mixing study)

Journal Title: IP Journal of Diagnostic Pathology and Oncology - Year 2018, Vol 3, Issue 3

Abstract

Introduction It is difficult to interpretate mixing study results both screening confirmatory in presence of LAC The main objective of this study is to define cut off values for ICA Correction which will reduce the no of false positive negative cases will help in proper categorization of factor deficiency inhibitors This study also briefs about preanalytical errors their correctionMaterial and Methods Rosner Index Cut offs 10 Correction 15 InhibitorLatest Sysmex CS5100 autoanalyser was used to determine the Cutoffs DRVVT mixing test ratio Rosners index ICA 115 correction 10 DRVVT Normalised ratio NR 105 p value 015 is 911 sensitive for inhibitor diagnosis it could not categorise 8 of total cases into factor deficiency inhibitorDiscussion Rosners index ICA as a confirmatory test for LA is more sensitive than correction DRVVT NR Changs correction with a cut off value of 70 is 85 sensitive in diagnosing factor deficiency a cut off value of Conclusion It can be safely concluded that Rosner index is better than correction both as a screening test confirmatory test to differentiate factor deficiency from inhibitor This study results are in agreement with CLSI guidelines favours the sequential order screenconfirm then if required mixing study as in case of screen and confirm analysis is not clearcut andor when other causes of prolonged clotting times are known or suspected The draw back with the mixing studies is that weak LAC can be missed Though in this study Nijmegen is better than Bethesda in terms of sensitivity specificity as the later gives false positive results other studies has to be taken into consideration which shows that both the Bethesda Nijgmegen technique have low specificity at higher inhibitor titre If actual quantitation of high titre activity is required then it is more reliable to estimate empirically plasma dilution that gives 50 inhibitionKeywords Lupus anticoagulant Pooled normal plasma Mixing study Rosners Index Changs correction

Authors and Affiliations

Mirza Asif Baig, Anil K. Sirasagi

Keywords

Related Articles

A retrospective audit of gall bladder histopathology following cholecystectomy

Gall bladder carcinoma is one of the common cancer of biliary tree which have rapid progression and high mortality rate It is difficult to differentiate early stage of gall bladder carcinoma from chronic cholecystitis as...

Clinicohistological correlation of psoriasis and immunohistochemical expression of Ki 67

Skin is considered as the largest organ of the body. Psoriasis is a chronic papillosquamous disorder of skin affecting 1-2% of population in all geographic areas.(4) There is a seven fold increase in the field of epiderm...

Seroprevalence of Hepatitis B virus among blood donors at a tertiary care hospital in Gujarat

Introduction Transfusion of blood and blood components as a specialized modality of patient management saves millions of lives worldwide each year and reduces morbidity Transfusiontransmitted infectious TTIs diseases rem...

A rare case of malignant paraganglioma of urinary bladder

Paraganglioma are neuroendocrine tumors arising from extra adrenal sympathetic and Parasympathetic nervous system1 either from the chromaffin positive paraganglion tissue or the chromaffin negative glomus cells2 derived...

Histopathological study of 40 Orchidectomy specimens in a tertiary care hospital in North Telangana

Introduction: Testicular tumours are the cause of about 1% of all cancer deaths. They are more frequent in white male population but are less common in Africans and Asians. They have trimodal age distribution – a peak du...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP482768
  • DOI 10.18231/2581-3706.2018.0041
  • Views 111
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Mirza Asif Baig, Anil K. Sirasagi (2018). Comparative evaluation of Rosner’s index (ICA) Vs Chang’s (% correction) as a screening test (mixing study). IP Journal of Diagnostic Pathology and Oncology, 3(3), 196-201. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-482768