However since its an old study it is not appropriate to prove and analyze their results. Eclampsia/Pr-eclampsia was also not significantly associated with IAXO-102 LAC positivity in our study as a result debating the indicator of these costly checks in these conditions. ISTH suspected the risk of high false-positivity if ?2 LAC assays are becoming performed. assays were positive. Our study therefore concluded that DRVVT was the most sensitive followed by APPT-LA, KCT, dPT. The combination of dRVVT with APTT-LA or KCT appeared to be superior to additional mixtures. No individual test per se is definitely 100% sensitive for the analysis of APLA in high risk pregnancy instances. Further results confirmed that repeated LAC result is required actually inside a high-risk establishing. Positive LAC assay in majority were not associated with specifically recurrent pregnancy loss but were associated with sporadic stillbirth and thrombosis. value of ?0.05 was considered significant. Results A total of 526 woman patients were analyzed. The median age of the patient was 28?years with the range of 20C42?years. Median age of the control was 27?years with the range of 20C39?years. None of the control instances were found to be positive by all four LAC tests. Table?1 shows 65 lupus anticoagulant (LAC) positive instances out of the 500 and 26 high risk pregnancy instances. After 12?weeks of repeated checks, 25 patients who also showed initial positivity were turned out to negative. Among the COLL6 40 repeated positive assays, overall dRVVT could able to diagnose 36 instances followed by APTT-LA which could able to diagnose 28 instances, while KCT could able to diagnose 23 instances and dPT could able to diagnose only 14 instances. There were 12 instances in whom all lupus assays were positive (Table?1). Table?1 Positive LAC High risk pregnancy instances negative predictive value Discussion The study which was aimed to focus on the utility of all four LAC checks in high risk pregnancies firstly has confirmed the fact that repeated LAC assay after 12?weeks while IAXO-102 suggested in the guidelines is required in order to avoid false positivity IAXO-102 while was also seen in our 25 instances that turned out to be negative after 12?weeks while evident in Table?1. Second of all, our study has confirmed an association between the LAC positivity and maternal thrombosis (Table?4) which has also been reported previously by other studies [19C21]. In our study the incidence rate of thrombosis was 10% (Table?3) which was same as documented in the previous studies [19C21]. This suggests an importance of counselling in individuals suspected to have APLA to avoid some other concomitant thrombophilic conditions, e.g. oestrogen-progesterone combination oral contraceptives, high altitudes, cigarette smoking. Similarly, stillbirths have been significantly associated with LAC positivity (Furniture?3, ?,44). Our study (Furniture?2, ?,4)4) didnt observe any association of LAC positivity with early abortions which was in concurrence with numerous studies [13, 18, 22C24]. However one study [14] observed the association of positive LAC assays with early abortions. It IAXO-102 is hypothesized that this study [14] was carried out in the era before Sydney recommendations were launched when LAC assays were repeated after 06?weeks period instead of 12?weeks period, hence it might be possible that it may be false positive. However since its an old study it is not appropriate to demonstrate and analyze their results. Eclampsia/Pr-eclampsia was also not significantly associated with LAC positivity in our study therefore debating the indicator of these expensive checks in these conditions. ISTH suspected the risk of high false-positivity if ?2 LAC assays are becoming performed. This problem is quite debatable as discussed below also and required to become analyzed. While the reported global prevalence of LAC positivity in high risk pregnancy was 2C8% [17], the prevalence of.
