Favaloro E J, Grispo L, Dinale A, Berndt M, Koutts J
Department of Haematology, Westmead Hospital, NSW, Australia.
Pathology. 1993 Apr;25(2):152-8. doi: 10.3109/00313029309084791.
This report details extensive studies investigating an improved screening procedure for the laboratory confirmation of clinically suspected von Willebrand's disease (vWD). Over the past two years, over 400 plasma samples, comprising samples derived from both normal individuals (n = 112) and from patients undergoing investigation on clinical grounds, underwent analysis in this screening procedure, comprising three distinct assays: a standard ELISA assay for von Willebrand Factor (vWF) antigen levels (vWF:Ag), a standard ristocetin cofactor (R Cof) assay, and a functional collagen based ELISA assay for vWF ('CBA'). Normal individual plasma samples yielded normal reference values (mean +/- 2SD) approximating 50-200% (vWF:Ag, R Cof) or 50-250% (CBA). In order to permit comparative analysis, and based upon derived assay values, and subsequent multimer analysis, patient samples were either deemed to derive from persons unlikely to suffer vWD ('non-vWD' patient group) or those potentially suffering vWD. The latter group was further separated into subgroups based upon the likelihood, and probable subtype of vWD. In conjunction with the vWF:Ag assay, the CBA provides the basis by which an effective predictor system (likelihood and probable subtype of vWD) can be offered on the basis of preliminary screening procedures. To date, there has been no overlap in vWF:Ag to CBA ratios (vWF:CBA) between patients yielding Type II vWD like multimer patterns and those yielding Type I vWD, or normal, multimer patterns. Thus, high vWF:CBA (i.e. > or = 3.0) would suggest a Type II, or pseudo, -vWD like defect, whereas low vWF:CBA (< or = 2.5) would likely derive from either normal individuals, or persons suffering from Type I vWD.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
本报告详细介绍了广泛的研究,这些研究旨在探究一种改进的筛查程序,用于实验室确诊临床疑似的血管性血友病(vWD)。在过去两年中,超过400份血浆样本接受了该筛查程序的分析,这些样本包括来自正常个体(n = 112)以及因临床原因接受调查的患者的样本。该筛查程序包括三种不同的检测方法:一种用于检测血管性血友病因子(vWF)抗原水平的标准酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)(vWF:Ag)、一种标准的瑞斯托霉素辅因子(R Cof)测定以及一种基于胶原蛋白的vWF功能性ELISA测定(“CBA”)。正常个体的血浆样本产生的正常参考值(均值±2标准差)约为50 - 200%(vWF:Ag、R Cof)或50 - 250%(CBA)。为了进行比较分析,并基于得出的检测值以及随后的多聚体分析,患者样本要么被认为来自不太可能患vWD的人(“非vWD”患者组),要么来自可能患vWD的人。后一组根据vWD的可能性和可能的亚型进一步分为亚组。结合vWF:Ag检测,CBA为基于初步筛查程序提供有效的预测系统(vWD的可能性和可能的亚型)奠定了基础。迄今为止,产生II型vWD样多聚体模式的患者与产生I型vWD或正常多聚体模式的患者之间,vWF:Ag与CBA的比率(vWF:CBA)没有重叠。因此,高vWF:CBA(即≥3.0)表明可能存在II型或假性vWD样缺陷,而低vWF:CBA(≤2.5)可能来自正常个体或患有I型vWD的人。(摘要截断于250字)