Article Text

PDF
Assessment of the 2006 revised antiphospholipid syndrome classification criteria
  1. Mala Kaul1,
  2. Doruk Erkan2,
  3. Lisa Sammaritano2,
  4. Michael D Lockshin2
  1. 1Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York, USA
  2. 2Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA
  1. Correspondence to:
    M Kaul
    Duke University DUMC, 31242 Durham NC 27710, USA; mala.kaul{at}duke.edu

Abstract

Objective: To analyse antiphospholipid (aPL) antibody-positive patients using the 2006 revised antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification criteria.

Methods: A descriptive study of 200 aPL-positive patients identified in a local, hospital-based registry, analysing demographic, clinical and aPL characteristics. Patients were analysed for (1) fulfilment of the 1999 original (Sapporo) and 2006 revised APS classification criteria; (2) non-criteria aPL features (for all aPL-positive patients, based on the 2006 revised criteria definitions); and (3) non-aPL thrombosis risk factors at the time of the clinical events (for patients with APS, based on the 2006 revised criteria stratifications).

Results: Of the 200 patients, 183 patients had sufficient data for analysis. Of these, 39 (21%) patients did not meet the laboratory requirement of the original 1999 criteria. Of 81 patients with APS who met the 1999 classification criteria, 47 (58%) also met the 2006 revised criteria. Of 63 asymptomatic (no vascular or pregnancy events) aPL-positive patients who met the laboratory requirement of the 1999 classification criteria, 38 (60%) also met the laboratory requirement of the 2006 revised criteria. More than 50% of the patients with APS with vascular events had identifiable non-aPL thrombosis risk factors at the time of clinical events.

Conclusions: Only 59% of the patients meeting the 1999 APS Sapporo classification criteria met the 2006 APS classification criteria. The revised criteria will have positive implications in APS research by way of limiting the inclusion of a heterogeneous group of patients and also by way of providing a risk-stratified approach.

  • aCL, anticardiolipin
  • 2GPI, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I
  • aPL, antiphospholipid
  • APS, antiphospholipid syndrome
  • LA, lupus anticoagulant

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Published Online First: 2 March 2007

  • Competing interests: None declared.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.