Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Clinical Intelligence

Testing for thrombophilia: clinical update

Neil Graham, Hunaid Rashiq and Beverley J Hunt
British Journal of General Practice 2014; 64 (619): e120-e122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp14X677310
Neil Graham
Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London.
Roles: Core Medical Trainee (CT1)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hunaid Rashiq
The Omnia Practice, Birmingham.
Roles: GP trainer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Beverley J Hunt
Professor of thrombosis & haemostasis, King’s College & consultant, Departments of Haematology, Pathology & Rheumatology, Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

BACKGROUND

Thrombophilia describes inherited and acquired prothrombotic states which predispose to venous, but not arterial thromboembolism. The heritable states are of limited clinical significance in primary care and while they may underlie a patient’s presentation with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) of uncertain cause, tests infrequently alter management. Testing patients is not without pitfalls: results are only informative if taken in the right patient at an appropriate time, as explained in recent guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)1 and described below.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The inherited thrombophilias are described in greater detail in Box 1 and largely fall into one of two groups: common low thrombosis-risk states, such as activated protein C resistance (due to the Factor V Leiden mutation) and rarer higher-risk states, including protein C or S deficiency. Due to their rarity, epidemiological data around some of the thrombophilias are poor: guidelines on these from NICE and the British Society for Haematology are largely expert opinion based on limited observational data.1,2

Box 1. Typical components of a thrombophilia blood panel

Inherited states
  • Heterozygous Factor V Leiden mutation (FVR506Q)6

    Mutation in Factor V gene confers resistance to activated protein C and increases thrombosis risk 3–5x

  • Heterozygous prothrombin 20210 mutation7

    Elevated prothrombin levels due to mutation increase risk by 2–3x

  • Heterozygous protein C deficiency8

    Rare mutations reduce the function or production of protein C, an inhibitor of coagulation together with protein S, increasing thrombosis risk around 3x

  • Heterozygous protein S deficiency9

    Rare mutations reducing function or production lead to increased risk of around 10x

  • Hereditary antithrombin deficiency10

    Reduced function or production of antithrombin thought to confer high thrombosis risk

  • Dysfibrinogenaemia

    Very rare prothrombotic mutation thought to confer high thrombosis risk

Acquired states
  • Antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL)3

    Variable risk of venous or arterial thrombosis due to the presence of any one or a combination of anti-cardiolipin, lupus anticoagulant, or anti β2-glycoprotein I antibodies. Antiphospholipid syndrome is due to the presence of persistent aPL antibodies and/or certain pregnancy complications

  • Full blood count, calcium, and liver function tests

    Variable risk of thrombosis due to the presence of cancer or myeloproliferative disease

The most common acquired thrombophilia state is antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), which requires positive tests for one or more of three antibodies on two occasions more than 12 weeks apart: lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies, and anti β2-glycoprotein I antibodies. These are unusual in that they predispose to thrombosis in any vascular bed, so can cause arterial and microvascular events as well as venous thromboembolism (VTE).3

Pregnancy, malignancy, and some drugs produce prothrombotic states, that underlie around 20% of cases of VTE,4 alongside myeloproliferative disease such as polycythaemia rubra vera. Oral and transdermal contraceptives, hormone replacement therapy, and tamoxifen are all associated with an increased risk of VTE, while pregnancy itself causes a hypercoagulable state, in addition to increased venous stasis. More rarely, inflammatory states such as Behçet’s disease may underlie thrombosis.

WHEN SHOULD I CONSIDER TESTING FOR THROMBOPHILIA?

As the recent NICE guidelines emphasise, testing should only performed when it is likely to change the patient’s management, such as in the risk–benefit analysis of whether to discontinue anticoagulation after a recent VTE.1

Meta-analysis of prospective cohort and randomised controlled trials shows a very low risk of recurrent thrombosis in those with ‘provoked’ VTE, in which case anticoagulation can safely be discontinued after 3 months for distal DVT, and 6 months for proximal DVT or PE.5

Conversely, if there is uncertainty in deciding whether to stop anticoagulation after a case of ‘unprovoked’ VTE (those circumstances where no temporary ‘provoking’ risk factor such as hospital admission, pregnancy, or use of the combined oral contraceptive is identified), the GP should consider aPL testing for acquired thrombophilia, as no positive family history is required to justify testing.1

The presence or absence of VTE in any first-degree relative should be sought and if present, inherited thrombophilia tests are indicated and in keeping with NICE guidance.1

Screening for cancer is recommended by NICE in patients with unprovoked VTE, it may underlie 6–10% of all patients with unprovoked VTE. NICE suggests a physical examination, urinalysis, bloods (including full blood count, calcium, and liver function tests), and a chest X-ray should be performed. In those aged ≥40 years with non-diagnostic initial findings, an abdomino-pelvic CT should be offered, alongside a mammogram for women.1

WHEN SHOULD I AVOID TESTING FOR THROMBOPHILIA?

Testing for thrombophilia will be uninformative if the patient is taking anticoagulation or has had a recent VTE for both will interfere with the assays. Beyond those patients with unprovoked VTE and a strong family history, there is very limited evidence to support use of the tests (Box 2).

Box 2. Key points

  • Test selectively: a full panel costs around £300 and tests taken inappropriately may add little, or misinform patient management. Only check for heritable thrombophilia in patients with unprovoked VTE and a positive family history.

  • Differentiate venous and arterial thrombosis: arterial events such as most ischaemic stroke or myocardial infarction are not affected by heritable thrombophilias, whereas inherited and acquired thrombophilias may contribute to venous thrombosis.

  • Get the timing right: physiological anticoagulant levels are reduced after acute thrombosis, invalidating test results. If a positive antiphospholipid test is found, it should be repeated 12 weeks later, as the antibody may be transient.

  • Avoid interfering drugs: anticoagulants interfere with the tests, which should be performed 2 weeks after cessation of vitamin K antagonists, which invalidate protein C and S and lupus anticoagulant assays and 24 hours after low molecular weight heparins are stopped, as these produce a false positive lupus anticoagulant test.

  • Use the correct blood bottle: all samples should be taken in sodium citrate (blue vacutainers), filling to the line to ensure the correct dilution is attained. Local policies for anticardiolipin tests vary and may require a clot-activated sample with (red top vacutainer), or without gel for serum separation (gold top vacutainer).

  • Appreciate the limitations: tests will not find abnormalities in all patients with VTE and a strong family history, reflecting the likelihood that some heritable states are yet to be identified, especially in the non-Caucasian population. Therefore, a negative set of investigations does not exclude an inherited prothrombotic tendency and if in doubt, a referral to a thrombosis specialist should be made.

In the risk assessment of women before starting oestrogen-containing oral hormonal therapy, a positive family history of VTE in a first-degree relative is sufficient grounds to avoid the combined oral contraceptive. Thrombophilia testing will not change this decision and should not be performed.2

Testing also has a limited role in screening asymptomatic relatives of patients with known thrombophilia. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies suggest that testing asymptomatic relatives is not helpful in low risk thrombophilias, while the evidence in high-risk thrombophilias is unclear.2 In such cases discussion with a thrombosis expert is advised.

CONCLUSION

The increasing availability of thrombophilia tests, particularly for heritable disease, has lead to much inappropriate use, but they rarely inform management. Judicious testing, taking into account the NICE recommendations, and practical advice in Box 2 is fundamental to ensuring meaningful results. In the event of positive, or uncertain results, timely discussion with a thrombosis expert should help to clarify the next stages of management.

Notes

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Discuss this article

Contribute and read comments about this article: www.bjgp.org/letters

  • Received June 13, 2013.
  • Accepted July 15, 2013.
  • © British Journal of General Practice 2014

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
    (2012) Venous thromboembolic diseases: the management of venous thromboembolic diseases and the role of thrombophilia testing (NICE, London) CG144.
  2. 2.↵
    1. Baglin T,
    2. Gray E,
    3. Greaves M,
    4. et al.,
    5. British Committee for Standards in Haematology
    (2010) Clinical guidelines for testing for heritable thrombophilia. Br J Haematol 149(2):209–220.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Miyakis S,
    2. Lockshin MD,
    3. Atsumi T,
    4. et al.
    (2006) International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost 4(2):295–306.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Heit JA,
    2. O’Fallon WM,
    3. Petterson TM,
    4. et al.
    (2002) Relative impact of risk factors for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a population-based study. Arch Intern Med 162(11):1245–1248.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Baglin T,
    2. Bauer K,
    3. Douketis J,
    4. et al.
    (2012) Duration of anticoagulant therapy after a first episode of an unprovoked pulmonary embolus or deep vein thrombosis: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost 10(4):698–702.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Franchini M
    (2012) Utility of testing for factor V Leiden. Blood Transfus 10(3):257–259.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Poort SR,
    2. Rosendaal FR,
    3. Reitsma PH,
    4. Bertina RM
    (1996) A common genetic variation in the 3’-untranslated region of the prothrombin gene is associated with elevated plasma prothrombin levels and an increase in venous thrombosis. Blood 88(10):3698–3703.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Koster T,
    2. Rosendaal FR,
    3. Briët E,
    4. et al.
    (1995) Protein C deficiency in a controlled series of unselected outpatients: an infrequent but clear risk factor for venous thrombosis (Leiden Thrombophilia Study). Blood 85(10):2756–2761.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Simioni P,
    2. Sanson BJ,
    3. Prandoni P,
    4. et al.
    (1999) Incidence of venous thromboembolism in families with inherited thrombophilia. Thromb Haemost 81(2):198–202.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Tait RC,
    2. Walker ID,
    3. Perry DJ,
    4. et al.
    (1994) Prevalence of antithrombin deficiency in the healthy population. Br J Haematol 87(1):106–112.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 64 (619)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 64, Issue 619
February 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Testing for thrombophilia: clinical update
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Testing for thrombophilia: clinical update
Neil Graham, Hunaid Rashiq, Beverley J Hunt
British Journal of General Practice 2014; 64 (619): e120-e122. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp14X677310

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Testing for thrombophilia: clinical update
Neil Graham, Hunaid Rashiq, Beverley J Hunt
British Journal of General Practice 2014; 64 (619): e120-e122. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp14X677310
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • BACKGROUND
    • CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
    • WHEN SHOULD I CONSIDER TESTING FOR THROMBOPHILIA?
    • WHEN SHOULD I AVOID TESTING FOR THROMBOPHILIA?
    • CONCLUSION
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • How to manage low testosterone level in men: a guide for primary care
  • Hyperparathyroidism (primary) NICE guideline: diagnosis, assessment, and initial management
  • The atypical presentation of COVID-19 as gastrointestinal disease: key points for primary care
Show more Clinical Intelligence

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242