Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune disease characterized by the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies, such as lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies and anti-β2-glycoprotein 1 antibodies. APS can present with a variety of clinical phenotypes, including thrombosis in the veins, arteries and microvasculature as well as obstetrical complications. The pathophysiological hallmark is thrombosis, but other factors such as complement activation might be important. Prevention of thrombotic manifestations associated with APS includes lifestyle changes and, in individuals at high risk, low-dose aspirin. Prevention and treatment of thrombotic events are dependent mainly on the use of vitamin K antagonists. Immunosuppression and anticomplement therapy have been used anecdotally but have not been adequately tested. Pregnancy morbidity includes unexplained recurrent early miscarriage, fetal death and late obstetrical manifestation such as pre-eclampsia, premature birth or fetal growth restriction associated with placental insufficiency. Current treatment to prevent obstetrical morbidity is based on low-dose aspirin and/or low-molecular-weight heparin and has improved pregnancy outcomes to achieve successful live birth in >70% of pregnancies. Although hydroxychloroquine and pravastatin might further improve pregnancy outcomes, prospective clinical trials are required to confirm these findings.

These data propose a substantial improvement in risk prediction of thrombosis or PL in SLE based on assessment of the GAPSS, a quantitative scoring system.

Antibodies to prothrombin are detected by directly coating prothrombin on irradiated ELISA plates (aPT) or by using the phosphatidylserine/prothrombin complex as antigen (aPS/PT). Although these antibodies have both been associated with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) and a correlation between the two assays have been reported, it seems that aPT and aPS/PT belong to different populations of autoantibodies. It was our objective to systematically review the available evidence on aPT and aPS/PT antibodies and the risk of thrombosis in APS. Medline-reports published between 1988 and 2013 investigating aPT and aPS/PT as a risk factor for thrombosis were included. Whenever possible, antibody isotype(s) and site of thrombosis were analysed. This systematic review is based on available data from more than 7,000 patients and controls from 38 studies analysing aPT and 10 aPS/PT. Antibodies to prothrombin (both aPT and aPS/PT) increased the risk of thrombosis (odds ratio [OR] 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-3.5). aPS/PT seemed to represent a stronger risk factor for thrombosis, both arterial and/or venous than aPT (OR 5.11; 95%CI 4.2-6.3 and OR 1.82; 95%CI 1.44-2.75, respectively). In conclusion, routine measurement of aPS/PT (but not aPT) might be useful in establishing the thrombotic risk of patients with previous thrombosis and/or systemic lupus erythematosus. Their inclusion as laboratory criteria for the APS should be indisputably further explored.

No abstract

No abstract

First described in the early 1980s, antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a unique form of acquired autoimmune thrombophilia in which patients present with clinical features of recurrent thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity and persistently test positive for the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). At least one clinical (vascular thrombosis or pregnancy morbidity) and one lab-based (positive test result for lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies and/or anti-β2-glycoprotein 1 antibodies) criterion have to be met for a patient to be classified as having APS. However, the clinical spectrum of APS encompasses additional manifestations that can affect many organs and cannot be explained exclusively by patients being in a prothrombotic state; clinical manifestations not listed in the classification criteria (known as extra-criteria manifestations) include neurologic manifestations (chorea, myelitis and migraine), haematologic manifestations (thrombocytopenia and haemolytic anaemia), livedo reticularis, nephropathy and valvular heart disease. Increasingly, research interest has focused on the development of novel assays that might be more specific for APS than the current aPL tests. This Review focuses on the current classification criteria for APS, presenting the role of extra-criteria manifestations and lab-based tests. Diagnostic approaches to difficult cases, including so-called seronegative APS, are also discussed.

Objectives To assess risk factors for a first thrombotic event in confirmed antiphospholipid (aPL) antibody carriers and to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic treatments.Methods Inclusion criteria were age 18-65 years, no history of thrombosis and two consecutive positive aPL results.Demographic, laboratory and clinical parameters were collected at enrolment, once a year during the follow-up and at the time of the thrombotic event, whenever that occurred.Results 258 subjects were prospectively observed between October 2004 and October 2008. The mean±SD follow-up was 35.0±11.9 months (range 1-48). A first thrombotic event (9 venous, 4 arterial and 1 transient ischaemic attack) occurred in 14 subjects (5.4%, annual incidence rate 1.86%). Hypertension and lupus anticoagulant (LA) were significantly predictive of thrombosis (both at p<0.05) and thromboprophylaxis was significantly protective during high-risk periods (p<0.05) according to univariate analysis. Hypertension and LA were identified by multivariate logistic regression analysis as independent risk factors for thrombosis (HR 3.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 11.1, p<0.05, and HR 3.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 14, p<0.05, respectively).Conclusions Hypertension and LA are independent risk factors for thrombosis in aPL carriers. Thromboprophylaxis in these subjects should probably be limited to high-risk situations.

BACKGROUND:Antiphospholipid syndrome is defined by the combination of thrombotic events and/or obstetric morbidity in patients who have tested positive persistently for antiphospholipid antibodies. With good treatment, approximately 70% of pregnant women with antiphospholipid syndrome will deliver a viable live infant. However, current management does not prevent all maternal, fetal, and neonatal complications of antiphospholipidsyndrome. OBJECTIVES:This observational, retrospective, single-center cohort study aimed to assess pregnancy outcomein women with antiphospholipid antibodies who were treated with hydroxychloroquine in addition to conventionaltreatment during pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN:One-hundred seventy pregnancies in 96 women with persistent antiphospholipid antibodies were analyzed: (1) 51 pregnancies that occurred in 31 women were treated with hydroxychloroquine for at least 6 months before pregnancy, and the therapy continued throughout gestation (group A); (2) 119 pregnancies that occurred in 65 women with antiphospholipid antibodies that were not treated with hydroxychloroquine were included as controls (group B). RESULTS:Hydroxychloroquine-treatment was associated with a higher rate of live births (67% group A vs 57% group B; P = .05) and a lower prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodiesrelated pregnancy morbidity (47% group A vs 63% B; P = .004). The association of hydroxychloroquine with a lower rate of any complication in pregnancywas confirmed after multivariate analysis (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-136; P = .04). Fetal losses at >10 weeks of gestation (2% vs 11%; P = .05) and placenta-mediated complications (2% vs 11%; P = .05) were less frequent in group A than group B. Pregnancy duration was longer in group A than group B (27.6 [6-40] vs 21.5 [6-40] weeks; P = .03). There was a higher rate of spontaneous vaginal labor in hydroxychloroquine-treatedwomen compared with group B (37.3% vs 14.3%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS:Despite the heterogeneity in the 2 groups in terms of systemic lupus erythematosus prevalence and previous pregnancy history, our results support the concept that women with antiphospholipid antibodies may benefit from treatment with hydroxychloroquine during pregnancy to improve pregnancy outcome. The addition ofhydroxychloroquine to conventional treatment is worthy of further assessment in a proper designed randomized controlled trial.