American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science
View all recommendations from this societySeptember 13, 2021
Avoid routine prothrombin time (PT) and partial thromboplastin time (PTT, APTT) pre-operative screens on asymptomatic patients, use instead a history-based bleeding assessment test.
The 1989 Medical Necessity Project of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association endorsed by the American College of Physicians found that at least 70% of PT and PTT tests were not clinically indicated. Subsequently, nine observational studies, including three prospective trials, reported that PT and PTT positive predictive values for bleeding complications ranged from 0.03 to 0.22, whereas computed 95% confidence intervals for each assay generates a 2.5% false positive rate. A review of 27,737 PT and PTT results over two decades showed that only 8% of PTs and PTTs were clinically indicated based on current or prior patient history of bleeding. A study of general hospital unregulated coagulation screening requests produced few abnormal results with no evidence that they were associated with an increased bleeding risk. In this study, all bleeding cases could be attributed to an underlying condition. The risk of intraoperative bleeding is best predicted from a careful history that includes a questionnaire-based bleeding assessment test (BAT).
These items are provided solely for informational purposes and are not intended as a substitute for consultation with a medical professional. Patients with any specific questions about the items on this list or their individual situation should consult their physician.
How The List Was Created
(1-5)
George Fritsma, MS, MLS (ASCP), and the late Cindy Johns, MS, MLS (ASCP) hosted a plenary presentation “Enhancing Laboratory Communication to Reduce Extra-analytical Errors” at the ASCLS Clinical Laboratory Educators’ Conference in Boston in February 2017. Their talk referenced the ABIMF Choosing Wisely initiative. Subsequent discussions resulted in the ASCLS Board of Directors appointing a Choosing Wisely task force that evolved to a standing committee. The committee is composed of ASCLS members representing all medical laboratory science disciplines.
The committee collaborated with respective ASCLS Scientific Assemblies in developing and reviewing recommendations, which the Board of Directors reviewed and accepted for publication. The recommendations were subsequently reviewed in collaboration with the ASCP Test Utilization Steering Committee prior to submission.
(6-10)
American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) recommendations were developed under the leadership of ASCLS’s Choosing Wisely Committee and the ASCLS president and executive vice president. The Committee examined numerous options based on evidence available through an extensive review of the literature and member proposals. Subject matter experts from the ASCLS Scientific Assemblies reviewed and recommended approval of their respective recommendations, which are subsequently approved by the ASCLS Board of Directors. The recommendations were subsequently reviewed in collaboration with the ASCP Test Utilization Steering Committee prior to submission.
Sources
Amukele TK, Baird GS, Chandler L. Reducing the use of coagulation test panels. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2011;22:688–95.
Asaf T, Reuveni H, Yermiahu T, et. al. The need for routine pre-operative coagulation screening tests (prothrombin PT/partial thromboplastin time PTT) for healthy children undergoing elective
tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy. Int J Ped Otorhinolaryngology. 2001;61:217–22.
Baker R. Pre-operative hemostatic assessment and management. Transfus Apher Sci. 2002;27:45–53.
Chee YL, Crawford JC, Watson HG, Greaves M. Guidelines on the assessment of bleeding risk prior to surgery or invasive procedures. British Committee for Standards in Haematology. Br J
Haematol. 2008;140:496–504.
Cosmi B, Alatri A, Cattaneo M, Gresele P, Marietta M, et. al. Assessment for the risk of bleeding in patients undergoing surgery or invasive procedures: Guidelines of the Italian Society for
Haemostasis and Thrombosis (SISET). Thromb Res. 2009;124:E6–12.
Houry S, Georgeac C, Hay JM, et. al. A prospective multicenter evaluation of preoperative hemostatic screening tests. The French Associations for Surgical Research. Am J Surg 1995;170:19–23.
Kolscielny J, Ziemer S, Radtke H, et.al. A practical concept for preoperative identification of patients with impaired primary hemostasis. Clin Appl Thrombosis/Hemostasis 2004;10:195–204.
McHugh J, Hold C, O’Keefe D. An assessment of the utility of unselected coagulation screening in general hospital practice. Blood Coag Fibrinolysis. 2011;22:106–9.
Mozes B, Lubin D, Modan B, et al. Evaluation of an intervention aimed at reducing inappropriate use of pre-operative blood coagulation tests. Arch Intern Med. 1989;149:1836–8.
Segal JB, Dzik WH. Paucity of studies to support that abnormal coagulation test results predict bleeding in the setting of invasive procedures: an evidence-based review. Transfusion. 2005;45:1413–25.
Wieland A, Belden L, Cunningham M. Preoperative coagulation screening for adenotonsillectomy: a review and comparison of current physician practices. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990;140:542–7
