von Willebrand disease: proposing definitions for future research

Thrombosis and Hemostasi

ASH ISTH NHF WFH 2021 guidelines on the diagnosis of von Willebrand disease

Background: von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder known in humans. Accurate and timely diagnosis presents numerous challenges.Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH), the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH), the National Hemophilia Foundation (NHF), and the World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about VWD diagnosis.Methods: ASH, ISTH, NHF, and WFH established a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 4 patient representatives and was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The Outcomes and Implementation Research Unit at the University of Kansas Medical Center (KUMC) supported the guideline-development process, including performing or updating systematic evidence reviews up to 8 January 2020. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subsequently subject to public comment.Results: The panel agreed on 11 recommendations.Conclusions: Key recommendations of these guidelines include the role of bleeding-assessment tools in the assessment of patients suspected of VWD, diagnostic assays and laboratory cutoffs for type 1 and type 2 VWD, how to approach a type 1 VWD patient with normalized levels over time, and the role of genetic testing vs phenotypic assays for types 2B and 2N. Future critical research priorities are also identified.Thrombosis and Hemostasi

Surgical management of patients with von Willebrand disease: summary of 2 systematic reviews of the literature

von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder. The management of patients with VWD who are undergoing surgeries is crucial to prevent bleeding complications. We systematically summarized the evidence on the management of patients with VWD who are undergoing major and minor surgeries to support the development of practice guidelines. We searched Medline and EMBASE from inception through October 2019 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs), comparative observational studies, and case series that compared maintaining factor VIII (FVIII) levels or von Willebrand factor (VWF) levels at >0.50 IU/mL for at least 3 days in patients undergoing major surgery, and those with options for perioperative management of patients undergoing minor surgery. Two authors screened and abstracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We conducted meta-analyses when possible. We evaluated the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. We included 7 case series for major surgeries and 2 RCTs and 12 case series for minor surgeries. Very-low-certainty evidence showed that maintaining FVIII levels or VWF levels of >0.50 IU/mL for at least 3 consecutive days showed excellent hemostatic efficacy (as labeled by the researchers) after 74% to 100% of major surgeries. Low- to very-low-certainty evidence showed that prescribing tranexamic acid and increasing VWF levels to 0.50 IU/mL resulted in fewer bleeding complications after minor procedures compared with increasing VWF levels to 0.50 IU/mL alone. Given the low-quality evidence for guiding management decisions, a shared-decision model leading to individualized therapy plans will be important in patients with VWD who are undergoing surgical and invasive procedures

von Willebrand factor levels in the diagnosis of von Willebrand disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

von Willebrand disease (VWD) is associated with significant morbidity as a result of excessive mucocutaneous bleeding. Early diagnosis and treatment are important to prevent and treat these symptoms. We systematically reviewed the accuracy of diagnostic tests using different cutoff values of von Willebrand factor antigen (VWF:Ag) and platelet-dependent von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity assays in the diagnosis of VWD. We searched Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for eligible studies. We pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity and reported patient-important outcomes when relevant. This review included 21 studies that evaluated VWD diagnosis. The results showed low certainty in the evidence for a net health benefit from reconsidering the diagnosis of VWD vs removing the disease diagnosis in patients with VWF levels that have normalized with age. For the diagnosis of type 1 VWD, VWF sequence variants were detected in 75% to 82% of patients with VWF:Ag < 0.30 IU/mL and in 44% to 60% of patients with VWF:Ag between 0.30 and 0.50 IU/mL. A sensitivity of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.94) and a specificity of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.76-0.97) were observed for a platelet-dependent VWF activity/VWF:Ag ratio < 0.7 in detecting type 2 VWD (moderate certainty in the test accuracy results). VWF:Ag and platelet-dependent activity are continuous variables that are associated with an increase in bleeding risk with decreasing levels. This systematic review shows that using a VWF activity/VWF:Ag ratio < 0.7 vs lower cutoff levels in patients with an abnormal initial VWD screen is more accurate for the diagnosis of type 2 VWD.Thrombosis and Hemostasi

Laboratory assays of VWF activity and use of desmopressin trials in the diagnosis of VWD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

von Willebrand Disease (VWD) is associated with significant morbidity because of excessive bleeding. Early diagnosis and treatment are important to prevent and treat these symptoms. We systematically reviewed the accuracy of any von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity assay in the diagnosis and classification of patients for VWD. We searched Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for eligible studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 and the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework. We pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. The review included 77 studies that evaluated the use of newer tests of VWF platelet binding activity (VWF:GPIbR, VWF:GPIbM) and VWF:RCo for the diagnosis of VWD (13 studies), VWF propeptide to VWF:Ag ratio, and desmopressin trial for the diagnosis of type 1C VWD (5 studies), VWF multimer analysis and VWF:CB/VWF:Ag ratio for the classification of type 2 VWD (11 studies), genetic testing and ristocetin-induced platelet aggregation to diagnose type 2B VWD (14 studies), genetic testing and FVIII:VWF binding to diagnose type 2N VWD (17 studies). Based on available diagnostic test accuracy, there appear to be comparable test accuracy results between newer tests of platelet binding activity of VWF function and VWF:RCo. The findings of these reviews support VWF multimer analysis or VWF:CB/VWF:Ag to diagnose type 2 VWD. The desmopressin trial test with 1- and 4-hour postinfusion blood work is the test of choice to confirm increased VWF clearance in patients with suspected VWD type 1C. Additionally, genetic testing is most useful in diagnosing type 2B VWD and has a role in the diagnostic algorithm of suspected type 2N VWD.Thrombosis and Hemostasi

ASH ISTH NHF WFH 2021 guidelines on the management of von Willebrand disease

Background: Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is a common inherited bleeding disorder. Significant variability exists in management options offered to patients. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH), the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH), the National Hemophilia Foundation (NHF), and the World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and health care professionals in their decisions about management of VWD. Methods: ASH, ISTH, NHF, and WFH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel. Three patient representatives were included. The panel was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The University of Kansas Outcomes and Implementation Research Unit and the McMaster Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Centre supported the guideline development process, including performing and updating systematic evidence reviews (through November 2019). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance to clinicians and patients. The panel used the GRADE approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. Results: The panel agreed on 12 recommendations and outlined future research priorities. Conclusions: These guidelines make key recommendations regarding prophylaxis for frequent recurrent bleeding, desmopressin trials to determine therapy, use of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulant therapy, target VWF and factor VIII activity levels for major surgery, strategies to reduce bleeding during minor surgery or invasive procedures, management options for heavy menstrual bleeding, management of VWD in the context of neuraxial anesthesia during labor and delivery, and management in the postpartum setting

Bleeding assessment tools in the diagnosis of VWD in adults and children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy

Von Willebrand disease (VWD) can be associated with significant morbidity. Patients with VWD can experience bruising, mucocutaneous bleeding, and bleeding after dental and surgical procedures. Early diagnosis and treatment are important to minimize the risk of these complications. Several bleeding assessment tools (BATs) have been used to quantify bleeding symptoms as a screening tool for VWD. We systematically reviewed diagnostic test accuracy results of BATs to screen patients for VWD. We searched Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for eligible studies, reference lists of relevant reviews, registered trials, and relevant conference proceedings. Two investigators screened and abstracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. We pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. The review included 7 cohort studies that evaluated the use of BATs to screen adult and pediatric patients for VWD. The pooled estimates for sensitivity and specificity were 75% (95% confidence interval, 66-83) and 54% (29-77), respectively. Certainty of evidence varied from moderate to high. This systematic review provides accuracy estimates for validated BATs as a screening modality for VWD. A BAT is a useful initial screening test to determine who needs specific blood testing. The pretest probability of VWD (often determined by the clinical setting/patient population), along with sensitivity and specificity estimates, will influence patient management.Thrombosis and Hemostasi

von Willebrand disease: proposing definitions for future research

Thrombosis and Hemostasi