100 Years of Milestone Developments in Hemostasis and Thrombosis

Editor's note: This essay is part of an ongoing series about the evolution of the laboratory over the past century, and part of ASCP's 100th Anniversary celebration.


The 100 years between 1922 to 2022 have witnessed revolutionary improvement in both our scientific understanding of the physiology of hemostasis and pathophysiology of thrombosis as well as the routine availability of high-quality diagnostic and monitoring testing for bleeding and clotting disorders. 

Expanding scientific understanding of hemostasis 
Fibrinogen, thrombin, and calcium were known to play a role in coagulation as early as 1905, as described by Morawitz^.1,2  In 1926, Dr. von Willebrand described patients with an autosomal mucosal bleeding disorder, but his criteria identified both patients with what we would now call von Willebrand disease as well as platelet dysfunction.³  Roman numerology for coagulation factors began in 1943 when Paul Owren described factor V.^1,4  Additional clotting factors were identified in the 1940s and 50s and coagulation factor nomenclature was rationalized and standardized in 1959 by consensus agreement.⁵  The familiar cascade/waterfall theories of coagulation were promulgated in the 1960s.^6,7 

Since these foundational discoveries, the hemostasis field has seen the benefits of factor concentrates for patient care, the devastation of HIV and hepatitis in the hemophilia patient community, the cloning of coagulation factors, and the true revolution of current hemophilia care advancements.^8-10  Additionally, the cell-based model of coagulation has been accepted to capture the accurate in vivo interplay of plasmatic coagulation factors as well as platelets and tissue factor (TF)-bearing cells.¹¹ 

Advances in diagnostic testing for bleeding and clotting disorders 
Primary hemostasis 
The quintessential point-of-care and whole blood clotting test, bleeding time was first described in 1901 as a screen for platelet dysfunction or coagulation factor deficiency. In 1982, approximately 1 million bleeding time determinations were performed annually in the United States.¹²  Rodgers and Levin published a landmark meta-analysis in 1990 questioning the use of the bleeding time as an accurate screen for bleeding disorders; particularly in a low-risk group such as pre-operative patients with no documented abnormal bleeding events, the bleeding time was no better than a coin flip at predicting bleeding events.¹² Since that time, bleeding times have become nearly unheard of in the United States as a routine clinical test.^13-15 Correspondingly, whole blood laboratory assays such as the PFA-100 have increased in utilization as a screen for disorders of primary hemostasis.¹⁶ 

In 1962, Born and O’Brien developed platelet light-transmission aggregometry (LTA), the gold standard platelet function assay.¹⁷  Automated instruments for combined detection of platelet aggregation and dense granule secretion were developed in the 1970s¹⁸ and computer-assisted aggregation/secretion trace analysis was described in 1984.19  Whole blood impendence aggregometry was shown to be an accurate method that could reduce the preanalytical work and volume of blood required, compared to LTA.^20,21 

Secondary hemostasis 
Citrated plasma-based testing has been the backbone of routine laboratory hemostasis testing. Seminal achievements in laboratory hemostasis testing include Quick’s description of the prothrombin time (PT) in 1935 (using rabbit brain thromboplastin and oxalate plasma) and the development of the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) by Langdell, Wagner, and Brinkhous in 1953.^2,22,23 These assays remain the foundation of routine coagulation testing to this day. The growth of the utilization of the PT and aPTT mirrored somewhat the development of anticoagulant medications which could be monitored by these assays: the discoveries of heparin by McLean and Howell in 1916 and dicoumarol by Campbell and Link in 1941.²⁴  

Rabbit brain-derived thromboplastin was the basis of the PT for many years.  The International Normalized Ratio (INR) method of reporting prothrombin time values was introduced in 1983 by the Expert Committee on Biological Standardization of the World Health Organization to standardize laboratory monitoring of oral anticoagulant therapy. Standardization was needed due to the significant variation in PT results derived from different commercial thromboplastin reagents, corresponding to their differential response to deficiency of vitamin K-dependent clotting factors.^25,26 With the cloning of the tissue factor (TF) gene in 1987,²⁷ recombinant human TF-based thromboplastins were developed (thromboplastins containing human TF were previously available from processed placentas).²⁸ The availability of recombinant human tissue factor made it easier to produce sensitive thromboplastin reagents in commercial quantities,²⁹ with the additional benefit that recombinant thromboplastins are a highly defined reagent allowing further standardization of PT testing.³⁰ The 1998 College of American Pathologists Conference XXXI on Laboratory Monitoring of Anticoagulant Therapy published a recommendation that laboratories use thromboplastins with an International Sensitivity Index (ISI) between 0.9 and 1.7, with a preference for reagents with an ISI toward the lower end of the scale.³¹ Although the effect of using sensitive thromboplastins on precision is modest, data from interlaboratory proficiency testing programs generally support the recommendation for an ISI close to 1.0.²⁶ 

The introduction of evacuated tubes in the late 1940s enhanced the precision and accuracy of coagulation test results by easing collection (eliminating the need for syringes) and standardizing blood-to-additive ratios.³² We have further progressed from glass evacuated citrate tubes to plastic evacuated tubes containing liquid citrate with a polypropylene insert tube within the polyethylene outer tube. In such configurations, the inner polypropylene tube is a non-activating surface and prevents the loss of water vapor, while the outer tube preserves the vacuum.³² Moving from glass to plastic blood tubes was a significant safety improvement for phlebotomists, nurses, and medical technologists, and technicians.³³ 

There has been a continuing increase in the use of semi- and fully automated devices for coagulation testing in the past 60 years. While the methodology of detecting changes in light passage or in the movement of a metal ball in a clotting plasma sample remain similar, automation moves the end-point detection from the human eye to a precise optical detection or electromagnetic circuit.  In 1962 essentially all coagulation tests were done using manual techniques. By 1969, about 40 percent of prothrombin time testing was being done using a semi-automated device, most often the Fibrometer.  Such a device automated endpoint detection while requiring the operator to be continually present for sample application.³⁴ By 1977 more than 80 percent of American hospital laboratories in a CAP survey performed PT and aPTT using some degree of automation.³⁵ We have now progressed to nearly all routine coagulation assays in the developed world being performed by automated techniques; fully automated tests show increased precision and therefore increase the reliability of patient testing results.³⁵ Large laboratories increasingly make use of total laboratory automation with interfacing of hemostasis measurement devices onto automated laboratory delivery lines.³⁶ We continue to attempt to harmonize standard coagulation testing, to further improve laboratory monitoring and patient care.³⁷   

Whole blood testing has received new attention in the past three to four decades with the use of viscoelastic testing (VET).^38,39 VET uses a physiologic matrix and captures the interplay of platelets, coagulation factors, tissue factor-bearing cells such as monocytes, and red blood cells.¹¹ For operative or massively bleeding patients, VET-based transfusion algorithms offer benefits over conventional coagulation assays with reductions in blood product utilization, bleeding, costs, and lengths of stay.⁴⁰  

Finally, thrombin generation assays (TGA) offer the ability to specifically measure the generation of thrombin in platelet-poor plasma, platelet-rich plasma, or whole blood.^41,42 The generation of thrombin correlates well with bleeding events and offers the potential to more objectively measure the hemophilic phenotype as well as the response to treatment.⁴³ Additionally, TGA may have a role in thrombosis prediction.^44,45 TGA is not currently FDA approved for clinical use in the United States, however. 

Conclusion 
As with most other areas of biology and medicine, the past 100 years have seen truly remarkable advancements in hemostasis science and coagulation laboratory testing. However, as is generally true in medicine, disease will continue to challenge us and show the limits of our knowledge and capabilities. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought these issues to the fore, from the limitations of standard coagulation assays for predicting thrombosis in COVID-19 patients, to the newly described vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT).⁴⁶    

Further progress in scientific knowledge as well as standardization, automation, and new assay development will continue to advance the accuracy and utility of the coagulation laboratory. As we look forward to another successful 100 years in the hemostasis field, we must remember that dedicated, knowledgeable, and skilled laboratory professionals are the foundation of our work.    

References  

1. Stormorken H. The discovery of factor V: a tricky clotting factor. J Thromb Haemost. 2003;1(2):206-213. 

2. Marder VJ, Aird WC, Bennett JS, Schulman S, White II GC. The Field of Hemostasis and Thrombosis: Selected Translational Achievements. In: Marder VJ, Aird WC, Bennett JS, Schulman S, White II GC, eds. Hemostasis and Thrombosis: Basic Principles and Clinical Practice. 6 ed: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2013. 

3. James PD, Goodeve AC. von Willebrand disease. Genet Med. 2011;13(5):365-376. 

4. Owren PA. Parahaemophilia; haemorrhagic diathesis due to absence of a previously unknown clotting factor. Lancet. 1947;1(6449):446-448. 

5. Wright IS. Nomenclature of blood clotting factors. Acceptance by the International Committee on Nomenclature of four factors, their characteristics, and international number. CMAJ. 1959;80:659-661. 

6. Macfarlane RG. An Enzyme Cascade in the Blood Clotting Mechanism, and Its Function as a Biochemical Amplifier. Nature. 1964;202:498-499. 

7. Davie EW, Ratnoff OD. Waterfall Sequence for Intrinsic Blood Clotting. Science. 1964;145(3638):1310-1312. 

8. Franchini M, Mannucci PM. The history of hemophilia. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2014;40(5):571-576. 

9. Schramm W. The history of haemophilia - a short review. Thromb Res. 2014;134 Suppl 1:S4-9. 

10. White GC. Hemophilia: an amazing 35-year journey from the depths of HIV to the threshold of cure. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2010;121:61-73; discussion 74-65. 

11. Hoffman M, Cichon LJ. Practical coagulation for the blood banker. Transfusion. 2013;53(7):1594-1602. 

12. Rodgers RP, Levin J. A critical reappraisal of the bleeding time. Semin Thromb Hemost. 1990;16(1):1-20. 

13. Lind SE. The bleeding time does not predict surgical bleeding. Blood. 1991;77(12):2547-2552. 

14. Peterson P, Hayes TE, Arkin CF, et al. The preoperative bleeding time test lacks clinical benefit: College of American Pathologists' and American Society of Clinical Pathologists' position article. Arch Surg. 1998;133(2):134-139. 

15. Russeau AP, Vall H, Manna B. Bleeding Time. StatPearls  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537233/. Accessed 11/6/2021, 2021. 

16. Podda GM, Bucciarelli P, Lussana F, Lecchi A, Cattaneo M. Usefulness of PFA-100 testing in the diagnostic screening of patients with suspected abnormalities of hemostasis: comparison with the bleeding time. J Thromb Haemost. 2007;5(12):2393-2398. 

17. Born GV. Aggregation of blood platelets by adenosine diphosphate and its reversal. Nature. 1962;194:927-929. 

18. Feinman RD, Lubowsky J, Charo I, Zabinski MP. The lumi-aggregometer: a new instrument for simultaneous measurement of secretion and aggregation by platelets. J Lab Clin Med. 1977;90(1):125-129. 

19. Miller JL. Platelet function testing: an improved approach utilizing lumi-aggregation and an interactive computer system. Am J Clin Pathol. 1984;81(4):471-476. 

20. Riess H, Braun G, Brehm G, Hiller E. Critical evaluation of platelet aggregation in whole human blood. Am J Clin Pathol. 1986;85(1):50-56. 

21. Cardinal DC, Flower RJ. The electronic aggregometer: a novel device for assessing platelet behavior in blood. J Pharmacol Methods. 1980;3(2):135-158. 

22. White GC, 2nd. The partial thromboplastin time: defining an era in coagulation. J Thromb Haemost. 2003;1(11):2267-2270. 

23. Quick AJ. The development and use of the prothrombin tests. Circulation. 1959;19(1):92-96. 

24. Wardrop D, Keeling D. The story of the discovery of heparin and warfarin. Br J Haematol. 2008;141(6):757-763. 

25. Loeliger EA, Poller L, Samama M, et al. Questions and answers on prothrombin time standardisation in oral anticoagulant control. Thromb Haemost. 1985;54(2):515-517. 

26. Adcock DM. Q&A. CAP Today: CAP; 2003. 

27. Morrissey JH, Fakhrai H, Edgington TS. Molecular cloning of the cDNA for tissue factor, the cellular receptor for the initiation of the coagulation protease cascade. Cell. 1987;50(1):129-135. 

28. Bader R, Mannucci PM, Tripodi A, et al. Multicentric evaluation of a new PT reagent based on recombinant human tissue factor and synthetic phospholipids. Thromb Haemost. 1994;71(3):292-299. 

29. Hirsh J, Poller L. The international normalized ratio. A guide to understanding and correcting its problems. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154(3):282-288. 

30. Tripodi A, Arbini A, Chantarangkul V, Mannucci PM. Recombinant tissue factor as substitute for conventional thromboplastin in the prothrombin time test. Thromb Haemost. 1992;67(1):42-45. 

31. Fairweather RB, Ansell J, van den Besselaar AM, et al. College of American Pathologists Conference XXXI on laboratory monitoring of anticoagulant therapy: laboratory monitoring of oral anticoagulant therapy. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998;122(9):768-781. 

32. Bush V, Cohen R. The Evolution of Evacuated Blood Collection Tubes. Laboratory Medicine. 2003;34(4):304-310. 

33. Ernst DJ. Plastic collection tubes decrease risk of employee injury. MLO Med Lab Obs. 2001;33(5):44-46, 48, 50. 

34. Miale JB. The Fibrometer System for Routine Coagulation Tests: Prothrombin Time and Partial Thromboplastin Time, Macro and Micro. Am J Clin Pathol. 1965;43:475-480. 

35. Koepke JA, Klee GG. Automated coagulation detection systems. Clin Lab Haematol. 1979;1(2):75-86. 

36. Lippi G, Plebani M, Favaloro EJ. Technological advances in the hemostasis laboratory. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2014;40(2):178-185. 

37. Dorgalaleh A, Favaloro EJ, Bahraini M, Rad F. Standardization of Prothrombin Time/International Normalized Ratio (PT/INR). Int J Lab Hematol. 2021;43(1):21-28. 

38. Carll TC, Wool GD. Basic Principles of Viscoelastic Testing. Transfusion. 2020;Submitted. 

39. Kang YG, Martin DJ, Marquez J, et al. Intraoperative changes in blood coagulation and thrombelastographic monitoring in liver transplantation. Anesth Analg. 1985;64(9):888-896. 

40. Cohen T, Haas T, Cushing MM. The strengths and weaknesses of viscoelastic testing compared to traditional coagulation testing. Transfusion. 2020;60 Suppl 6:S21-S28. 

41. Al Dieri R, de Laat B, Hemker HC. Thrombin generation: what have we learned? Blood Rev. 2012;26(5):197-203. 

42. Wan J, Konings J, Yan Q, et al. A novel assay for studying the involvement of blood cells in whole blood thrombin generation. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(6):1291-1301. 

43. Young G, Sorensen B, Dargaud Y, Negrier C, Brummel-Ziedins K, Key NS. Thrombin generation and whole blood viscoelastic assays in the management of hemophilia: current state of art and future perspectives. Blood. 2013;121(11):1944-1950. 

44. O'Donnell J, Mumford AD, Manning RA, Laffan MA. Marked elevation of thrombin generation in patients with elevated FVIII:C and venous thromboembolism. Br J Haematol. 2001;115(3):687-691. 

45. Lim HY, O'Malley C, Donnan G, Nandurkar H, Ho P. A review of global coagulation assays - Is there a role in thrombosis risk prediction? Thromb Res. 2019;179:45-55. 

46. Thachil J. Lessons learnt from COVID-19 coagulopathy. EJHaem. 2021.