Neonatal alloimmune thrombocytopenia in Norway: poor detection rate with nonscreening versus a general screening programme

Authors

  • H Tiller,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Immunology and Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway
    Search for more papers by this author
  • MK Killie,

    1. Department of Immunology and Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway
    Search for more papers by this author
  • B Skogen,

    1. Department of Immunology and Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway
    2. Department of Immunology, Institute of Medical Biology, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway
    Search for more papers by this author
  • P Øian,

    1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway
    2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway
    Search for more papers by this author
  • A Husebekk

    1. Department of Immunology and Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway
    2. Department of Immunology, Institute of Medical Biology, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway
    Search for more papers by this author

Dr H Tiller, Department of Immunology and Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, N-9038 Tromsø, Norway. Email heidi.tiller@unn.no

Abstract

The implementation of an antenatal screening programme for neonatal alloimmune thrombocytopenia (NAIT) is currently under debate. We evaluated the detection rate for NAIT in a nonscreened population of 661 200 births where NAIT was diagnosed on clinical indication. We did a cross-sectional comparison with a population of 100 448 human platelet antigen 1a (HPA1a)-screened pregnancies from three of the five health regions in Norway. In a nonscreening situation, 7.5 cases of NAIT were detected per year compared with 53 cases when screening was applied. The detection rate of NAIT in Norway was therefore 14% of the expected rate.

Ancillary