Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication of COVID-19, so that the importance of adequate in-hospital thromboprophylaxis in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is well established. However, the incidence of VTE after discharge and whether postdischarge thromboprophylaxis is beneficial and safe are unclear. In this prospective observational single-center study, we report the incidence of VTE 6 weeks after hospitalization and the use of postdischarge thromboprophylaxis. Methods Patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 were invited to a multidisciplinary follow-up clinic 6 weeks after discharge. D-dimer and C-reactive protein were measured, and all patients were screened for deep vein thrombosis with venous duplex-ultrasound. Additionally, selected high-risk patients received computed tomography pulmonary angiogram or ventilation–perfusion (V/Q) scan to screen for incidental pulmonary embolism. Results Of 485 consecutive patients hospitalized from March through June 2020, 146 patients were analyzed, of which 39% had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Postdischarge thromboprophylaxis was prescribed in 28% of patients, but was used more frequently after ICU stay (61%) and in patients with higher maximal D-dimer and C-reactive protein levels during hospitalization. Six weeks after discharge, elevated D-dimer values were present in 32% of ward and 42% of ICU patients. Only one asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (0.7%) and one symptomatic pulmonary embolism (0.7%) were diagnosed with systematic screening. No bleedings were reported. Conclusion In patients who had been hospitalized with COVID-19, systematic screening for VTE 6 weeks after discharge revealed a low incidence of VTE. A strategy of selectively providing postdischarge thromboprophylaxis in high-risk patients seems safe and potentially effective.

Lower throughput CZE using the Sebia Minicap Flex Piercing can be used for precise and accurate first line screening and follow-up of hemoglobinopathies.

Introduction Sysmex XN‐9100™ (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) system has an optional White Progenitor Cell (WPC) channel. While the White Differentiation (WDF) channel reports a combined flag for blasts/abnormal lymphocytes, WPC channel specifies flagging into a separate flag for each cell type or removes the flag entirely. Aim of this study was to evaluate the added value of this WPC channel in the detection of malignant samples. Methods Routine blood samples analyzed on Sysmex XE‐5000 with flagging for either blasts, abnormal lymphocytes, or atypical lymphocytes (n = 630) were selected for testing on Sysmex XN‐9100, resulting in a reflex WPC analysis in 420 samples. All samples were microscopically evaluated with DI‐60 digital cell imaging analyzer. Results WPC reflex testing resulted in a suspect flag ("blasts" and/or "abnormal lymphocytes") in 334 samples, which was confirmed microscopically in 38% (128/334). In all true positive samples, WPC correctly classified the initial WDF flag in either "blasts" flag or "abnormal lymphocytes?" flag in 75%. Only 12% (50/420) of WDF "blasts/abnormal lymphocytes" positive samples became negative after WPC reflex testing. Subgroup analysis showed differences between the "pediatric" versus "adult" groups and the "hematological/chemotherapy" versus "nonhematological/nonchemotherapy" groups in specificity and smear reduction. Conclusion Overall, WPC reflex testing showed good sensitivity (99%); however, the specificity remains poor (29%). Using reflex WPC to the WDF channel resulted in a 12% reduction of the smear review rate. Although the WPC channel offers different interesting advantages, additional topics and a specific workflow should be applied to optimize the use of this channel.

Objectives: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first discovered in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, and soon spread around the entire world. As no effective treatment is known, prediction of disease severity is very important in order to estimate a patients outcome. Aim of this study was to evaluate routine hematology parameters in time after admission. Methods: Data from routine blood analyses from confirmed COVID-19 cases admitted to the University Hospital of Leuven in Belgium were collected. COVID-19 patients (n = 197) were assigned to three groups: a 'non-ICU' group, a 'ICU' group and a 'deceased' group. A control group of 60 Influenza A (non-COVID-19) patients was also included. The parameters evaluated were platelet count (PLT, 10 9 /L), hemoglobin concentration (Hb, g/dL), leukocyte count (LEU, 10 9 /L), neutrophil count (NEU, %), eosinophil count (EO, %), lymphocyte count (LYM, %) and monocyte count (MONO, %). Results: Deceased COVID-19 patients had significant lower platelet count, higher leukocyte/ neutrophil count, and lower eosinophil/lymphocyte/monocyte count compared to recovered patients. Especially lymphocyte count showed important differences; they were significantly lower between day 9 and 12 after admission making this time window important in predicting clinical worsening of a patient. Conclusion: Patients with COVID-19 with poor outcome showed significant differences in results of routine hematological parameters compared with patients that recovered. Especially lymphocyte count can be helpful in the prediction of a patients outcome.

No abstract