scholarly journals Intermediate vs Standard-dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to ICU: Ninety-day Results from the INSPIRATION Trial

Author(s):  
Behnood Bikdeli ◽  
Azita H Talasaz ◽  
Farid Rashidi ◽  
Hooman Bakhshandeh ◽  
Farnaz Rafiee ◽  
...  

Background: Thrombotic complications are considered among the main extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. The optimal type and duration of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy in these patients remain unknown. Methods: This manuscript reports the final (90-day) results of the Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) study. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care were randomized to intermediate-dose versus standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation for 30 days, irrespective of hospital discharge status. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or all-cause death. The main safety outcome was major bleeding. Results: Of 600 randomized patients, 562 entered the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median age [Q1, Q3]; 62 (50, 71) years; 237 (42.2%) women), of whom 336 (59.8%) survived to hospital discharge. The primary outcome occurred in 132 (47.8%) of patients assigned to intermediate-dose and 130 (45.4%) patients assigned to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.55, P=0.11). No significant differences were observed between the two groups for other efficacy outcomes, or in the landmark analysis from days 31-90. Overall, there were 7 (2.5%) major bleeding events in the intermediate-dose group (including 3 fatal events) and 4 (1.4%) major bleeding events in the standard-dose group (none fatal) (HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 0.53-6.24, P=0.33). Conclusion: Intermediate-dose compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not reduce a composite of death, treatment with ECMO, or venous or arterial thrombosis at 90-day follow-up.

2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (1141) ◽  
pp. 693-702
Author(s):  
Qing Chen ◽  
Yuanyuan Zhang ◽  
Zhen Wang ◽  
Shuai Wang ◽  
Hao Zhang ◽  
...  

Our aim was to examine clinical trials, provide guidance to practitioners and estimate the efficacy and safety of two agents by comparing low dose ticagrelor with standard dose clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome. We systematically looked through Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Wanfang data and CNKI for trials comparing low dose ticagrelor with standard dose clopidogrel for the treatment of patients with ACS since the database was created. The primary endpoint for efficacy was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). The primary endpoint for safety was the rate of major bleeding events. We also evaluated platelet function between low dose ticagrelor and standard dose clopidogrel in ACS patients. From 6744 articles, 16 studies including 1629 patients met the inclusion criteria. In contrast with standard dose clopidogrel, low dose ticagrelor significantly reduced MACEs (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26, 0.58) and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.01). No difference was noted for major bleeding events (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.43, 3.08) between the two agents (p=0.77). In addition, low dose ticagrelor showed lower platelet aggregation rate than clopidogrel (standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.68, 95% CI −0.83 to 0.53) (p<0.01). Platelet reaction units for low dose ticagrelor were much lower than those for standard dose clopidogrel (SMD −2.46, 95% CI −2.85 to −2.07) (p<0.01). In comparison with standard dose clopidogrel, low dose ticagrelor significantly lowered the incidence of MACEs, improved left ventricular ejection fraction, decreased left ventricular end diastolic dimension and did not expand the risk of major bleeding events or minor or minimal bleeding events in ACS patients with a considerable safety and efficacy profile. In addition, low dose ticagrelor was associated with dramatically lower platelet aggregation compared with standard dose clopidogrel.


CJEM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (S1) ◽  
pp. S109-S110
Author(s):  
J. Chao ◽  
P. Brasher ◽  
K. Cheung ◽  
R. Sharma ◽  
K. Badke ◽  
...  

Introduction: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are first-line analgesics for emergency department (ED) patients with renal colic. Lower doses of intravenous (IV) ketorolac may provide similar pain relief to standard dosing in patients with acute pain. Patients with renal colic may be at increased risk of acute kidney injury; exposing them to lower doses of NSAIDs may put them at lower risk while providing equally effective analgesia. We conducted a pilot study to determine the feasibility of a randomized trial comparing the effectiveness and safety of low with standard ketorolac dosing in ED patients with suspected renal colic. The primary objective was to demonstrate the ability to achieve an enrolment target of 2 patients per week. Methods: We enrolled a convenience sample of adults presenting to an academic urban ED with unilateral flank pain suspected to be renal colic. We randomized patients to 10 mg (low dose, intervention) or 30 mg (standard dose, control). Participants, treating physicians and nurses, and researchers were blinded to treatment allocation. Our main feasibility outcome was the recruitment rate. Secondary outcomes were changes in pain scores (0-10) at 30 and 120 minutes post-ketorolac administration, vital signs, adverse events and ED length of stay. Results: We approached 82 patients, of whom 47 (57.3%) were eligible. Of these, 36 consented to participating and 30 were randomized. The proportion of screened patients who were enrolled was 36.6% (30/82). We completed enrolment over a 21-week period, with an average recruitment rate of 1.5 patients/week (range 0-4). The average baseline pain score for all participants was 6.9 (SD = 2.1). At 30 minutes post-ketorolac administration, the low dose group had a mean pain reduction of 2.0 points compared to a pain reduction of 1.7 in standard dose group (difference = 0.3, 90% CI: -0.7 to 1.4). Conclusion: These preliminary results support the possibility that low dose ketorolac may be efficacious in this patient population. We did not meet our target recruitment of 2 patients per week as this was primarily due to restricted recruitment hours. To successfully conduct a larger trial, we would need to expand both recruitment hours and the number of sites.


Author(s):  
Alexandra Jayne Nelson ◽  
Brian W Johnston ◽  
Alicia Achiaa Charlotte Waite ◽  
Gedeon Lemma ◽  
Ingeborg Dorothea Welters

Background. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in critically ill patients. There is a paucity of data assessing the impact of anticoagulation strategies on clinical outcomes for general critical care patients with AF. Our aim was to assess the existing literature to evaluate the effectiveness of anticoagulation strategies used in critical care for AF. Methodology. A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PubMed databases. Studies reporting anticoagulation strategies for AF in adults admitted to a general critical care setting were assessed for inclusion. Results. Four studies were selected for data extraction. A total of 44087 patients were identified with AF, of which 17.8-49.4% received anticoagulation. The reported incidence of thromboembolic events was 0-1.4% for anticoagulated patients, and 0-1.3% in non-anticoagulated patients. Major bleeding events were reported in three studies and occurred in 7.2-8.6% of the anticoagulated patients and up to 7.1% of the non-anticoagulated patients. Conclusions. There was an increased incidence of major bleeding events in anticoagulated patients with AF in critical care compared to non-anticoagulated patients. There was no significant difference in the incidence of reported thromboembolic events within studies, between patients who did and did not receive anticoagulation. However, the outcomes reported within studies were not standardised, therefore, the generalisability of our results to the general critical care population remains unclear. Further data is required to facilitate an evidence-based assessment of the risks and benefits of anticoagulation for critically ill patients with AF.


2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 315-324
Author(s):  
Julien Durand ◽  
Stéphanie Parat ◽  
Jean-Christophe Lega ◽  
Yessim Dargaud ◽  
Véronique Potinet ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuo-Min Hsu ◽  
Hung-Jen Lin ◽  
Yi-Wei Kao ◽  
Te-Mao Li ◽  
Ben-Chang Shia ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: This retrospective cohort study investigated the risk of major bleeding events during the concurrent use of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) and anticoagulants in clinical practice. Methods: A total of 4,470 patients receiving anticoagulant drugs were selected from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Half (n=2,235) were also using CHMs (CHM cohort); the other half were not (non-CHM cohort). Each cohort was matched 1:1 using the propensity score. Chi-square testing and the Student’s t-test were used to examine differences between two cohorts. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis assessed the risks for major bleeding events in each cohort, as well as bleeding risks associated with specific CHM formulas and herbs. Cumulative incidence curves for major bleeding events were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Compared with the non-CHM cohort, the CHM cohort had a lower risk of overall bleeding events (p < 0.001) including hemorrhagic stroke (p = 0.008), gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (p < 0.001), urogenital bleeding (p ≤ 0.001) and nasal/ear/eye bleeding (p = 0.004). Single herbs, such as Glycyrrhiza uralensis et Rhizoma, Panax notoginseng, Panax ginseng, Platycodon grandiflorum, Eucommia ulmoides Oliver and formulas, such as Shu Jing Huo Xue Tang, Shao Yao Gan Cao Tang and Ji Sheng Shen Qi Wan were associated with a lower risk of major bleeding events. Conclusions: Using CHMs with anticoagulants appeared to decrease the risk of major bleeding. Further investigations are needed to determine whether CHM can maintain the therapeutic efficacy of anticoagulants while simultaneously reducing potential side effects.Trial registration: Not applicable.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sirui Zhang ◽  
Yupei Li ◽  
Guina Liu ◽  
Baihai Su

Abstract Background Anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients has been associated with survival benefit; however, the optimal anticoagulant strategy has not yet been defined. The objective of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of intermediate-to-therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis on the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality and other patient-centered secondary outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to August 10th 2021. Cohort studies and randomized clinical trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of intermediate-to-therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients were included. Baseline characteristics and relevant data of each study were extracted in a pre-designed standardized data-collection form. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcomes were incidence of thrombotic events and incidence of any bleeding and major bleeding. Pooled analysis with random effects models yielded relative risk with 95 % CIs. Results This meta-analysis included 42 studies with 28,055 in-hospital COVID-19 patients totally. Our pooled analysis demonstrated that intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation was not associated with lower in-hospital mortality (RR=1.12, 95 %CI 0.99-1.25, p=0.06, I2=77 %) and lower incidence of thrombotic events (RR=1.30, 95 %CI 0.79-2.15, p=0.30, I2=88 %), but increased the risk of any bleeding events (RR=2.16, 95 %CI 1.79-2.60, p<0.01, I2=31 %) and major bleeding events significantly (RR=2.10, 95 %CI 1.77-2.51, p<0.01, I2=11 %) versus prophylactic anticoagulation. Moreover, intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation decreased the incidence of thrombotic events (RR=0.71, 95 %CI 0.56-0.89, p=0.003, I2=0 %) among critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU), with increased bleeding risk (RR=1.66, 95 %CI 1.37-2.00, p<0.01, I2=0 %) and unchanged in-hospital mortality (RR=0.94, 95 %CI 0.79-1.10, p=0.42, I2=30 %) in such patients. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Conclusions We recommend the use of prophylactic anticoagulation against intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation among unselected hospitalized COVID-19 patients considering insignificant survival benefits but higher risk of bleeding in the escalated thromboprophylaxis strategy. For critically ill COVID-19 patients, the benefits of intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation in reducing thrombotic events should be weighed cautiously because of its association with higher risk of bleeding. Trial registration The protocol was registered at PROSPERO on August 17th 2021 (CRD42021273780). Graphical abstract


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 352-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhonghua Wu ◽  
Ao-Fei Liu ◽  
Ji Zhou ◽  
Yiqun Zhang ◽  
Kai Wang ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo investigate the safety of triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT) with cilostazol in patients undergoing stenting for extracranial and/or intracranial artery stenosis.MethodsA prospectively collected database was reviewed to identify patients who underwent stenting for extracranial and/or intracranial artery stenosis and showed resistance to aspirin and/or clopidogrel as assessed by pre-stenting thromboelastography (TEG) testing. Patients were assigned to a TAT group and a dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) group. Major complications were defined as thromboembolic events (transient ischemic attack (TIA), ischemic stroke, and stent thrombosis) or major bleeding events within 30 days, and minor complications were defined as extracranial bleeding that did not require vascular surgery or transfusion within 30 days.ResultsA total of 183 patients were identified. The incidence of major complications was significantly lower in the TAT group than in the DAT group (TAT group vs. DAT group, 1/110 vs. 6/73; P=0.017). TIAs occurred in four patients, with one in the TAT group and three in the DAT group (1/110 vs. 3/73; P=0.303). Ischemic strokes occurred in three patients in the DAT group (TAT group vs. DAT group, P=0.062). No major bleeding events or stent thrombosis was recorded in either group. Two patients (one in each group) experienced minor complications that resolved without additional treatment (1/110 vs. 1/73; P>0.999).ConclusionsTAT under TEG guidance appears to be a safe antiplatelet strategy in patients undergoing stenting for extracranial and/or intracranial artery stenosis. By employing TAT under TEG guidance, favorable outcomes can be achieved in these patients.


Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin A Steinberg ◽  
DaJuanicia N Simon ◽  
Laine Thomas ◽  
Jack Ansell ◽  
Gregg C Fonarow ◽  
...  

Background: Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are effective at preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, little is known about the frequency of major bleeds on NOACs and how these events are managed in clinical practice. Methods: We assessed the rates, management, and outcomes of ISTH major bleeding events among AF patients in the ORBIT-AF II registry (mean follow-up 213 days). Results: Overall, 103 patients experienced 110 major bleeding events during follow-up n=90/4986 (1.8%) on NOAC, and n=20/1320 (1.5%) on warfarin. Patients with bleeding events on NOAC were slightly younger than those on warfarin (median age 76 vs. 80; p=0.2). Among mutually-exclusive bleeding types, intracranial bleeding was more common in warfarin treated patients than NOAC-treated (15% vs 6.7%), whereas GI bleeding was more common on NOACs (56% vs. 40%, overall p=0.1 for bleeding type). Management of bleeding differed by anticoagulation type: blood products and reversal agents were more commonly used in patients on warfarin (Table). No patient received prothrombin complexes, recombinant factor VIIa, aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid, aprotinin, or desmopressin. Out of 90 major bleeding events in NOAC patients, only 1 was fatal (1%). Within 30 days following bleeding, there were no strokes and 1 TIA (NOAC). Following a major bleed, the recurrent bleeding rate in NOAC patients in the next 30-days was 4% and the death rate was 4%. Conclusions: Rates of major bleeding with NOACs in clinical practice are comparable to those reported in clinical trials. Compared with warfarin, bleeding among NOAC users was less likely intracranial and more likely to be GI. Management of bleeding in the setting of NOAC rarely includes reversal agents.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Faizan Khan ◽  
Miriam Kimpton ◽  
Tobias Tritschler ◽  
Grégoire Le Gal ◽  
Brian Hutton ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The optimal duration of anticoagulation after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains controversial. Deciding to stop or continue anticoagulant therapy indefinitely after completing 3 to 6 months of initial treatment requires balancing the long-term risk of recurrent VTE if anticoagulation is stopped against the long-term risk of major bleeding if anticoagulation is continued. However, knowledge of the long-term risk for major bleeding events during extended anticoagulation in this patient population is limited. We plan to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the risk for major bleeding events during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked VTE. Methods Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched with the assistance of an information specialist (from inception to March 1, 2019) to identify randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies reporting major bleeding during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked VTE, who have completed at least 3 months of initial anticoagulant therapy. Study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction will be performed independently by at least two investigators. The number of major bleeding events and person-years of follow-up will be used to calculate the rate (events per 100 person-years) with its 95% confidence interval for each study cohort, during clinically relevant time periods of extended anticoagulant therapy. Results will be pooled using random effect meta-analysis. Discussion The planned systematic review and meta-analysis will provide reliable estimates of the risk for major bleeding events during extended anticoagulation. This information will help inform patient prognosis and assist clinicians with balancing the risks and benefits of treatment to guide management of unprovoked VTE. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019128597.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document