An international survey of current practice in the laboratory assessment of anticoagulant therapy with heparin

Pathology ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel J. Favaloro ◽  
Roslyn Bonar ◽  
John Sioufi ◽  
Michael Wheeler ◽  
Joyce Low ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
International Survey ◽  
Laboratory Assessment

scholarly journals Applied Nanotechnologies in Anticoagulant Therapy: From Anticoagulants to Coagulation Test Performance of Drug Delivery Systems

Applied Nano ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-117
Author(s):  
Yuri B. G. Patriota ◽  
Luíse L. Chaves ◽  
Evren H. Gocke ◽  
Patricia Severino ◽  
Mônica F. R. Soares ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Delivery ◽  
Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Delivery Systems ◽  
Reversal Agent ◽  
Laboratory Assessment ◽  
Administration Routes

Heparin-based delivery systems have been explored to improve their therapeutic efficacy and to reduce toxicity for different administration routes. Regardless of the applied drug delivery system (DDS), the evaluation of anticoagulant performance is instrumental for the development of a suitable DDS. The understanding of the range of anticoagulant assays, together with their key applications and limitations, is essential both within the context of scientific research and for clinical usage. This review provides an overview of the current anticoagulant therapy and discusses the advantages and limitations of currently available anticoagulant assays. We also discuss studies involving low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH)-based nanocarriers with emphasis on their anticoagulation performance. Conventional anticoagulants have been used for decades for the treatment of many diseases. Direct oral anticoagulants have overcome some limitations of heparins and vitamin K antagonists. However, the lack of an accurate laboratory assessment, as well as the lack of a factor “xaban” (Xa) inhibitor reversal agent, remains a major problem associated with these anticoagulants. LMWHs represent anticoagulant agents with noteworthy efficacy and safety, and they have been explored to improve their outcomes with various nanocarriers through several administration routes. The main problems related to LMWHs have been surmounted, and improved efficiency may be achieved through the use of DDSs.

scholarly journals Current practice and perceptions of safety protocols for the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the operating room: results of the IP-OR international survey

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Clerc ◽  
Martin Hübner ◽  
K.R. Ashwin ◽  
S.P. Somashekhar ◽  
Beate Rau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Operating Room ◽  
Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
High Volume ◽  
International Survey ◽  
Protection Measures ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Cleaning Staff ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Or Team

Abstract Objectives To assess the risk perception and the uptake of measures preventing environment-related risks in the operating room (OR) during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Methods A multicentric, international survey among OR teams in high-volume HIPEC and PIPAC centers: Surgeons (Surg), Scrub nurses (ScrubN), Anesthesiologists (Anest), Anesthesiology nurses (AnesthN), and OR Cleaning staff (CleanS). Scores extended from 0–10 (maximum). Results Ten centers in six countries participated in the study (response rate 100%). Two hundred and eleven responses from 68 Surg (32%), 49 ScrubN (23%), 45 Anest (21%), 31 AnesthN (15%), and 18 CleanS (9%) were gathered. Individual uptake of protection measures was 51.4%, similar among professions and between HIPEC and PIPAC. Perceived levels of protection were 7.57 vs. 7.17 for PIPAC and HIPEC, respectively (p<0.05), with Anesth scoring the lowest (6.81). Perceived contamination risk was 4.19 for HIPEC vs. 3.5 for PIPAC (p<0.01). Information level was lower for CleanS and Anesth for HIPEC and PIPAC procedures compared to all other responders (6.48 vs. 4.86, and 6.48 vs. 5.67, p<0.01). Willingness to obtain more information was 86%, the highest among CleanS (94%). Conclusions Experience with the current practice of safety protocols was similar during HIPEC and PIPAC. The individual uptake of protection measures was rather low. The safety perception was better for PIPAC, but the perceived level of protection remained relatively low. The willingness to obtain more information was high. Intensified, standardized training of all OR team members involved in HIPEC and PIPAC is meaningful.

Current Practice of IMRT to Treat Carcinoma of the Vulva: Results of an International Survey

2011 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. S45-S46 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. King ◽  
M. Barkati ◽  
A. Fyles ◽  
L. Mell ◽  
A. Mundt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Current Practice ◽  
International Survey

Sa1363 International Survey of Methods for Anorectal Manometry: An Exploration of Variability in Current Practice

2015 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. S-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma V. Carrington ◽  
Henriette Heinrich ◽  
Mark R. Fox ◽  
Satish S. Rao ◽  
Charles H. Knowles ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anorectal Manometry ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
International Survey

scholarly journals Current practice and effects of intravenous anticoagulant therapy in hospitalized acute heart failure patients with sinus rhythm

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroki Nakano ◽  
Yasuhiro Hamatani ◽  
Toshiyuki Nagai ◽  
Michikazu Nakai ◽  
Kunihiro Nishimura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Sinus Rhythm ◽  
Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
Heart Failure Patients ◽  
Heparin Administration ◽  
Intravenous Heparin ◽  
Study Population

AbstractAlthough the risk of thromboembolism is increased in heart failure (HF) patients irrespective of atrial fibrillation (AF), especially during the acute decompensated phase, the effects of intravenous anticoagulants for these patients remain unclear. We sought to investigate the current practice and effects of intravenous anticoagulant therapy in acute HF (AHF) patients with sinus rhythm. We analyzed a nationwide prospective cohort from April 2012 to March 2016. We extracted 309,015 AHF adult patients. After application of the exclusion criteria, we divided the 92,573 study population into non-heparin [n = 70,621 (76.3%)] and heparin [n = 21,952 (23.7%)] groups according to the use of intravenous heparin for the first 2 consecutive days after admission. Multivariable logistic regression analyses demonstrated that heparin administration was not associated with in-hospital mortality (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91–1.03) and intracranial hemorrhage (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.78–1.77), while heparin administration was significantly associated with increased incidence of ischemic stroke (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.29–1.72) and venous thromboembolism (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.14–2.30). In conclusion, intravenous heparin administration was not associated with favorable in-hospital outcomes in AHF patients with sinus rhythm. Routine additive use of intravenous heparin to initial treatment might not be recommended in AHF patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document