scholarly journals Bleeding events in COVID-19: the other side of the coin?

Author(s):  
Antonietta Coppola ◽  
Anna Annunziata ◽  
Maria Rosaria Gioia ◽  
Giuseppe Fiorentino

We present three cases of patients affected by severe SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia treated with a low molecular weight heparin for prevention or treatment of pulmonary embolism, who presented a major bleed, in particular an ileopsoas haematoma that caused severe anaemia; in one case it was fatal. In the recent outbreak of novel coronavirus infection, significantly abnormal coagulation parameters in SARS-CoV-2 infection occur very often, but complications in the opposite direction such as bleeding diathesis are very rare. In these cases, there are different levels of gravity: for one patient the major bleed required the anticoagulant therapy to be stopped until bleeding stabilized, one patient needed interventional radiology and one patient died.

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 709-709 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.C. Spyropoulos ◽  
A.G.G. Turpie ◽  
A.S. Dunn ◽  
J. Spandorfer ◽  
J. Douketis ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The optimal perioperative management of patients on long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy is currently unclear. There have been no large prospective clinical studies comparing unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) as bridge therapy in this setting. This registry compared the efficacy and safety of in-hospital UFH with mostly outpatient-based LMWH for perioperative bridging in patients on long-term OAC. Methods: REGIMEN is a large, prospective, multi-center registry in the USA and Canada of patients receiving chronic anticoagulation and requiring a perioperative bridge for an elective procedure or surgery. Patients who were ≥18 years, on OAC ≥3 months prior to the elective procedure, and who had heparin as a bridge to OAC for ≥2 days in the pre- and/or post-operative period, were included in the registry. Data on patient characteristics and primary clinical adverse events up to 30 days post-procedure were collected and compared between UFH and LMWH. Results: Of 1077 patients enrolled in this registry, 180 received UFH alone and 721 received LMWH (treatment or prophylactic dose) alone. Patients not receiving the same heparin pre- and post-procedure (n=123) and those undergoing multiple procedures (n=53) were excluded from the analysis. Patients on LMWH spent less time in hospital and were less likely to undergo major surgery or receive general anesthesia. Adverse events occurred at similar rates in both groups (table 1), and were primarily minor bleeds. Univariate analysis for procedure variables showed that UFH versus LMWH, intra-procedural anticoagulants/thrombolytics, procedure duration ≥45 minutes and general anesthesia were associated with an increased risk of a major adverse event. Logistic regression analysis for major bleeding can be seen in table 2. Conclusions: REGIMEN, a large, prospective, multi-center registry of patients in the US and Canada requiring bridging therapy with heparin for elective surgery, reveals that bridging therapy with LMWH in selected outpatients is at least as safe and effective as in-hospital UFH. Table 1. Adverse events in bridged patients UFH (n=164) LMWH (n=668) p-value Adverse event 28 (17.1%) 108 (16.2%) 0.81 Arterial/venous complication, major bleed, or death 13 (7.9%) 28 (4.2%) 0.07 Adverse Events: Arterial complications: Cardiac valvular or mural thrombus 1 (0.6%) 0 (0%) Intracranial event 1 (0.6%) 2 (0.3%) TIA 1 (0.6%) 2 (0.3%) Peripheral arterial event 1 (0.6%) 0 (0%) Venous complications: DVT 0 (0%) 2 (0.3%) PE 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Major bleed 9 (5.5%) 22 (3.3%) 0.25 Minor bleed 15 (9.1%) 80 (12.0%) 0.34 Thrombocytopenia 2 (1.2%) 3 (0.4%) Death 2 (1.2%) 4 (0.6%) Table 2. Logistic regression analysis for major bleed Independent variable Reference OR 95% CI Vascular surgery Not vascular surgery 4.72 0.92–24.09 General surgery Not general surgery 2.25 0.78–6.53 Charlson score >1 Charlson score ≤1 2.24 1.02–4.93 Procedure duration ≥45mins Procedure duration <45mins 1.37 0.59–3.18 LMWH post-op UFH post-op 0.76 0.32–1.81


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 593-593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Durant Myers ◽  
Shirely K. Wrobleski ◽  
Krus Kelsey ◽  
Diana Farris ◽  
Diaz A. Jose ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Previous studies have shown that inhibition of E-selectin can decrease thrombus formation and associated inflammation. E-selectin (CD-62E) is a cell adhesion molecule that is expressed on activated endothelial cells and plays an important role in leukocyte recruitment to the site of vascular injury. GMI-1271 is designed to mimic the bioactive conformation of the sialyl-Lex carbohydrate binding domain of E-selectin and is a specific E-selectin inhibitor. There remains an unmet medical need for a translatable therapeutic that can treat VT in combination with lower, safer levels of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) anticoagulation. We hypothesize that E-selectin inhibition combined with LMWH will permit lower doses of therapeutic LMWH for the treatment of VT without increasing adverse bleeding events. Methods: Male C57BL/6J mice, 10 weeks old (23-28 grams, n5), underwent our electrolytic IVC model (EIM) to produce a non-occlusive thrombosis, via electrical free radical stimulation (250 µAmp) for 15 minutes. Experimental groups included non-treated controls (CTR-No Tx), animals given LMWH (3-6 mg/kg, SQ, once daily (qd), the E-selectin inhibitor GMI-1271 20/kg intraperitoneal (IP) twice daily (BID), and a combination of the agents. The dose range of LMWH that produced anti-Xa levels in the therapeutic range (0.5-1.0IU/mL) and significantly decreased thrombus weight in this mouse VT model was 5 and 6 mg/kg. Treated mouse groups received the first dose of experimental therapy immediately following thrombus induction and through day 2. Animals were euthanized 2 days post-thrombosis for tissue harvest and blood collection for the following evaluations: thrombus weight (grams), anti-Xa testing, and tail vein bleeding time (seconds). Results: GMI-1271 Works in Combination with LMWH to Decreases Venous Thrombosis : LMWH dosed at 6mg/kg and 5mg/kg alone, significantly decreased venous thrombus weight at 2 days, versus non-treated controls (73.0±7.5, 62.8±1.9 vs. 186.8±63.9 x10-4 grams, P<0.01). Notably, the combination of GMI-1271 20 mg/kg + LMWH 4mg/kg (33% dose decrease from LMWH 6 mg/kg), and GMI-1271 20 mg/kg + LMWH 3mg/kg (50% dose decrease from LMWH 6 mg/kg dose), significantly decreased thrombus weight, versus non-treated controls (75.6±17.1, 73.0±14.8 vs. 186.8±63.9 x10-4 grams, P<0.01), equivalent to the results of higher doses of LMWH alone (FIGURE 1 A). GMI-1271 Does not Increase Bleeding Potential: GMI-1271 administration did not significantly elevate tail bleeding times, versus non-treated control mice (67.00±44 vs. 53.8±7.5 seconds). LMWH dosed at 5mg/kg and 6 mg/kg, elevated tail bleeding times in mice with the 5 mg/kg LMWH group significant versus non-treated controls (87±25 vs. 53.8±7.5 seconds, P<0.005). Both animal groups treated with GMI-1271, in combination with lower dose LMWH therapy, had tail bleeding times comparable to non-treated control animals (FIGURE 1 B). Conclusion: We report, for the first time, that GMI-1271 works in combination with LMWH to significantly reduce acute VT without increasing bleeding times and by inference, bleeding potential. These preliminary studies suggest that E-selectin inhibition with GMI-1271 may be used to treat VT alone, or in combination with lower and safer levels of LMWH anticoagulation. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Magnani: GlycoMimetics Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 488-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fergus Macbeth ◽  
Simon Noble ◽  
Jessica Evans ◽  
Sheikh Ahmed ◽  
David Cohen ◽  
...  

Purpose Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in cancer patients. Evidence has suggested that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) might improve survival in patients with cancer by preventing both VTE and the progression of metastases. No trial in a single cancer type has been powered to demonstrate a clinically significant survival difference. The aim of this trial was to investigate this question in patients with lung cancer. Patients and Methods We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to evaluate the addition of a primary prophylactic dose of LMWH for 24 weeks to standard treatment in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer of any stage and histology. The primary outcome was 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes included metastasis-free survival, VTE-free survival, toxicity, and quality of life. Results For this trial, 2,202 patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment arms over 4 years. The trial did not reach its intended number of events for the primary analysis (2,047 deaths), and data were analyzed after 2,013 deaths after discussion with the independent data monitoring committee. There was no evidence of a difference in overall or metastasis-free survival between the two arms (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.10; P = .814; and HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.08; P = .864, respectively). There was a reduction in the risk of VTE from 9.7% to 5.5% (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P = .001) in the LMWH arm and no difference in major bleeding events but evidence of an increase in the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the LMWH arm. Conclusion LMWH did not improve overall survival in the patients with lung cancer in this trial. A significant reduction in VTE is associated with an increase in clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Strategies to target those at greatest risk of VTE are warranted.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5057-5057 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Recio Boiles ◽  
Ali McBride ◽  
Hani M. Babiker ◽  
Nimer Alsaid ◽  
Ivo Abraham ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Cancer patients who experienced a venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at high risk for poor clinical outcomes; hence VTE recurrence prevention is salient. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has been the preferred treatment for cancer-related VTE; however, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been prescribed empirically in cancer due to patient convenience. Although the recent HOKUSAI and SELECT-D trials have confirmed the non-inferiority of DOACs to LMWH in the management of recurrent VTE in cancer patients, there remain a continued safety concern for major bleeds (MB). Recurrent VTE and MB complications during anticoagulation treatment of GI cancer (GICA) patients are increased as compared to other cancer types. The incremental health care costs associated with VTE recurrences and MB episodes are significant and steadily increasing. In this retrospective analysis, we aimed (1) to evaluate for differences in the VTE recurrence rate and MB events based on anticoagulation therapy (LMWH or DOAC) prescribed with a prior VTE and (2) to calculate the associated healthcare costs for six months of treatment. Methods: We reviewed the medical records of patients with biopsy-proven GICA and imaging documented VTE treated with DOAC or LMWH from November 2013 to February 2017. Patients were excluded if anticoagulation was given for another treatment indication or cancer diagnosis. Adverse events of recurrent VTE and MB criteria were defined per the Subcommittee on Control of Anticoagulation of the Scientific and Standardization Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Costs of LMWH and DOAC t was sourced from Medicare Reimbursement 2018. Hospital admission and adjusted 6-month ambulatory cots were sourced from Economic Evaluations of Anticoagulation Outcomes in the U.S. by Amin et al 2015. Costs were inflation-adjusted to 2018 cost levels using the Medical Care component of the Consumer Price Index. The Chi-squared test was used for overall and the Fisher exact test for pairwise comparisons of the proportions of patients experiencing VTE and MB events. Results: Our analysis included 106 patients on enoxaparin (N=40), rivaroxaban (N=37) and apixaban (N=29). Recurrent VTE outcomes at 6 months were 3 (7.5%) for enoxaparin, 1 (2.7%) for rivaroxaban, and 2 (6.8%), for apixaban (all p=n.s.) (Table 1). Major bleeding events at 6 months were 2 (5%) for enoxaparin, 2 (6.8%) for apixaban, and a significantly higher 8 (21.6%) for rivaroxaban (overall p=0.048; v. LMWH pairwise p=0.042; all other p=n.s.). The estimated composite costs associated with the observed recurrent VTE event rates were $173,130 for enoxaparin, $57,710 for rivaroxaban, and $115,420 for apixaban. The estimated composite costs associated with the observed MB event rates were $117,146 for enoxaparin and apixaban, versus $468,558 for rivaroxaban. The estimated total 6-months healthcare costs for recurrent VTE, MB and prescriptions were $293,784 for enoxaparin, $529,336 for rivaroxaban, and $235,634 for apixaban. Conclusion: Our real-world retrospective analysis corroborates a non-inferiority of DOACs to LMWH in preventing recurrent VTE in GICA patients at 6 months but a higher incidence of MB in rivaroxaban v. LMWH treated patients. The higher MB rate for rivaroxaban mainly accounts for the higher overall costs of this DOAC v. LMWH and apixaban. In absolute total costs, apixaban prevails over LMWH and rivaroxaban, and LMWH prevails over rivaroxaban in cost-efficiency in this analysis of anticoagulation in selected high-risk GICA patients. Rivaroxaban significantly increases medical costs, mainly driven by the total number of major bleed adverse events in GICA patients, confirming previously published evidence. The subpopulation of GICA patients at high risk of VTE/MB warrants an additional prospective clinical trial for primary safety major bleed outcomes of DOACs with an accompanying cost-effectiveness analysis. This may eventually reduce the healthcare economic burden. Disclosures Abraham: Sandoz: Consultancy.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2524-2524
Author(s):  
R Sumner Abraham ◽  
Trish A Millard ◽  
Surabhi Palkimas ◽  
Nolan A Wages ◽  
Hillary S. Maitland

Abstract Introduction Appropriate anticoagulation management in cancer patients is complicated by the high propensity for recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) as well as history of bleeding, altered anatomy, impaired organ function, nutritional issues, and intracranial tumors. The Hokusai trial demonstrated non-inferiority of edoxaban, a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), to low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in treatment of cancer-associated VTE. In the SELECT D trial, patients with cancer-associated VTE treated with rivaroxaban, another DOAC, had a 4% recurrence of VTE compared to 11% in the group treated with LMWH. These results have challenged the long standing dogma of use of LMWH for the treatment of cancer-associated VTE based on the CLOT trial. One of the particularly challenging features of treating cancer patients with VTE is when patients have known brain tumor(s) as this heightens the concern for intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). A retrospective cohort study reported in Blood in 2015 showed no difference in ICH in patients with intracranial tumors treated with LMWH compared to matched controls not on anticoagulation. This study also confirmed that tumor histology predicts bleeding risk as the metastatic melanoma and renal cell carcinoma patients had greater risk of ICH. The risk of ICH in patients with intracranial tumors treated with DOACs remains unknown. The aim of the present study is to compare the ICH rate in patients with intracranial tumors treated either with a DOAC or LMWH. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with a diagnosis of malignancy with intracranial tumor documented by imaging between May 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016. All patients were on therapeutic anticoagulation with either a DOAC or LMWH. We compared the rate of ICH in patients with intracranial tumors on treatment with DOACs to the rate in those on treatment with LMWH. Additionally, we evaluated the rate of non-intracranial bleeding and recurrent VTE in both groups. CTCAE grading was used for bleeding events. Comparisons among continuous variables were made using t-tests, and comparisons among categorical variables were made using Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Associations were considered significant for P-values (two-sided) ≤ 0.05. Results A total of 135 patients, 90 in the LMWH group and 45 in the DOAC group, were available for analysis. For patient demographics and characteristics by treatment group, see Table 1. There was a significant difference between treatment group and type of cancer, with a higher proportion of primary CNS malignancy (versus metastatic disease) in the LMWH group (71.2% vs 42.2%, p=0.003), and a higher proportion of patients in the LMWH group had only 1 brain tumor (55.6% vs 35.6%, p=0.035). There was a significant association between treatment group and whether patients were treated with bevacizumab (p=0.002), with a higher rate of bevacizumab treatment in the LMWH group (28.9% vs. 4.4%). There was not a significant difference between treatment groups and the occurrence of ICH (10.0% LMWH vs. 8.9% DOAC, Table 2). Across treatment groups, the majority of ICH events were grade 1-2, but the LMWH group did have one grade 4 and one grade 5 ICH compared to no high grade ICH in the DOAC group (Table 3). In the LMWH group, nearly all (8/9) of the observed ICH events required anticoagulation to be discontinued. In the DOAC group, only one ICH event required anticoagulant discontinuation, whereas one other ICH event required decreased anticoagulation to prophylactic dosing. In the LMWH group, nearly all (8/9) of the observed ICH events occurred at a time when patients were not on systemic antineoplastic treatment. One ICH event in the LMWH group occurred while the patient was on therapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKIs). In the DOAC group, two ICH events occurred at a time when patients were not on systemic antineoplastic treatment, whereas the other two events occurred while the patients were on immunotherapy. There was no significant difference between recurrent clotting events (4.4% LMWH vs. 6.7% DOAC) or other bleeding events (11.1% LMWH vs. 6.7% DOAC). Conclusion In patients with malignant intracranial tumors, there is no difference in the risk of ICH or other bleeding events between those on therapeutic anticoagulation with a DOAC or LMWH. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1238-1238
Author(s):  
Kamolyut Lapumnuaypol ◽  
Thita Chiasakul

Abstract Introduction: The coagulopathy of cirrhosis is characterized by a complex rebalanced hemostasis which increases the risk of bleeding as well as thrombosis. For the treatment and prevention of thromboembolism, low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and vitamin K antagonists, such as warfarin, are generally used in cirrhotic patients. Although efficacious, these agents are inconvenient due to the parenteral route of administration, need for monitoring, and interactions with food or drugs. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may provide safe and effective alternatives for patients with cirrhosis. However, data concerning their safety profile in this population are limited given that patients with advanced liver diseases were excluded from most clinical trials. To address this, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of DOACs compared to warfarin or low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with cirrhosis. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception up to June 2018. We included prospective and retrospective studies involving adults ≥18 years with cirrhosis of any stage in whom anticoagulants were indicated for any indications. Included studies are required to report the incidence, odds ratio, or hazard ratio of bleeding events in both patients receiving DOACs and patients receiving warfarin or LMWH (controls). Two authors independently searched the literature, screened for eligibility, and extracted the data. Any discrepancies were resolved by reaching consensus. Primary outcome of interest was all-cause bleeding events. Secondary outcome was major bleeding. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. For all-cause bleeding, pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel method. For major bleeding, effect estimates and standard errors from individual studies were combined by the generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird. Random-effects model was used in all analyses. Inter-study heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and I2statistics. Results: A total of 279 articles were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE, of which 93 were removed because of duplication. After screening by title and abstract, 174 articles were excluded. Full text of 12 articles were reviewed, of which 5 studies (4 observational studies and 1 randomized controlled trial) with a total of 447 patients met eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. The indications for anticoagulants included atrial fibrillation, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and portal vein thrombosis. The DOACs used in these studies included dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban. Heterogeneity among studies was low to moderate. Compared to controls, the use of DOACs in cirrhotic patients did not show any significant difference in all-cause bleeding (RR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.32-1.63; I2=59%, Figure 1). Among 3 studies that reported major bleeding, there was no significant difference in major bleeding between both groups (OR 0.46; 95% CI, 0.10-2.09; I2=42%, Figure 2). Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that, compared to those who were treated with traditional anticoagulants, cirrhotic patients who were treated with DOACs had no significant increase risk of all-cause bleeding and major bleeding. The use of DOACs in patents with cirrhosis appears to be as safe as traditional anticoagulants. Further randomized controlled studies involving larger numbers of patients are required to explore the efficacy as well as potential beneficial effects of DOACs for each indications in cirrhotic patients. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Author(s):  
Aleksandar Đenić

COVID-19 patients have a high risk of thrombosis of the arterial and venous systems due to extensive systemic inflammation, platelet activation, endothelial dysfunction, and stasis. D-dimer is an important prognostic marker of mortality caused by COVID-19 patients and its increased values indicate tissue damage and inflammation. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTe) is between 16 and 49% as a complication of more severe forms of COVID-19 infection in patients hospitalized in intensive care units. Prophylactic doses of low molecular weight heparin (lMWH) should be given to all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection in the absence of active bleeding. The safest way is to adjust the low molecular weight heparin (lMWH) dose according to body weight, especially in obese patients. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) is used in patients with a creatinine clearance of less than 30 ml/min. The therapeutic dose of anticoagulation should be discontinued if the platelet count is <50 × 109 /l or fibrinogen <1.0 g/l. Clinically significant bleeding events are higher in those who received therapeutic doses compared to those with standard thromboprophylaxis doses. Thrombolytic therapy is recommended in patients with proven pulmonary embolism (Pe) and hemodynamic instability or signs of cardiogenic shock, who are not at high risk of bleeding. In hospitalized COVID-19 patients with a high clinical risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTe) and D-dimer values greater than 2600 ng/ml, the use of therapeutic doses of lMWH in doses adjusted to the patient's body weight should be considered, in the absence of a higher risk of bleeding.


2020 ◽  
pp. 001857872095415
Author(s):  
Rebecca Toor ◽  
Francis J. Zamora ◽  
Naaz Fatteh ◽  
Nathan Drexler ◽  
Jose Lozada

In 2019, a novel coronavirus was identified in Wuhan, China. This strain was classified as a pandemic in early 2020 by the World Health Organization (WHO), rapidly reaching millions of cases worldwide and overwhelming intensive care units. One distinct feature identified in severe SARS-CoV-2 is abnormal and complex coagulation and hematologic abnormalities, including significantly elevated D-dimer and fibrin/fibrinogen values possibly increasing morbidity and mortality in this patient population. Aggressive anticoagulation therapy with appropriate peak anti-Xa level monitoring has produce satisfactory results at our institution. Our intent is to present a case series of our strategy to highlight the benefits of this approach.


2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Kujath ◽  
Christian Eckmann ◽  
Frank Misselwitz

Periprocedural and postprocedural anticoagulation during arterial reconstructive surgery (ARS) with intravenous heparin is standard of care. The general use and correct dosage of low-molecular-weight heparin, however, are still under debate. A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial was performed with a parallel group comparison of four dose regimen of a low-molecular-weight heparin, reviparin sodium, in patients undergoing major ARS. Sixty-five patients were randomly allocated to receive twice-daily subcutaneous injections of reviparin, 3500 (group A, n=17), 4200 (group B, n= 16), 5950 (group C, n= 16), and 7000 (group D, n= 16) anti-Xa IU per day. Patients were eligible for the trial if they had angiographically proven peripheral arterial obstructive disease with a planned arterial reconstruction of the infrarenal aorta, iliaca artery, or femoralis artery. Fifty-nine patients completed the trial. The goal was to determine the optimal dose of the low-molecular-weight heparin to achieve a minimum of early vascular events (less than 12%) with a minimum of major bleeding events (less than 10%) during a shortterm follow-up of up to 8 postoperative days. There was no reocclusion in the entire population. Patients randomized into the two lower dose groups (A and B), however, experienced a relatively high incidence of restenosis, whereas patients enrolled in group D, receiving the highest dose of reviparin, experienced an unacceptably high rate of bleeding events (all bleeds, 43%; major bleeding, 14.3%). Thus, the optimal dose of reviparin sodium to be administered in patients undergoing major ARS is half the therapeutic dose:5950 to 6300 anti Xa IU (75-85 anti Xa IU/kg body weight per day). Patients included in group C had no major bleeding event (95% confidence interval, 0% to 6.6%), a significant improvement of the doppler anklebrachial systolic pressure index (difference of 0.46 ± 0.29, P=.017), and a higher rate of responders with regard to the puls status measured at the tibialis posterior arteries (66.7%) compared to groups A and B (46.7% and 54.5%, respectively, P=.086). The efficacy and safety of this dosage regimen in comparison to standard of care should be further substantiated in larger trials.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document