Pre-medication with oral anticoagulants is associated with better outcomes in a large multinational COVID-19 cohort with cardiovascular comorbidities

The impact of oral anticoagulants on mortality from pneumonia: a propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

Pneumonia continues to be one of the leading causes of death. During the COVID pandemic, pre-existing anticoagulant therapy with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) appeared to be beneficial. The present study aimed to investigate the impact of pre-existing DOAC therapy on mortality from community-acquired, non-COVID pneumonia.

METHODS

The study utilized data from the eICU Collaborative Research Database, a comprehensive, multi-institutional critical care database. We included all adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia, selecting for patients with a primary admission diagnosis of pneumonia or pulmonary sepsis who were admitted to the ICU <24 h after admission to the hospital. To adjust for confounders, we performed propensity score matching, matching patients receiving DOACs to an equivalent cohort of patients not receiving DOAC therapy. Our primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included all-cause in-hospital mortality, all-cause in-ICU mortality, intubation within 24 h following ICU admission, incidence of acute kidney injury and renal replacement therapy, vasopressor administration, and mechanical ventilation days.

RESULTS

Our final matched cohort included 198 DOAC patients matched to 594 patients without DOAC therapy. Survival was significantly higher in DOAC patients with a hazard ratio of 0.56 [95% CI = 0.36-088]. Both all-cause in-unit mortality (6.1% [95% CI = 2.7-9.4%] vs. 13.3% [95% CI = 10.6-16.0%], p = 0.008) and all-cause in-hospital mortality (11.6% [95% CI = 7.2-16.1%] vs. 19.7% [95% CI = 16.5-22.9%], p = 0.013) were significantly lower in patients receiving DOACs.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates a positive association between the pre-existing intake of direct oral anticoagulants and the survival of community acquired pneumonia. Future prospective studies should evaluate supportive therapy with DOACs.

Impact of prior oral anticoagulation therapies on post-discharge outcomes after COVID-19: Results from a global federated health network analysis

BACKGROUND

The impact of chronic oral anticoagulant (OACs) use on long-term post-discharge outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalisation remains unclear. Herein, we compared clinical outcomes up to 2-years after COVID-19 hospitalisation between patients on vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), direct-acting OACs (DOACs) and no OAC therapy.

METHODS

Data from TriNetX, a global federated health research network, were used. Adult patients on VKAs, DOACs or no OAC therapy at diagnosis of COVID-19 between 20 January 2020 and 31 December 2021, who were hospitalised for COVID-19, were included. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA)/systemic embolism (SE) and the composite of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH)/gastrointestinal bleeding, at 2 years after COVID-19 hospitalisation.

RESULTS

We included 110,834 patients with COVID-19. Following propensity score matching (PSM), we identified a decreased mortality risk in DOAC-treated patients compared to the no OAC cohort (RR .808, 95% CI .751-.870). A higher risk of ischaemic stroke/TIA/SE was observed in VKA users compared to DOAC users (RR 1.100, 95% CI 1.020-1.220) and in VKA users compared to patients not taking OAC (RR 1.400, 95% CI 1.140-1.720). VKA use was associated with a greater risk of ICH/gastrointestinal bleeding than DOAC users (RR 1.198, 95% CI 1.066-1.347), while DOAC users had a lower risk compared to no OAC-treated patients (RR .840, 95% CI .754-.936).

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 patients taking prior DOACs were associated with lower long-term mortality risk and ICH/gastrointestinal bleeding than patients not taking OAC. Compared to patients on DOACs, VKA users were associated with higher risks of mortality, ischaemic stroke/TIA/SE and ICH/gastrointestinal bleeding.

Anticoagulant use before COVID-19 diagnosis prevent COVID-19 associated acute venous thromboembolism or not: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Coagulopathy and thromboembolic events are associated with poor outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. There is conflicting evidence on the effects of chronic anticoagulation on mortality and severity of COVID-19 disease.

AIM

To summarize the body of evidence on the effects of pre-hospital anticoagulation on outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A Literature search was performed on LitCovid PubMed, WHO, and Scopus databases from inception (December 2019) till June 2023 for original studies reporting an association between prior use of anticoagulants and patient outcomes in adults with COVID-19. The primary outcome was the risk of thromboembolic events in COVID-19 patients taking anticoagulants. Secondary outcomes included COVID-19 disease severity, in terms of intensive care unit admission or invasive mechanical ventilation/intubation requirement in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, and mortality. The random effects models were used to calculate crude and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs).

RESULTS

Forty-six observational studies met our inclusion criteria. The unadjusted analysis found no association between prior anticoagulation and thromboembolic event risk [n = 43851, 9 studies, odds ratio (OR)= 0.67 (0.22, 2.07); P = 0.49; I 2 = 95%]. The association between prior anticoagulation and disease severity was non-significant [n = 186782; 22 studies, OR = 1.08 (0.78, 1.49); P = 0.64; I 2 = 89%]. However, pre-hospital anticoagulation significantly increased all-cause mortality risk [n = 207292; 35 studies, OR = 1.72 (1.37, 2.17); P < 0.00001; I 2 = 93%]. Pooling adjusted estimates revealed a statistically non-significant association between pre-hospital anticoagulation and thromboembolic event risk [aOR = 0.87 (0.42, 1.80); P = 0.71], mortality [aOR = 0.94 (0.84, 1.05); P = 0.31], and disease severity [aOR = 0.96 (0.72, 1.26); P = 0.76].

CONCLUSION

Prehospital anticoagulation was not significantly associated with reduced risk of thromboembolic events, improved survival, and lower disease severity in COVID-19 patients.

The impacts of prophylactic anticoagulation therapy during hospitalization on long-term cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk COVID-19 patients amid the omicron wave of the pandemic

Background

Although prophylactic anticoagulation therapy is suggested to be adopted in severe COVID-19 patients, its effects on the long-term cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, namely the risk of major adverse CV events(MACEs) in high-risk CV patients amid the omicron wave of the pandemic, remain unknown.

Methods

We conducted this prospective cohort study of consecutive adults hospitalized COVID-19 between 19 April and 12 June 2022, COVID-19 patients with at least two CV risk factors or pre-existing CV diseases were enrolled. A propensity score matching(PSM) method was used to evaluated the effects of prophylactic anticoagulation therapy in hospital on long-term MACEs, including CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, hospitalization due to unstable angina pectoris, coronary revascularization and arterial or venous thrombosis.

Results

Two cohorts (with or without anticoagulants during hospitalization) of each 230 patients with balanced baseline characteristics were formed using PSM. During the 15-month follow-up period, 13 patients with anticoagulants and 29 patients without anticoagulants developed MACEs. Overall, the anticoagulation group had a significantly lower risk of MACEs than the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.431; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.224-0.830, P = 0.010). Regarding specific constituents of MACEs, the differences were mainly reflected in arterial or venous thrombosis. The significantly lower HRs of overall MACEs were significantly observed in subgroup of age > 75 years, women, higher D dimer level, unvaccinated and non-nirmatrelvir-ritonavir prescribed patients.

Conclusions

Prophylactic anticoagulation therapy during hospitalization was effective in reducing long-term MACEs among COVID-19 patients with CV risk factors or pre-existing CV diseases amid the omicron wave of the pandemic.

Peripheral artery disease independently associated with significantly higher risk for COVID-19 mortality: Evidence based on adjusted effect estimates

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the influence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) on the risk of mortality among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients based on adjusted effect estimates.

METHODS

Systematic searches were performed through electronic databases. A random-effect model was applied to calculate the pooled effect and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Inconsistency index (I2) was used to evaluate the heterogeneity across studies. Sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and Begg's test were all implemented.

RESULTS

On the basis of 16 eligible studies with 142,832 COVID-19 patients, the meta-analysis showed that PAD significantly increased the risk for mortality among COVID-19 patients (pooled effect = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.10-1.51). The significant association was also observed in the subgroup analysis stratified by hospitalized patients, mean age ≥ 60 years, Europe and North America. Sensitivity analysis verified the robustness of our findings. Begg's test (P = 0.15) showed there was no potential publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 patients with PAD may have a greater risk of mortality. Clinicians and nursing staff are supposed to identify and monitor these high-risk patients in a timely manner and provide appropriate clinical treatment for them.

Clinical Outcomes of Anticoagulant Therapy in COVID-19 Patients with Pre-Existing Cardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review

The COVID-19 infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 is a healthcare crisis that has led to unparalleled disruption and has impacted healthcare services, leading to significant morbidity and mortality in the worldwide population. Insufficient data on the management of COVID-19 complications such as hypercoagulability and the controversy about the benefits of anticoagulant therapy are major challenges encountered by clinicians, especially for patients with pre-existing cardiovascular diseases (CVD), and are still debatable. Therefore, we endeavored to conduct a systematic review to assess the clinical outcomes of prior anticoagulant therapy in patients with COVID-19 having pre-existing CVD. Electronic searches of the PubMed database and EBSCO Information Services were carried out, and all relevant articles were employed. Seven articles with data from 21,989 subjects were included. Despite the promised clinical outcomes of anticoagulant therapy, the results of the current systematic review indicated insignificant improvements in the reduction of mortality rate or ICU admission among patients with COVID-19 having pre-existing CVD. Furthermore, direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) were favored over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) due to better action and less side effects. In conclusion, the findings are controversial as we did not statistically analyze the results. The data showed inconsistent information with no clear effect of anticoagulant use before patient hospitalization or decreasing COVID-19 severity, particularly in those with CVD. Further studies including randomized controlled trials are required to describe the best course as well as optimal dose of anticoagulant use in the treatment of patients with COVID-19, particularly those with comorbidities such as CVD.

COVID-19 and comedications in atrial fibrillation-a case-control study in Stockholm

To test the main hypothesis that anticoagulation reduces risk of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death in COVID-19. Nested case-control study among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in Stockholm. COVID-19 cases were matched to five disease-free controls with same sex, born within ± 1 years. Source population was individuals in Stockholm with AF 1997-2020. Swedish regional and national registers are used. National registers cover hospitals and outpatient clinics, local registers cover primary care. Records were linked through the personal identity number assigned to each Swedish resident. Cases were individuals with COVID-19 (diagnosis, ICU admission, or death). The AF source population consisted of 179,381 individuals from which 7548 cases were identified together with 37,145 controls. The number of cases (controls) identified from hospitalization, ICU admission or death were 5916 (29,035), 160 (750) and 1472 (7,360). The proportion of women was 40% for hospitalization and death, but 20% and 30% for admission to ICU in wave one and two, respectively. Primary outcome was mortality, secondary outcome was hospitalization, tertiary outcome was ICU admission, all with COVID-19. Odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for antithrombotics were 0.79 (0.66-0.95) for the first wave and 0.80 (0.64-1.01) for the second wave. Use of anticoagulation among patients with arrythmias infected with COVID-19 is associated with lower risk of hospitalization and death. If further COVID-variants emerge, or other infections with prothrombotic properties, this emphasize need for physicians to ensure compliance among vulnerable patients.

The pharmacology of anticoagulant drug treatment options in COVID-19 patients: reviewing real-world evidence in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

The optimal anticoagulation strategy for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention among COVID-19 patients, hospitalized or in the community setting, is still challenging and largely based on real-world evidence.

AREAS COVERED

We analyzed real-world data regarding the safety and effectiveness of anticoagulant treatment, both parenteral and oral, for VTE prevention or atrial fibrillation (AF)/VTE treatment among COVID-19 patients.

EXPERT OPINION

The efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) doses for VTE prevention correlates with COVID-19 disease status. LMWH prophylactic dose may be useful in COVID-19 patients at the early stage of the disease. LMWH intermediate or therapeutic dose is recommended in COVID-19 patients with an advanced stage of the disease. COVID-19 patients on VKA therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) and VTE should switch to NOACs in the community setting or LMWH in the hospital setting. No definitive data on de-novo starting of NOACs or VKA therapy for VTE prevention in COVID-19 outpatients are available. In patients at high risk discharged after hospitalization due to COVID-19, thromboprophylaxis with NOACs may be considered.

The optimal anticoagulation strategy for COVID-19, prophylactic or therapeutic?: a meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and meta-regression of more than 27,000 participants

Background

Anticoagulants are promising regimens for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, whether prophylactic or intermediate-to-therapeutic dosage is optimal remains under active discussion.

Methods

We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials, and MedRxiv databases on April 26, 2022. Two independent researchers conducted literature selection and data extraction separately according to predetermined criteria. Notably, this is the first meta-analysis on COVID-19, taking serious consideration regarding the dosage overlap between the 2 comparison groups of prophylactic anticoagulation (PA) and intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation (I-TA).

Results

We included 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 36 cohort studies with 27,051 COVID-19 patients. By analyzing all the RCTs, there was no significant difference in mortality between the PA and I-TA groups, which was further confirmed by trial sequential analysis (TSA) (odds ratio [OR]: 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71–1.22; P = 0.61; TSA adjusted CI: 0.71–1.26). The rate of major bleeding was remarkably higher in the I-TA group than in the PA group, despite adjusting for TSA (OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.15–2.60; P = 0.009; TSA adjusted CI: 1.09–2.58). RCTs have supported the beneficial effect of I-TA in reducing thrombotic events. After including all studies, mortality in the I-TA group was significantly higher than in the PA group (OR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.15–1.66; P = 0.0005). The rate of major bleeding was similar to the analysis from RCTs (OR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.86–2.69; P < 0.00001). There was no distinct difference in the rate of thrombotic events between the 2 regimen groups. In addition, in both critical and noncritical subgroups, I-TA failed to reduce mortality but increased major bleeding rate compared with PA, as shown in meta-analysis of all studies, as well as RCTs only. Meta-regression of all studies suggested that there was no relationship between the treatment effect and the overall risk of mortality or major bleeding (P = 0.14, P = 0.09, respectively).

Conclusion

I-TA is not superior to PA for treating COVID-19 because it fails to lower the mortality rate but increases the major bleeding rate in both critical and noncritical patients.