Once-Daily Enoxaparin in The Outpatient Setting Versus Unfractionated Heparin in Hospital for the Treatment of Symptomatic Deep-Vein Thrombosis

[Sustainable anticoagulation in COVID-19: Review of severity prediction and clinical reasoning]

OBJECTIVE

To identify the procoagulant phenomenon in SARS-CoV-2 patients and propose sustainable therapeutic guidance for low-income countries.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted. It identified 5 observational studies from a scrutiny from 78 results. 712 patients were examined and the results were grouped according to mortality and severity. The comparison of the groups was interpreted using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

D-dimer values were significantly associated with greater severity and mortality. Prothrombin was associated in some observations with higher mortality, but in terms of severity it was inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 disease has significant procoagulant activity and its timely treatment can alter the prognosis. The explored evidence supports sustainable methods. More evidence is needed to improve management. An early systematic approach to patients with sustainable therapeutic measures tailored to the health system is recommended.

Site of Deep Venous Thrombosis and Age in the Selection of Patients in the Emergency Department for Hospitalization Versus Home Treatment

Despite apparent advantages of home treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) based upon results of randomized controlled trials, physicians maintain a conservative approach, and a large proportion of patients with DVT are hospitalized. In the present investigation we assess whether selection of patients for hospitalization for acute DVT was related to the site of the DVT or to age. This was a retrospective cohort study based on administrative data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, 2016. Patients were identified by International Classification of Diseases-10-Clinical Modification codes. Most, 87,436 of 133,414 (66%), had proximal DVT. A minority of patients with isolated distal DVT were hospitalized, 10,621 of 37,592 (28%). However, hospitalization was selected for 47,459 of 87,436 (54%) with proximal DVT; 4,867 of 7,599 (64%) with pelvic vein DVT; and 611 of 788 (78%) with DVT involving the inferior vena cava. Hospitalization for patients with distal DVT, proximal DVT, and pelvic vein DVT was age-dependent. In conclusion, both the site of acute DVT and age were factors affecting the clinical decision of emergency department physicians to select patients for hospital treatment.

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), occurs in ∼1 to 2 individuals per 1000 each year, corresponding to ∼300 000 to 600 000 events in the United States annually.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about treatment of VTE.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and adult patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 28 recommendations for the initial management of VTE, primary treatment, secondary prevention, and treatment of recurrent VTE events.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE and hemodynamic compromise, use of an international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 over a lower INR range for patients with VTE who use a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for secondary prevention, and use of indefinite anticoagulation for patients with recurrent unprovoked VTE. Conditional recommendations include the preference for home treatment over hospital-based treatment for uncomplicated DVT and PE at low risk for complications and a preference for direct oral anticoagulants over VKA for primary treatment of VTE.

Home vs hospital treatment of low-risk venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Increasing evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of managing low-risk deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) in outpatient settings. We performed a systematic review to assess safety and effectiveness of managing patients with DVT or PE at home compared with the hospital. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched up to July 2019 for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and prospective cohort studies. Two investigators independently screened titles and abstracts of identified citations and extracted data from relevant full-text papers. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated, and certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Seven RCTs (1922 patients) were included in meta-analyses on managing patients with DVT. Pooled estimates indicated decreased risk of PE (RR = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.93) and recurrent DVT (RR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.90) for home management, both with moderate certainty of the evidence. Reductions in mortality and major bleeding were not significant, both with low certainty of the evidence. Two RCTs (445 patients) were included in meta-analyses on home management of low-risk patients with PE. Pooled estimates indicated no significant difference in all-cause mortality, recurrent PE, and major bleeding, all with low certainty of the evidence. Results of pooled estimates from 3 prospective cohort studies (234 patients) on home management of PE showed similar results. Our findings indicate that low-risk DVT patients had similar or lower risk of patient-important outcomes with home treatment compared with hospital treatment. In patients with low-risk PE, there was important uncertainty about a difference between home and hospital treatment.

Development and Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Driven Screening Tool to Identify Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department Who Are Eligible for Outpatient Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a critical and costly health issue. Treatment in the outpatient setting is preferred compared to the inpatient setting. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding how best to identify patients who are ideal for outpatient DVT treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To design and evaluate a pharmacist-driven screening tool for the identification of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) at a community hospital with DVT who are appropriate for outpatient treatment.

METHODS

This study was conducted in sequential phases: compilation and vetting of screening criteria, descriptive evaluation of criteria through retrospective chart review, and quantification of potential cost savings by avoiding admissions. Criteria were collected via literature search and assembled into a screening tool, which was applied retroactively to a cohort of ED patients admitted with DVT diagnosis.

RESULTS

A screening tool was developed with multidisciplinary input and consisted of 5 categories with individual patient and disease state criteria. The majority (91%) of patients reviewed would not have qualified for outpatient DVT treatment based on the retrospective application of the screening tool. The most common disqualification criteria category was high risk of bleeding/clotting (n = 81), and the most frequently represented parameter within that category was antithrombotic therapy prior to admission (n = 53).

CONCLUSION

A screening tool may not be the most efficient method for health-care practitioners such as pharmacists to identify ED patients appropriate for outpatient management of DVT. Other avenues should be explored for improving the cost-effective management of these patients.

Effect of anticoagulants on admission rates and length of hospital stay for acute venous thromboembolism: A systematic review of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data available on hospitalization and length of stay (LOS) for different anticoagulant therapies. We sought to compare and summarize admission rates and LOS, and describe the frequency of reporting these two outcomes in randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing different anticoagulant therapies for venous thromboembolism (VTE).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted from inception to August 15, 2016 on RCTs of anticoagulant therapy for patients with VTE. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias analysis were done by two reviewers independently. Meta-analyses were conducted for admission rates and LOS.

RESULTS

A total of 4064 articles were identified. There were 74 articles of 70 studies included in the analysis. Hospitalization rates and LOS were reported in 13 (18.6%) and 12 (17.1%) of the 70 included studies, respectively. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH)-treated patients were 33.0% less likely to be admitted to hospitals compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH) (RR = 0.67, 95% CI [0.58, 0.78]). The mean difference in LOS between LMWH and UFH was 2.54 days in favor of LMWH (95% CI [-4.94, -0.14]). Compared to parenteral therapy, using rivaroxaban was associated with a lower admission rate for a difference of 1.4-5.1% in VTE, 2.5% in DVT and 0.2% in PE. The LOS of patients receiving rivaroxaban was significant shorter than the LOS in parenteral therapy group for a difference of 1-5 days in VTE, 3 days in DVT and 1 day in PE.

CONCLUSION

Admission rates were lower and LOS was shorter using LMWH compared to UFH and oral therapy compared to parenteral therapy for acute VTE treatment in RCTs, based on limited eligible RCTs. These crucial clinically relevant outcomes are underreported in the existing VTE clinical trials.

Home versus in-patient treatment for deep vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) occurs when a blood clot blocks blood flow through a vein, which can occur after surgery, after trauma, or when a person has been immobile for a long time. Clots can dislodge and block blood flow to the lungs (pulmonary embolism (PE)), causing death. DVT and PE are known by the term venous thromboembolism (VTE). Heparin (in the form of unfractionated heparin (UFH)) is a blood-thinning drug used during the first three to five days of DVT treatment. Low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) allow people with DVT to receive their initial treatment at home instead of in hospital. This is an update of a review first published in 2001 and updated in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the incidence and complications of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients treated at home versus patients treated with standard in-patient hospital regimens. Secondary objectives included assessment of patient satisfaction and cost-effectiveness of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register (last searched 16 March 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), and trials registries. We also checked the reference lists of relevant publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining home versus hospital treatment for DVT, in which DVT was clinically confirmed and was treated with LMWHs or UFH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author selected material for inclusion, and another reviewed the selection of trials. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed included studies for risk of bias. Primary outcomes included combined VTE events (PE and recurrent DVT), gangrene, heparin complications, and death. Secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction and cost implications. We performed meta-analysis using fixed-effect models with risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review seven RCTs involving 1839 randomised participants with comparable treatment arms. All seven had fundamental problems including high exclusion rates, partial hospital treatment of many in the home treatment arms, and comparison of UFH in hospital versus LMWH at home. These trials showed that patients treated at home with LMWH were less likely to have recurrence of VTE events than those given hospital treatment with UFH or LMWH (fixed-effect risk ratio (RR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.86; 6 studies; 1708 participants; P = 0.007; low-quality evidence). No clear difference was seen between groups for major bleeding (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.36; 6 studies; 1708 participants; P = 0.27; low-quality evidence), minor bleeding (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.78; 6 studies; 1708 participants; P = 0.11; low-quality evidence), or mortality (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09; 6 studies; 1708 participants; P = 0.11; low-quality evidence). The included studies reported no cases of venous gangrene. We could not combine patient satisfaction and quality of life outcomes in meta-analysis owing to heterogeneity of reporting, but two of three studies found evidence that home treatment led to greater improvement in quality of life compared with in-patient treatment at some point during follow-up, and the third study reported that a large number of participants chose to switch from in-patient care to home-based care for social and personal reasons, suggesting it is the patient's preferred option (very low-quality evidence). None of the studies included in this review carried out a full cost-effectiveness analysis. However, a small randomised economic evaluation of the two alternative treatment settings involving 131 participants found that direct costs were higher for those in the in-patient group. These findings were supported by three other studies that reported on their costs (very low-quality evidence).Quality of evidence for data from meta-analyses was low to very low. This was due to risk of bias, as many of the included studies used unclear randomisation techniques, and blinding was a concern for many. Also, indirectness was a concern, as most studies included a large number of participants randomised to the home (LMWH) treatment group who were treated in hospital for some or all of the treatment period. A further issue for some outcomes was heterogeneity that was evident in measurement and reporting of outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence suggests that patients treated at home with LMWH are less likely to have recurrence of VTE than those treated in hospital. However, data show no clear differences in major or minor bleeding, nor in mortality (low-quality evidence), indicating that home treatment is no worse than in-patient treatment for these outcomes. Because most healthcare systems are moving towards more LMWH usage in the home setting it is unlikely that additional large trials will be undertaken to compare these treatments. Therefore, home treatment is likely to become the norm, and further research will be directed towards resolving practical issues by devising local guidelines that include clinical prediction rules, developing biomarkers and imaging that can be used to tailor therapy to disease severity, and providing training for community healthcare workers who administer treatment and monitor treatment progress.

Management of immune thrombocytopenia: Korean experts recommendation in 2017

Management options for patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) have evolved substantially over the past decades. The American Society of Hematology published a treatment guideline for clinicians referring to the management of ITP in 2011. This evidence-based practice guideline for ITP enables the appropriate treatment of a larger proportion of patients and the maintenance of normal platelet counts. Korean authority operates a unified mandatory national health insurance system. Even though we have a uniform standard guideline enforced by insurance reimbursement, there are several unsolved issues in real practice in ITP treatment. To optimize the management of Korean ITP patients, the Korean Society of Hematology Aplastic Anemia Working Party (KSHAAWP) reviewed the consensus and the Korean data on the clinical practices of ITP therapy. Here, we report a Korean expert recommendation guide for the management of ITP.

The Saudi Clinical Practice Guideline for the treatment of venous thromboembolism. Outpatient versus inpatient management

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) is commonly encountered in daily clinical practice. After diagnosis, its management frequently carries significant challenges to the clinical practitioner. Treatment of VTE with the inappropriate modality and/or in the inappropriate setting may lead to serious complications and have life-threatening consequences. As a result of an initiative of the Ministry of Health of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, an expert panel led by the Saudi Association for Venous Thrombo-Embolism (a subsidiary of the Saudi Thoracic Society) and the Saudi Scientific Hematology Society with the methodological support of the McMaster University Guideline working group, this clinical practice guideline was produced to assist health care providers in VTE management. Two questions were identified and were related to the inpatient versus outpatient treatment of acute DVT, and the early versus standard discharge from hospital for patients with acute PE. The corresponding recommendations were made following the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

Admission rates for emergency department patients with venous thromboembolism and estimation of the proportion of low risk pulmonary embolism patients: a US perspective

Objective

Introduction of target specific anticoagulants and recent guidelines encourage outpatient management of low risk patients with venous thromboembolism. We describe hospital admission rates over time for patients presenting to US emergency departments (EDs) with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) and estimate the proportion of low-risk PE patients who could potentially be managed as outpatients.

Methods

We performed a structured analysis of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (a nationally representative weighted sampling of US ED visits) database for the years 2006–2010 including all adult patients with a primary diagnosis of DVT or PE. Simplified pulmonary embolus scoring index (sPESI) scores were determined in patients with PE to identify low risk patients.

Results

There were an estimated 652,000 and 394,000 ED visits for DVT and PE over the 5-year period (0.17%). Mean (SE) age was 59 (1.3), 50% were female, and 40% were > 65 years. Admission rates for DVT and PE were 52% and 90% respectively with no significant changes over time. In patients with DVT, predictors for admission were age (odds ratio, 1.03 per year of age [95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.05]) and race (odds ratio, 4.1 [95% confidence interval, 0.9 to 19.8] for Hispanics and 2.9 [1.2 to 7.4] for Blacks). Of all ED patients with PE, 51% were low risk based on sPESI scores.

Conclusion

Admission rates for DVT and PE have remained high and unchanged, especially with PE, minorities, and in older patients. Based on sPESI scores, up to half of PE patients might be eligible for early discharge or outpatient therapy.

Home Treatment of Deep Venous Thrombosis According to Comorbid Conditions

BACKGROUND

Cautious exploration of the safety of home treatment of deep venous thrombosis has been recommended by many. Our goal was to identify categories of patients with deep venous thrombosis who typically are hospitalized, and categories frequently treated at home.

METHODS

The Nationwide Emergency Department Sample and the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 2007-2012, were used to determine the number of patients seen in emergency departments throughout the US with deep venous thrombosis and no diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, the proportion of such patients hospitalized according to comorbid conditions and age, the proportion discharged early (≤2 days), and charges for hospitalization and emergency department visits.

RESULTS

From 2007-2012, home treatment was selected for 905,152 of 2,671,452 (33.9%) patients with deep venous thrombosis. Home treatment was more frequent in those with no comorbid conditions than with comorbid conditions, 58.0% compared with 15.5% (P <.0001). Early discharge (≤2 days) was in 23.9% with no comorbid conditions, compared with 12.8% with comorbid conditions. Among patients aged 18-50 years, home treatment was selected in 62.9% with no comorbid conditions, compared with 24.2% with comorbid conditions (P <.0001). Among hospitalized patients with no comorbid conditions, 40.7% were aged 18-50 years. Their charges for hospitalization in 2012 were $494 million.

CONCLUSION

Patients aged 50 years or younger with deep venous thrombosis and no comorbid conditions appear to be a group that can be targeted for more frequent home treatment, which would save millions of dollars.

Home treatment of deep venous thrombosis in the era of new oral anticoagulants

This is a retrospective cohort study of adults with a primary diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) unaccompanied by pulmonary embolism (PE), seen in 4 emergency departments in 2013 and part of 2014. The purpose was to assess the prevalence of home treatment of DVT in the present era of new oral anticoagulants. Among 96 patients with DVT and no PE, 85 (88.5%) were hospitalized and 11 (11.5%) were discharged to home. Most of the patients discharged to home received low-molecular-weight heparin, 9 (81.8%) of 11. None were prescribed new oral anticoagulants. Early discharge in ≤2 days occurred 28 (32.9%) of 85 patients. Most (64.3%) received enoxaparin and/or warfarin at early discharge. Rivaroxaban was prescribed in 7 (25.0%) of those discharged in ≤2 days. We conclude that in some emergency departments, patients with DVT are uncommonly discharged to home even though new oral anticoagulants are available.

Index clinical manifestation of venous thromboembolism predicts early recurrence type and frequency: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest index clinical manifestation of venous thromboembolism (VTE) predicts recurrence type. Data regarding the association between index manifestation and recurrence rates are conflicting.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the type and frequency of recurrent VTE (rVTE) in persons after an index deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE).

PATIENTS/METHODS

We searched bibliographic databases for RCTs of acute (early) treatment of rVTE in persons with an index DVT or PE (±DVT), enrolling ≥ 50 subjects anticoagulated ≥ 3-months and reporting types of rVTE. We pooled (random-effects) the proportion of rVTEs that were DVTs, PEs, and fatal PEs, the proportion of recurrent PEs that were fatal, and absolute rVTE rates.

RESULTS

In nine RCTs (N = 13 640; 413 rVTEs) evaluating persons with an index PE; 66% (95% CI, 60-72%) of rVTEs were PE and 27% (95% CI, 22-33%) were fatal PE. Among 25 RCTs (N = 17 340; 692 rVTEs) evaluating persons with an index DVT, 36% (95% CI, 29-44%) experienced a recurrent PE and 10% (95% CI, 7-13%) a fatal PE. Recurrent PEs following an index PE had a higher fatality rate than after an index DVT (41%; 95% CI, 33-48% vs. 25%; 95% CI, 18-33%; P = 0.007). The rVTE rate was higher following an index DVT compared with a PE (2.6%; 95% CI, 1.6-3.8% vs. 4.9%; 95% CI, 4.0-6.0%; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests most rVTEs will be the same type as the index event. While index DVTs are associated with a higher rVTE rate than index PEs; recurrent PEs are associated with high fatality.

Should alternatives to conventional hospitalisation be promoted in an era of financial constraint?

BACKGROUND

Because the current economic crisis has led to austerity in health policies, with severe restrictions on public health care, avoiding unnecessary admissions and shortening hospital stays is rapidly becoming an urgent priority. Alternatives to hospitalisation replace or shorten hospital processes, including diagnosis, monitoring, treatment and follow-up. This review aims to present the available evidence on alternatives to conventional hospitalisation for medical disorders; options for surgery, psychiatry and palliative care are largely excluded.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Narrative review.

RESULTS

The main alternatives to conventional hospitalisation include day centres (DC), quick diagnosis units (QDU), hospital at home (HaH) and, in some circumstances, telemonitoring. DC increase patient comfort, reduce costs and can improve efficiency. In generally healthy patients with suspected severe disease, QDU may be a good alternative to hospitalisation for diagnostic procedures. However, their cost-effectiveness remains to be clearly proven. Randomised controlled trials have shown that hospital-at-home (HaH) can lead to earlier hospital discharges, improve outcomes and reduce costs in patients with prevalent chronic diseases. Although telemonitoring seems to be promising and its use is increasing, methodologically sounder studies with a higher level of evidence are needed to assess its clinical effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors such as ageing, the need for an earlier diagnosis of suspected severe disease, the increasing complexity of medical care and the increasing costs of hospitalisation mean that, whenever possible, giving priority to less expensive alternatives to hospital admission, such as QDU, DC, HaH and telemedicine, is an urgent task in the current economic crisis.

Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

This article addresses the treatment of VTE disease.

METHODS

We generated strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high-quality (Grade A), moderate-quality (Grade B), and low-quality (Grade C) evidence.

RESULTS

For acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend initial parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Grade 1B) or anticoagulation with rivaroxaban. We suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux over IV unfractionated heparin (Grade 2C) or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for PE with hypotension (Grade 2C). For proximal DVT or PE, we recommend treatment of 3 months over shorter periods (Grade 1B). For a first proximal DVT or PE that is provoked by surgery or by a nonsurgical transient risk factor, we recommend 3 months of therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if provoked by a nonsurgical risk factor and low or moderate bleeding risk); that is unprovoked, we suggest extended therapy if bleeding risk is low or moderate (Grade 2B) and recommend 3 months of therapy if bleeding risk is high (Grade 1B); and that is associated with active cancer, we recommend extended therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if high bleeding risk) and suggest LMWH over vitamin K antagonists (Grade 2B). We suggest vitamin K antagonists or LMWH over dabigatran or rivaroxaban (Grade 2B). We suggest compression stockings to prevent the postthrombotic syndrome (Grade 2B). For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we suggest prophylactic-dose fondaparinux or LMWH over no anticoagulation (Grade 2B), and suggest fondaparinux over LMWH (Grade 2C).

CONCLUSION

Strong recommendations apply to most patients, whereas weak recommendations are sensitive to differences among patients, including their preferences.

Outcomes of a Comprehensive, Pharmacist-Managed Injectable Anticoagulation Discharge Program for the Prophylaxis and Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism

Background:

Safe and effective transition of patients receiving injectable anticoagulation, from an inpatient to an outpatient setting, requires patient education, prescription coordination, and appropriate follow-up.

Objective:

To evaluate a long-standing, hospital-wide, pharmacist-managed injectable anticoagulation discharge program at an urban academic medical center.

Methods:

This observational study included adults discharged on an injectable anticoagulant between December 1, 2008, and February 28, 2009. The primary endpoint was program adherence, defined as percent of discharged patients whose anticoagulation therapy was coordinated by a pharmacist. Secondary endpoints included duration of patient counseling and medication procurement (including confirmation of current home supply or need for complete procurement of a full/new prescription); length of hospital stay for patients with a primary diagnosis of venous thromboembolism (VTE); and VTE recurrence and bleeding rates at 3 months. Descriptive statistics were used and are presented as proportions and mean (SD).

Results:

A total of 207 patients discharged on an injectable anticoagulant (3.2 discharges/day) were included. Pharmacist coordination was documented for 180 (87%) patients. Overall, pharmacists spent 37.6 (25.5) minutes per patient, including 19.4 (9.6) minutes for counseling and 19.7 (19.7) minutes for medication procurement; 150 (83%) patients required complete medication procurement lasting 21.4 (19.6) minutes. The length of hospital stay for patients with a primary diagnosis of VTE was 3.2 (2.4) days. At 3 months, 5.3% and 1.4% of assessable patients had recurrent VTE or major bleeding events, respectively. Patients with major bleeding experienced intracranial hemorrhage (n = 2) and gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 1), all beyond the first 2 weeks after discharge.

Conclusions:

The pharmacist-managed injectable anticoagulation discharge program was completed in a large proportion of patients. Patient education and medication procurement require the majority of time-related resources. Continual process improvement is crucial for hospitals to ensure that all patients discharged with injectable anticoagulation are assessed and receive anticoagulation education.

Physician and patient perceptions of the route of administration of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: results from an international survey

INTRODUCTION

Acceptability of a prescribed treatment regimen is crucial to its clinical success, and the route of drug administration can play an important role in determining acceptability. This international survey explored physician and patient perceptions of injectable and oral treatments, and how these perceptions affect acceptability of treatments. Findings are discussed in the context of patient acceptance of treatments for venous thromboembolism (VTE) management.

METHODS

Physicians who are regular prescribers of VTE prophylaxis and a randomly selected patient population were recruited to take part in a questionnaire. Patients had to answer 23 questions and physicians gave their predictions of patients' responses.

RESULTS

In total, 568 physicians and 825 patients from 5 countries took part in the survey. More patients considered injectable treatments effective than considered oral treatments effective (87% versus 76%, respectively). This trend was well predicted by the physicians (98% and 61%, respectively). Additionally, 46% of patients would accept an injectable treatment program lasting >2months (rising to 67% for life-threatening diseases), a figure underestimated by physicians (11% and 46%, respectively). Overall, 73% of patients stated they would never miss an injection, where as 54% of physicians expected patients to miss one injection in a month of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians who are regular prescribers of VTE prophylaxis underestimate patients' ability to accept injectable treatments as an alternative to oral therapy. This survey suggests that injectable treatments may be an acceptable, and often preferred, option over oral administration of therapeutic and preventive medicines.

Differentiation of parenteral anticoagulants in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

The prevention of venous thromboembolism has been identified as a leading priority in hospital safety. Recommended parenteral anticoagulant agents with different indications for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism include unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins and fondaparinux. Prescribing decisions in venous thromboembolism management may seem complex due to the large range of clinical indications and patient types, and the range of anticoagulants available.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify relevant original articles.

RESULTS

Low-molecular-weight heparins have nearly replaced unfractionated heparin as the gold standard antithrombotic agent. Low-molecular-weight heparins currently available in the US are enoxaparin, dalteparin, and tinzaparin. Each low-molecular-weight heparin is a distinct pharmacological entity with different licensed indications and available clinical evidence. Enoxaparin is the only low-molecular-weight heparin that is licensed for both venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment. Enoxaparin also has the largest body of clinical evidence supporting its use across the spectrum of venous thromboembolism management and has been used as the reference standard comparator anticoagulant in trials of new anticoagulants. As well as novel oral anticoagulant agents, biosimilar and/or generic low-molecular-weight heparins are now commercially available. Despite similar anticoagulant properties, studies report differences between the branded and biosimilar and/or generic agents and further clinical studies are required to support the use of biosimilar low-molecular-weight heparins. The newer parenteral anticoagulant, fondaparinux, is now also licensed for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in surgical patients and the treatment of acute deep-vein thrombosis; clinical experience with this anticoagulant is expanding.

CONCLUSIONS

Parenteral anticoagulants should be prescribed in accordance with recommended dose regimens for each clinical indication, based on the available clinical evidence for each agent to assure optimal safety and efficacy.

Modest response in translation to home management of deep venous thrombosis

BACKGROUND

years may elapse between the publication of results of rigorous randomized trials and changes in clinical practice. It is not often that a definitive time interval can be identified that shows the time taken for published clinical trials to affect clinical practice. In the present study, we track the timelines of evidence for home treatment of deep venous thrombosis and its eventual impact on hospitalizations and early discharge.

METHODS

the number of patients discharged from short-stay hospitals throughout the United States between 1979 and 2006 with a principal diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis and the proportion discharged in ≤ 2 days was determined from The National Hospital Discharge Survey. We also attempted to identify all published articles that reported home treatment of deep venous thrombosis in unselected populations.

RESULTS

eleven years after demonstration of the safety and efficacy of home treatment, there was only a 21% decrease in the population-based incidence of hospitalizations of patients with a principal diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis. The proportion of patients with a principal diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis who were discharged in ≤ 2 days began to increase prominently after the 1996 publication of trials showing the safety and efficacy of home treatment, and continued to increase through 2006. However, the proportion discharged early remained modest (21% to 25%).

CONCLUSIONS

whether the slow implementation of home treatment reflects a cautious approach accompanied by a gradual testing of shortened hospitalization for deep venous thrombosis or other factors is uncertain.

Low-molecular-weight heparins: pharmacoeconomic decision modeling based on meta-analysis data

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare efficacy, safety, and consumption of low-molecular-weight heparins with unfractionated heparin, and to develop a pharmacoeconomic decision model based on meta-analysis data.

METHODS

Review and meta-analysis were performed of published randomized control trials directly comparing the safety and efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs)-that is, nadroparin, enoxaparin, and dalteparin-and unfractionated heparin (UFH) was performed by two reviewers using inclusion/exclusion criteria based on the research objectives. The value of fixed effects and random effects odds ratio (95 percent confidence interval) was calculated for each trial for the composite end point. Subsequently, a pharmacoeconomic decision modeling based on reference pricing methodology was implemented.

RESULTS

In comparison to UFH, all LMWHs have independently demonstrated greater safety and effectiveness. None of the LMWHs demonstrated a significant superiority over each other; therefore, the group of LMWHs was interchangeable and suitable for cost minimization analysis and reference price implementation. Being the least expensive option, dalteparin single DDD price was set as the reference. Introduction of reference pricing for LMWHs would decrease the total expenditure on LMWHs of approximately 30 percent and would result in total savings of 1.830-2.070 thousand LTL in the country of Lithuania (approximately 0.8 million USD) per year.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis results of LMWHs could be used to support a policy on reference-based pricing and pharmacoeconomic decision modeling in healthcare institutions, which would allow a decrease in healthcare expenditures.

Endovascular treatment of peripheral vascular disease

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) affects about 27 million people in North America and Europe, accounting for up to 413,000 hospitalizations per year with 88,000 hospitalizations involving the lower extremities and 28,000 involving embolectomy or thrombectomy of lower limb arteries. Many patients are asymptomatic and, among symptomatic patients, atypical symptoms are more common than classic claudication. Peripheral arterial disease also correlates strongly with risk of major cardiovascular events, and patients with PAD have a high prevalence of coexistent coronary and cerebrovascular disease. Because the prevalence of PAD increases progressively with age, PAD is a growing clinical problem due to the increasingly aged population in the United States and other developed countries. Until recently, vascular surgical procedures were the only alternative to medical therapy in such patients. Today, endovascular practice, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with or without stenting, is used far more frequently for all types of lower extremity occlusive lesions, reflecting the continuing advances in imaging techniques, angioplasty equipment, and endovascular expertise. The role of endovascular intervention in the treatment of limb-threatening ischemia is also expanding, and its promise of limb salvage and symptom relief with reduced morbidity and mortality makes percutaneous transluminal angioplasty/stenting an attractive alternative to surgery and, as most endovascular interventions are performed on an outpatient basis, hospital costs are cut considerably. In this monograph we discuss current endovascular intervention for treatment of occlusive PAD, aneurysmal arterial disease, and venous occlusive disease.

Diagnosis and management of venous thromboembolism

Venous thromboembolic disease is a common disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Accurate and timely diagnosis should be guided by the use of validated clinical prediction rules. The mainstay of therapy is anticoagulation, although alternative approaches, such as use of concurrent thrombolysis or placement of vena caval filters, may be appropriate in selected patients. Determination of duration of anticoagulation requires a detailed assessment of the risk factors associated with the event allowing estimation of recurrence risk, and careful assessment of bleeding risk. Although extremely effective, anticoagulants have a narrow therapeutic window; systems should be in place to reduce risk of adverse events associated with these agents.

Outpatient-Based Primary and Secondary Thromboprophylaxis With Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin

Although oral vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin have been the mainstay of thromboprophylaxis in the outpatient setting, warfarin has potential disadvantages, including food and drug interactions, the need for drug monitoring, intolerance, failure, and hypersensitivity syndromes. The use of low-molecular-weight heparin as a primary or secondary thromboprophylactic drug in the outpatient setting for extended prophylaxis or as outpatient bridging therapy has been addressed less extensively. Available evidence shows that low-molecular-weight heparin can be used as extended outpatient-based primary thromboprophylaxis for major orthopedic and cancer surgery and is a safe and effective alternative to warfarin in long-term secondary thromboprophylaxis, especially in cancer patients and in pregnant women. Low-molecular-weight heparin can also be used as an alternative to unfractionated heparin as outpatient-based bridging therapy. In addition to good clinical outcomes and financial benefits, mainly resulting from a reduction in the length of hospital stay, the use of extended-duration low-molecular-weight heparin in the outpatient setting appears to be feasible, with high patient compliance.

Home versus in-patient treatment for deep vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) occurs when a blood clot blocks blood flow through a vein. This can happen after surgery, trauma, or when a person has been immobile. Clots can dislodge and block blood flow to the lungs, causing death. Heparin is a blood-thinning drug used in the first 3-5 days of DVT treatment. Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) allow people with DVT to receive their initial treatment at home instead of in hospital.

OBJECTIVES

To collate randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing home (LMWH) versus hospital (LMWH or UH) treatment for DVT, and to compare the safety, efficacy, acceptability and cost implications of home versus hospital treatment.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group trials register (inception to May 2007) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (last searched Issue 2, 2007) which includes searches of MEDLINE (January 1966 onwards) and EMBASE (January 1980 onwards). We also handsearched non-listed journals and contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of home versus hospital treatment for DVT in which DVT was clinically confirmed and treated with either LMWH or UH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer selected the material for inclusion and another reviewed the literature and selection of trials. Two reviewers independently extracted data. Outcomes included PE, recurrent DVT, gangrene, heparin complications, and death.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs involving 1708 participants with comparable treatment arms were included. All six had fundamental problems including high exclusion rates, partial hospital treatment of many in the LMWH arms, and comparison of UH in hospital with LMWH at home. The trials showed that patients treated at home with LMWH are less likely to have recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared to hospital treatment with UH or LMWH (fixed effect relative risk (FE RR) 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 0.90). Home treated patients also had lower mortality (FE RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.15) and fewer major bleeding (FE RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.33 to 1.36), but were more likely to have minor bleeding than those in hospital (FE RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.78) though these were not statistically significant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The limited evidence suggests that home management is cost effective and preferred by patients. Further large trials comparing these treatments are unlikely to occur. Therefore, home treatment is likely to become the norm; further research will be directed to resolving practical issues.

Community-based treatment of venous thromboembolism with a low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin

This multicenter, prospective, open label, observational study evaluated practice patterns of physicians using tinzaparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and warfarin for the treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) with or without pulmonary embolism (PE). Short-term recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and safety were also evaluated. Patients with an objective diagnosis of DVT, with or without PE, were invited by their physician to participate in this study. Treatment was given according to the approved U.S. package inserts for tinzaparin (175 IU/kg SQ QD) and warfarin and the clinical judgment of the prescribing physician. Baseline patient history including demographic information and the results of tests to confirm the diagnosis of DVT, with or without PE, were collected. Follow-up information included the treatment setting in which each dose of tinzaparin was administered, medical training of the person administering tinzaparin doses, timing of initiation of warfarin with respect to that of tinzaparin, length of overlap of tinzaparin and warfarin therapy, and adverse experiences. A total of 334 patients were enrolled at 65 sites. Patients across a wide age (range 18-93 years old) and body weight (range 40-261 kg) were included. Overall, 27.3% of patients had cancer, and 50% of the overall study population reported more than one VTE risk factor. Mean duration of tinzaparin treatment was 7.61 days. Therapy at home was more common in suburban and rural settings than in urban settings. High proportions of patient, even among the small group with concurrent PE, were treated at home with self-injection. Severity of disease was the primary reason for hospitalization. Home treatment of DVT, with or without PE, with self administration of tinzaparin at 175 IU SQ once-daily was safe and resulted in an acceptably low rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism and adverse events. Home therapy in the usual practice setting should achieve substantial overall cost savings in the treatment of DVT.

Management of venous thromboembolism in the elderly

In this review the authors discuss the use of oral and parenteral anticoagulants for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the elderly. The use of anticoagulant agents in VTE prophylaxis and treatment in the elderly is complicated by an increase with age in the presence of multiple risk factors and co-morbidities that may increase the risk of both VTE and bleeding. Age itself is identified as an independent risk factor for thromboembolism. VTE is underdiagnosed in the elderly population, and routine prophylaxis frequently falls short of the levels required according to level of risk. Although appropriate anticoagulation of at-risk patients offers a means of reducing the significant VTE burden in this population, concerns have been raised over the use of anticoagulants in a patient group in whom multiple risk factors are common. Bleeding in the elderly can be exacerbated by reduced renal clearance and hypersensitivity to oral anticoagulants that may lead to over-anticoagulation. Although bleeding due to anticoagulant therapy is a serious issue in the elderly, it is often overemphasized, given the therapeutic value otherwise observed in treating this patient group. Warfarin is still used in VTE prophylaxis after orthopaedic surgery and for long-term VTE treatment. Unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) have been shown to be safe and effective in the prophylaxis of VTE, and are now being shown to be as effective as warfarin in the initial and long-term treatment of VTE. LMWHs confer the advantage over unfractionated heparin of subcutaneous once-daily administration with no requirement for laboratory monitoring of their anticoagulant effect, which allows for the convenience of outpatient therapy. New anticoagulants that may be of potential benefit in this patient population include fondaparinux sodium, but clinical experience of this drug in the elderly remains limited.