Heparin-associated thrombocytopenia: a comparison of three heparin preparations

Impact of Acquired Thrombocytopenia on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Acquired thrombocytopenia (aTP) is associated with a high frequency of bleeding and ischemic complications in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Herein, we report a meta-analysis evaluating the adverse effects of aTP on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality post-PCI.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and, clinicaltrials.gov from the inception of these databases through October 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: 1) No Thrombocytopenia (nTP) and 2) Acquired Thrombocytopenia (aTP) after PCI. Primary endpoints were in-hospital, 30-day and all-cause mortality rates at the longest follow-up. The main summary estimate was random effects Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Seven studies involving 57,247 participants were included. There was significantly increased in-hospital all-cause mortality (HR 10.73 [6.82-16.88]), MACE (HR 2.96 [2.24-3.94]), major bleeding (HR 4.78 [3.54-6.47]), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (HR 7.53 [2.8-20.2]), in the aTP group compared to the nTP group. Similarly, aTP group had a statistically significant increased incidence of 30-day all-cause mortality (HR 6.08), MACE (HR 2.77), post-PCI MI (HR 1.98), TVR (HR 5.2), and major bleeding (HR 12.73). Outcomes at longest follow-up showed increased incidence of all-cause mortality (HR 3.98 [1.53-10.33]) and MACE (HR 1.24 [0.99-1.54]) in aTP group, while there was no significant difference for post-PCI MI (HR 0.94 [0.37-2.39]) and TVR (HR 0.96 [0.69-1.32]) between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Acquired Thrombocytopenia after PCI is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, adverse bleeding events and the need for in-hospital and 30-day TVR.

Unfractionated heparin versus low molecular weight heparins for avoiding heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in postoperative patients

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse drug reaction presenting as a prothrombotic disorder related to antibody-mediated platelet activation. It is a paradoxical immune reaction resulting in thrombin generation in vivo, which leads to a hypercoagulable state and the potential to initiate venous or arterial thrombosis. A number of factors are thought to influence the incidence of HIT including the type and preparation of heparin (unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)) and the heparin-exposed patient population, with the postoperative patient population at higher risk.Although LMWH has largely replaced UFH as a front-line therapy, there is evidence supporting a lack of superiority of LMWH compared with UFH regarding prevention of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism following surgery, and similar frequencies of bleeding have been described with LMWH and UFH. The decision as to which of these two preparations of heparin to use may thus be influenced by harmful effects such as HIT. We therefore sought to determine the relative impact of UFH and LMWH on HIT in postoperative patients receiving thromboembolism prophylaxis. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to compare the incidence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and HIT complicated by venous thromboembolism in postoperative patients exposed to unfractionated heparin (UFH) versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH).

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Specialised Register (May 2016), CENTRAL (2016, Issue 4) and trials registries. The authors searched Lilacs (June 2016) and additional trials were sought from reference lists of relevant publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which participants were postoperative patients allocated to receive prophylaxis with UFH or LMWH, in a blinded or unblinded fashion. Studies were excluded if they did not use the accepted definition of HIT. This was defined as a relative reduction in the platelet count of 50% or greater from the postoperative peak (even if the platelet count at its lowest remained greater than 150 x 10⁹/L) occurring within five to 14 days after the surgery, with or without a thrombotic event occurring in this timeframe. Additionally, we required circulating antibodies associated with the syndrome to have been investigated through laboratory assays.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with participation of a third author.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we included three trials involving 1398 postoperative participants. Participants were submitted to general surgical procedures, minor and major, and the minimum mean age was 49 years. Pooled analysis showed a significant reduction in the risk of HIT with LMWH compared with UFH (risk ratio (RR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.73); low-quality evidence. The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) was 59. The risk of HIT was consistently reduced comparing participants undergoing major surgical procedures exposed to LMWH or UFH (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.75); low-quality evidence. The occurrence of HIT complicated by venous thromboembolism was significantly lower in participants receiving LMWH compared with UFH (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.84); low-quality evidence. The NNTB was 75. Arterial thrombosis occurred in only one participant who received UFH. There were no amputations or deaths documented. Although limited evidence is available, it appears that HIT induced by both types of heparins is common in people undergoing major surgical procedures (incidence greater than 1% and less than 10%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This updated review demonstrated low-quality evidence of a lower incidence of HIT, and HIT complicated by venous thromboembolism, in postoperative patients undergoing thromboprophylaxis with LMWH compared with UFH. Similarily, the risk of HIT in people undergoing major surgical procedures was lower when treated with LMWH compared to UFH (low-quality evidence). The quality of the evidence was downgraded due to concerns about the risk of bias in the included studies and imprecision of the study results. These findings may support current clinical use of LMWH over UFH as front-line heparin therapy. However, our conclusions are limited and there was an unexpected paucity of RCTs including HIT as an outcome. To address the scarcity of clinically-relevant information on HIT, HIT must be included as a core harmful outcome in future RCTs of heparin.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: natural history, diagnosis, and management

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an under-recognized, limb- and life-threatening complication of pharmacologic heparin administration. Antibody formation against heparin complexed to platelet factor 4 (PF4) is central to the pathogenesis of HIT. Heparin: PF4 antibodies promote platelet activation and aggregation as well as excess thrombin generation which may lead to clinical thrombosis. HIT should be suspected in patients who develop thrombocytopenia with or without associated arterial or venous thrombosis while on heparin. HIT is a clinical diagnosis. Specialized HIT assays should be interpreted with care. The cornerstone of HIT management is the discontinuation of all forms of heparin exposure and the institution of anticoagulation with an alternative agent. The direct thrombin inhibitors lepirudin and argatroban are currently available and approved for use in patients with HIT.

Dermatologic Problems in the Intensive Care Unit: Part IV

In this final section of our review, we discuss a variety of skin disorders often acquired during hospitalization in the intensive care unit. Environmental, nutritional, immunologic, and pharmacologic factors, among others, place patients at risk for drug eruptions, including leukocytoclastic vasculitis and anticoagulant-induced necrosis; moniliasis; acquired zinc deficiency; recurrent herpes simplex labialis; seborrheic dermatitis; contact dermatitis; and pressure sores.

Lack of In Vitro Cross-Reactivity Predicts Safety of Low-Molecular Weight Heparins in Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Alternative anticoagulation in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is often problematic. The relatively high cross-reactivity rate reported for the low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) has discouraged their use in this setting. This study has investigated the safety of using the LMWH Fragmin, based on a negative heparin-dependent platelet aggregation test using the latter, in patients with proven HIT. Fifty-three evaluable patients with clinical and laboratory evidence of HIT were evaluated for cross-reactivity with Fragmin using a Fragmin-dependent platelet aggregation test. In 20 of 38 patients who showed no in vitro cross-reactivity. Fragmin was substituted for unfractionated heparin. The outcome of these 20 patients was evaluated and compared to that of the remaining 33 patients, in whom anticoagulates were ceased or warfarin or Orgaran was used. Eighteen of 20 patients treated with Fragmin increased their platelet count by ≥50 x 109/l from a mean nadir of 57.9 ± 4.7 x 109/l within 2.8 ± 0.29 days following substitution of Fragmin for unfractionated heparin. Twenty-eight of the 33 remaining patients who did not receive Fragmin increased their platelet count by ≥50 x 109/l from a mean nadir of 53.0 ± 4.8 x 109/l within 3.0 ± 0.29 days. In seven patients (two treated with Fragmin), response could not be evaluated due to death within 36 h of cessation of heparin or discharge from hospital. The results indicate that in vitro cross-reactivity testing employing a heparin-dependent platelet aggregation assay can be safely used to select patients with HIT for further anticoagulation with LMWH. Key Words: Fragmin—Crossreactivity—Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

Prognostic significance of post percutaneous coronary intervention thrombocytopenia

Several definitions of post percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) thrombocytopenia (TC) were formulated. Recent studies demonstrated that a relative drop in platelet count ≥ 25% is the most appropriate criterion. By this definition a population is detected that is exposed not only to increased risk of hemorrhagic complications but also to increased risk of ischemic events, which may appear a paradox. In patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing PCI, several conditions might be associated with TC: cardiopulmonary by-pass and the presence of extra corporeal membrane oxygenators, intra aortic balloon pump (IABP), cardiogenic shock, thrombolytic drugs and anticoagulant or antiplatelet drugs. Several studies demonstrated that TC and ischemic outcomes are related although it is unclear whether this is a direct relationship or TC is just a secondary effect of another cryptic protagonist. It is suggested that further investigations determine whether there is a real link between TC, a probably well defined covariate, and ischemic outcomes or whether IABP is the joining link between these two variables and whose presence needs in any case be considered in multivariable statistics. Post-PCI TC could be only a secondary effect of IABP use. On turn, the prolonged use of heparin necessarily accompanying the use of IABP, and producing a paradoxical pro-thrombotic TC, might also be implicated.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin is widely used for the prevention and treatment of thrombotic and particularly cardiovascular disorders. Unfortunately, 0.5 to 3.0% of patients given heparin develop an immune reaction, commonly termed Type II heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). This is characterized by a moderate thrombocytopenia and in some patients, a venous or arterial thrombosis. This frequently leads to disastrous sequelae, such as limb amputation and death. The pathophysiological basis of this serious adverse drug reaction is the production of an immunoglobulin G antibody that reacts with an antigenic complex consisting of heparin and platelet factor 4. A significant risk factor for the development of HIT is recent surgery, and the frequency of developing an antiheparin-platelet factor 4 or HIT antibody is particularly high in cardiac surgery patients, although surprisingly, only a few of these patients actually develop the clinical syndrome of HIT. This review will discuss the frequency, pathophysiology, clinical features, diagnosis and management of HIT.

Unfractionated heparin versus low molecular weight heparin for avoiding heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in postoperative patients

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse drug reaction presenting as a prothrombotic disorder related to antibody-mediated platelet activation. It is a poorly understood paradoxical immune reaction resulting in thrombin generation in vivo, which leads to a hypercoagulable state and the potential to initiate venous or arterial thrombosis. A number of factors are thought to influence the incidence of HIT including the type and preparation of heparin (unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)) and the heparin-exposed patient population, with the postoperative patient population presenting a higher risk.Although LMWH has largely replaced UFH as a front-line therapy, there is evidence supporting a lack of superiority of LMWH compared with UFH regarding prevention of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism following surgery, and similar frequencies of bleeding have been described with LMWH and UFH. The decision as to which of these two preparations of heparin to use may thus be influenced by adverse reactions such as HIT. We therefore sought to determine the relative impact of UFH and LMWH specifically on HIT in postoperative patients receiving thromboembolism prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to compare the incidence of HIT and HIT complicated by thrombosis in patients exposed to UFH versus LMWH in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of postoperative heparin therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group searched their Specialised Register (March 2012) and CENTRAL (2012, Issue 2). In addition, the authors searched LILACS (March 2012) and additional trials were sought from reference lists of relevant publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We were interested in comparing the incidence of HIT occurring during exposure to UFH or LMWH after any surgical intervention. Therefore, we studied RCTs in which participants were postoperative patients allocated to receive UFH or LMWH, in a blinded or unblinded fashion. Eligible studies were required to have as an outcome clinically diagnosed HIT, defined as a relative reduction in the platelet count of 50% or greater from the postoperative peak (even if the platelet count at its lowest remained > 150 x 10(9)/L) occurring within five to 14 days after the surgery, with or without a thrombotic event occurring in this timeframe. Additionally, circulating antibodies associated with the syndrome were required to have been investigated through laboratory assays.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with participation of a third author.

MAIN RESULTS

In total two studies involving 923 participants met all the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Pooled analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in the risk of HIT with LMWH compared with UFH (risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.82; P = 0.02). This result suggests that patients treated with LMWH would have a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 76% in the probability of developing HIT compared with patients treated with UFH.Venous thromboembolism (VTE) complicating HIT occurred in 12 of 17 patients who developed HIT. Pooled analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in HIT complicated by VTE with LMWH compared with UFH (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.90; P = 0.04). This result indicates that patients using LMWH would have a RRR of 80% for developing HIT complicated by VTE compared with patients using UFH. Arterial thrombosis occurred in only one patient who received UFH and there were no amputations or deaths documented.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was a lower incidence of HIT and HIT complicated by VTE in postoperative patients undergoing thromboprophylaxis with LMWH compared with UFH. This is consistent with the current clinical use of LMWH over UFH as front-line heparin therapy. However, conclusions are limited by a scarcity of high quality evidence. We did not expect the paucity of RCTs including HIT as an outcome as heparin is one of the most commonly used drugs worldwide and HIT is a life-threatening adverse drug reaction. To address the scarcity of clinically-relevant information on the topic of HIT as a whole, HIT should be included as an outcome in future RCTs of heparin, and HIT as an adverse drug reaction should be considered in clinical recommendations regarding monitoring of the platelet count for HIT.

Lower extremity manifestations and treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia syndromes: a cohort study

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with thrombosis (HITT) syndromes are the result of an adverse reaction to heparin that results in a spectrum of laboratory and end-organ manifestations secondary to thrombosis of both arterial and venous small and large vessels. HITT most often manifests in the extremities as acral ischemia and necrosis, with a spectrum of severity. The lower extremity surgical patient is at risk for deep venous thrombosis, and when exposed to heparin products, is also at risk for the development of a heparin-induced thrombocytopenic syndrome. This article reports on a cohort of patients from a tertiary referral lower extremity reconstruction practice with the HIT/HITT syndromes, with an analysis of the frequency, medical characteristics, clinical settings, lower extremity manifestations, management, and outcomes of patients with HIT/HITT.).

Decline in platelet count in patients treated by percutaneous coronary intervention: definition, incidence, prognostic importance, and predictive factors

AIMS

We investigated the incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of a decline in platelet count (DPC) in patients treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 10 146 consecutive patients treated by PCI from 2003 to 2006 were included. According to the magnitude of the DPC, the population was divided into four groups: no DPC (<10%), minor DPC (10-24%), moderate DPC (25-49%), and severe DPC (>or=50%). The primary haemorrhagic endpoint was a composite of post-procedure surgical repair major bleeding. The primary ischaemic endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality-non-fatal myocardial infarction. Among the total population, 36% had a DPC <10%, 47.7% had a DPC of 10-24%, 14% had a DPC of 25-49%, and 2.3% had a DPC >or=50%. On multivariate analysis, moderate and severe DPC were independent predictive factors of the ischaemic outcome. Two procedural practices were identified that, if modified, might reduce the incidence of acquired thrombocytopaenia. Both the intraprocedural use of heparin (as opposed to bivalirudin) and of low molecular weight contrast material were independently associated with severe acquired thrombocytopaenia.

CONCLUSION

Moderate and severe DPC are independent predictors of adverse bleeding and ischaemic outcomes in PCI. Adoption of intraprocedural anticoagulant other than heparin and avoidance of a low molecular weight contrast agent could potentially decrease the occurrence of severe acquired thrombocytopaenia.

Incidence of thrombocytopenia in hospitalized patients with venous thromboembolism

PURPOSE

To determine the incidence of heparin-associated thrombocytopenia in patients receiving prophylaxis or treatment for venous thromboembolism.

METHODS

We assessed the database of the National Hospital Discharge Survey from 1979 through 2005 and complemented this with a meta-analysis of published literature.

RESULT

Among 10,554,000 patients discharged from short-stay hospitals throughout the US with venous thromboembolism during the 27 years of study, secondary thrombocytopenia was coded in 38,000 patients (0.36%). From 1979 through 1992, secondary thrombocytopenia was coded in only 0.15% of hospitalized patients with venous thromboembolism. The frequency increased sharply to 0.54% from 1993 through 2005. Secondary thrombocytopenia was rarely diagnosed among 1,446,000 patients aged <40 years and among 77,000 women who had venous thromboembolism with deliveries. Meta-analysis of published literature showed a higher incidence among patients who received unfractionated heparin (UFH) for prophylaxis than those who received low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for prophylaxis. Treatment resulted in smaller differences of the incidence between UFH and LMWH.

CONCLUSION

Heparin-associated thrombocytopenia is rare among patients aged <40 years and women following delivery. The risk of heparin-associated thrombocytopenia is more duration-related than dose-related, and higher with UFH when used for an extended duration. Our findings and those of the literature suggest that although heparin-associated thrombocytopenia is uncommon, the incidence can be minimized by use of LMWH, particularly if extended prophylaxis or extended treatment is required.

Quantitative PCR and Disaccharide Profiling to Characterize the Animal Origin of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins

Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are widely used in the management of thrombosis and acute coronary syndromes. They are obtained by the enzymatic or chemical depolymerization of porcine intestinal heparin. Enoxaparin sodium, a widely used LMWH, has a unique and reproducible oligosaccharide profile which is determined by the origin of the starting material and a tightly controlled manufacturing process. Although other enoxaparin-like LMWHs do exist, specific release criteria including the origin of the crude heparin utilized for their production, have not been established. A quantitative polymerase chain reaction method has been developed to ensure the purity of the porcine origin of crude heparin, with a DNA detection limit as low as 1 ppm for bovine, or 10 ppm for ovine contaminants. This method is routinely used as the release acceptance criterion during enoxaparin sodium manufacturing. Furthermore, when the process removes DNA, other analytical techniques can be used to assess any contamination. Disaccharide profiling after exhaustive depolymerization can determine the presence of at least 10% bovine or 20% ovine material; multivariate analysis is useful to perform the data analysis. Consistent with the availability of newer technology, these methods should be required as acceptance criteria for crude heparins used in the manufacture of LMWHs to ensure their safety, quality, and immunologic profile.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (an overview)

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia is a serious side effect of a drug that is widely used in clinical practice. All patients exposed to heparin, administered by any route or at any dose, are at varying risk of developing HIT and its potentially devastating thrombotic complications. There are two clinical forms of HIT, type I and type II. Type I HIT, is a non-immunologic response, while type II HIT is an immunologic response to heparin therapy. Type I HIT is not associated with an increased risk of thrombosis and is characterized by reversible thrombocytopenia. Type II HIT occurs in approximately 1 to 3% of patients receiving unfractionated heparin. Type II HIT is more severe because of the increased risk of thrombotic events. Venous and arterial thromboembolic complications may lead to amputation, stroke, myocardial infarction, and death.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the critical care setting: Diagnosis and management^

BACKGROUND

Thrombocytopenia is a common occurrence in critical illness, reported in up to 41% of patients. Systematic evaluation of thrombocytopenia in critical care is essential to accurate identification and management of the cause. Although sepsis and hemodilution are more common etiologies of thrombocytopenia in critical illness, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is one potential etiology that warrants consideration.

OBJECTIVE

This review will summarize the pathogenesis and clinical consequences of HIT, describe the diagnostic process, and review currently available treatment options.

DATA SOURCE

MEDLINE/PubMed search of all relevant primary and review articles.

DATA SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS

HIT is a clinicopathologic syndrome characterized by thrombocytopenia (>/=50% from baseline) that typically occurs between days 5 and 14 after initiation of heparin. This temporal profile suggests a possible diagnosis of HIT, which can be supported (or refuted) with a strong positive (or negative) laboratory test for HIT antibodies. When considering the diagnosis of HIT, critical care professionals should monitor platelet counts in patients who are at risk for HIT and carefully evaluate for, a) temporal features of the thrombocytopenia in relation to heparin exposure; b) severity of thrombocytopenia; c) clinical evidence for thrombosis; and d) alternative etiologies of thrombocytopenia. Due to its prothrombotic nature, early recognition of HIT and prompt substitution of heparin with a direct thrombin inhibitor (e.g., argatroban or lepirudin) or the heparinoid danaparoid (where available) reduces the risk of thromboembolic events, some of which may be life-threatening.

Impact of in-hospital acquired thrombocytopenia in patients undergoing primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction

Thrombocytopenia that develops after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may result in hemorrhagic complications, requirement for blood product transfusions, and potentially thrombotic or ischemic complications. The incidence and prognostic significance of thrombocytopenia, in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who undergo primary PCI have not been evaluated. In the CADILLAC trial 2,082 patients who had AMI within 12 hours of onset without shock were prospectively randomized to receive balloon angioplasty with or without abciximab versus stenting with or without abciximab. Acquired thrombocytopenia, defined as a nadir platelet count <100 x 10(9)/L in patients who did not have baseline thrombocytopenia, developed in 50 of 1,975 qualifying patients (2.5%) after primary PCI. By multivariate analysis, acquired thrombocytopenia developed more frequently in patients who had non-insulin-requiring diabetes mellitus (odds ratio 3.88 [OR], p = 0.0002), previous statin administration (OR 3.28, p = 0.002), and use of abciximab (OR 2.06, p = 0.02) and less frequently in patients who had previous aspirin use (OR 0.26, p = 0.002), a higher baseline platelet count (OR 1.20, p < 0.0001), and greater body mass index (OR 0.90, p = 0.006). Patients who developed thrombocytopenia versus those who did not had higher in-hospital rates of major hemorrhagic complications (10.0% vs 2.7%, p = 0.01), greater requirement for blood transfusions (10.0% vs 3.9%, p = 0.05), longer hospital stay (median 4.8 vs 3.6 days, p = 0.008), and increased costs (median dollar 14,466 vs dollar 11,629, p = 0.001). All-cause mortality was markedly increased at 30 days (8.0% vs 1.6%, p = 0.0008) and at 1 year (10.0% vs 3.9%, p = 0.03) in patients who developed thrombocytopenia. In conclusion, thrombocytopenia that develops after primary PCI for AMI, although uncommon, is associated with increased hemorrhagic complications and decreased survival.

Transition to an oral anticoagulant in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Recommendations for transitioning from therapy with heparin or a low-molecular-weight heparin preparation to therapy with an oral anticoagulant in patients with acute venous or arterial thromboembolism have undergone several changes during the last two decades. Physicians are now comfortable with beginning treatment with an oral anticoagulant once the diagnosis is confirmed, and loading doses are no longer considered to be necessary. Exceptions to early transition may be necessary in patients with an extensive iliofemoral or axillary-subclavian vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism where thrombolytic agents may be indicated, or in individuals who require surgery or other invasive procedures, or if there are concerns about bleeding. The avoidance of early transition to oral anticoagulants in patients with acute heparin-induced thrombocytopenia also has been advised because of the potential for further thrombotic complications, including venous limb gangrene and warfarin-induced skin necrosis.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the pediatric intensive care unit population

OBJECTIVES

To report the occurrence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), discuss its pathophysiology, and outline an approach to management in the pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) patient.

DESIGN

Retrospective case reports.

SETTING

Pediatric ICU in a tertiary-care center.

PATIENTS AND RESULTS

Two pediatric ICU patients (2 and 6 mos of age) who developed HIT in the pediatric ICU. One was receiving heparin as a flush solution through a central line and the other had full heparinization during cardiopulmonary bypass. Both had received heparin during their neonatal course and developed thrombocytopenia; however, HIT was not considered as a possible diagnosis. HIT was diagnosed using a heparin-induced platelet aggregation study. The thrombocytopenia resolved with the cessation of heparin administration. One of the patients developed a deep vein thrombosis around a femoral venous catheter.

CONCLUSION

Although well described in the adult literature, there have been a limited number of reports of HIT in pediatric-aged patients. Given its potential for morbidity, HIT should be considered in the differential diagnosis of thrombocytopenia in the pediatric ICU patient.

Identification, Diagnosis and Treatment of Heparin-induced Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis: A Registry of Prolonged Heparin Use and Thrombocytopenia among Hospitalized Patients with and without Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is estimated to occur in 1-5% of all patients receiving heparin, and 25-50% of such cases develop heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with thrombosis (HITT) A conservative estimate based only on cardiovascular patients suggests that in the United States approximately 100,000 patients develop thrombocytopenia, and 25-50,000 develop HITT annually. Both HIT and HITT are associated with high morbidity and mortality and represent substantial worldwide public health concerns.

REGISTRY DESIGN

The objective of the Complication After Thrombocytopenia Caused by Heparin (CATCH) Registry is to identify the incidence of HIT and/or HITT in patients treated with systemic heparin (unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin) in contemporary practice. Additional objectives include to: (1) provide a comprehensive database of patients with suspected HIT or HITT, (2) monitor and define clinical events, including thrombocytopenia, thrombosis, and mortality among patients treated with prolonged (> 96 hours) heparin, (3) describe the incidence and outcomes of HIT and HITT in patients who are treated with heparin and who develop thrombocytopenia in the Coronary Care Unit setting, and (4) document and characterize current diagnostic and therapeutic strategies of suspected HIT. The unblinded registry will record approximately 5,000 patients at 60-80 US hospitals with either prolonged systemic heparin administration or thrombocytopenia and those with suspected HIT or HITT. Enrollment began in the first quarter 2003 and was completed at the end of 2004.

IMPLICATIONS

The registry will provide valuable insights to the incidence and consequences of HIT and HITT that will enable improvements in diagnosis and treatment.

Comparison of bovine and porcine heparin in heparin antibody formation after cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a potentially devastating complication of heparin therapy. The incidence of clinical HIT after cardiovascular surgery is less than 2%, although asymptomatic antibodies to heparin-platelet factor 4 (PF4) occur more frequently. Bovine heparin is thought to cause more HIT than porcine heparin, although this has never been established for heparin use during coronary artery bypass grafting. We therefore undertook a randomized, prospective study of heparin-PF4 antibody formation in patients undergoing first-time CABG given intraoperative bovine or porcine heparin.

METHODS

Two hundred seven patients (108 porcine, 99 bovine) completed the study. Heparin given pre- or postoperatively was always porcine. Platelet counts and heparin-PF4 antibody tests (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays) were performed preoperatively and daily until postoperative day 7 or discharge if earlier.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of heparin-PF4 antibody formation was 42%. Six patients (2.9%) were positive preoperatively, of which, 1 developed clinical HIT. When these were excluded, seroconversion rates were 44 of 99 (44.4%) and 33 of 108 (30.6%) for bovine and porcine heparin, respectively (p = 0.041). Among patients who produced antibodies, most (90% bovine, 85% porcine) seroconverted after postoperative day 2. There were no differences in postoperative platelet counts; only 1 patient developed thrombosis associated with seroconversion, but without developing thrombocytopenia. The seroconversion rates for patients having cardiopulmonary bypass or off-pump surgery were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the high frequency of heparin-PF4 antibodies after coronary artery bypass grafting and demonstrates a significantly higher incidence after bovine heparin. However, because some patients may seroconvert after discharge, our study may underestimate the true incidence.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: molecular pathogenesis

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a common and often serious complication of heparin therapy [1,2]. Although the reduction in platelet levels associated with HIT is usually not severe, about 10% of patients experience arterial and/or venous thromboses (HITT), which can be incapacitating or fatal [3]. Recent work done in our laboratory [4] and by others [5-7] has shown that patients with HIT/T* almost invariably have antibodies specific for complexes consisting of heparin and platelet factor 4 (PF4), a heparin-binding protein found normally in platelet alpha granules. We [4] and others [8] have developed hypotheses to explain how these antibodies cause HIT/T in patients given heparin, but knowledge of the disease process is far from complete. An unusual feature of HIT/T is that antibodies important in pathogenesis are specific for complexes made up of two normal body constituents: PF4 and heparin. These antibodies are produced by a high percentage of certain patient populations treated with heparin, but only a minority of antibody formers are adversely affected. We postulate that a fuller understanding of the molecular basis for this immune response could lead to improved diagnosis, treatment and prevention of HIT/T and to the identification of risk factors that predispose to this complication.

New Treatment Options for Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Heparin, in various forms, is used in a variety of conditions including prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolic disorders. Although the most common adverse effect related to the use of heparin is bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) can also occur. Two types of HIT exist, HIT type I and type II. HIT type I is a mild and self-limiting disease in which the patient’s platelet count may decrease slightly but will recover with continued treatment. This is in contrast to HIT type II, which may lead to potentially devastating complications. Patients with HIT type II are at increased risk for thromboembolic complications that are mediated through autoimmune reactions and therefore require anticoagulation with danaparoid or one of the direct thrombin inhibitors, including lepirudin, argatroban, or bivalirudin. Limited data are available on the use of these agents in special populations including patients who are pregnant or those undergoing procedures such as percutaneous coronary intervention, cardiopulmonary bypass and dialysis, and pregnancy. Future therapies may include the use of unfractionated heparin in combination with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during cardiopulmonary bypass.

Use of plasma exchange and heparin during cardiopulmonary bypass for a patient with heparin induced thrombocytopenia: a case report

Patients with documented history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) pose a difficult problem during surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Several alternatives to heparin exist, but these products either are not approved for use in the United States or have more side effects than heparin. We report on a patient with documented heparin-induced antibody and left main coronary artery disease who underwent uneventful coronary artery bypass surgery and recovery by using preoperative plasmaphresis and limited use of porcine intestinal heparin during CPB.

Direct vasodilators and their role in hypertension management: minoxidil

Minoxidil is a direct vasodilator that has been in use for over two decades. It is used primarily to reduce blood pressure in hypertensives who have been poorly controlled on various multidrug regimens. Although minoxidil is extremely effective, its usefulness is limited by its tendency to increase the pulse rate and to trigger salt and water retention. The latter may be incapacitating in some patients. Therefore, minoxidil is typically administered with both a diuretic and an agent that can control the pulse rate, such as a beta blocker. Minoxidil has several other side effects that may limit its use, including hypertrichosis, aggravation of myocardial ischemia and/or left ventricular hypertrophy, and (infrequently) pericardial effusions. If a patient's hypertensive pattern is sufficiently severe to warrant contemplation of minoxidil therapy, referring the patient to a hypertension specialist should be strongly considered. (c) 2001 by LeJacq Communications, Inc.

Pathophysiology of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Clinical and diagnostic implications--a review

OBJECTIVE

This review of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), the most frequent and dangerous side effect of heparin exposure, covers the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of this disease syndrome.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Current consensus of opinion is given based on literature reports, as well as new information where available. A comprehensive analysis of the reasons for discrepancies in incidence numbers is given. The currently known mechanism is that HIT is mediated by an antibody to the complex of heparin->platelet factor 4, which binds to the Fc receptor on platelets. New evidence suggests a functional heterogeneity in the anti-heparin-platelet factor 4 antibodies generated to heparin, and a "superactive" heparin-platelet factor 4 antibody that does not require the presence of heparin to promote platelet activation or aggregation has been identified. Up-regulation of cell adhesion molecules and inflammatory markers, as well as preactivation of platelets/endothelial cells/leukocytes, are also considered to be related to the pathophysiology of HIT. Issues related to the specificity of currently available and new laboratory assays that support a clinical diagnosis are addressed in relation to the serotonin-release assay. Past experience with various anticoagulant treatments is reviewed with a focus on the recent successes of thrombin inhibitors and platelet GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors to combat the platelet activation and severe thrombotic episodes associated with HIT.

CONCLUSIONS

The pathophysiology of HIT is multifactorial. However, the primary factor in the mediation of the cellular activation is due to the generation of an antibody to the heparin-platelet factor 4 complex. This review is written as a reference for HIT research.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is a rare but complex adverse drug reaction that can produce devastating results. Treatment and clinical management of the patient requires close observation and education of the pathophysiology occurring at the cellular level. Documented cases of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia have been reported in the literature for years. This case presentation details a multiple trauma patient in whom heparin-induced thrombocytopenia developed and the effect this syndrome had on her treatment and eventual recovery.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis

Heparin remains the most commonly used parenteral medication in hospitalized patients. Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and heparin induced thrombocytopenia with thrombosis syndrome or the white clot syndrome are important complications of heparin use. This article provides an in-depth review of the etiopathogenesis, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and management options in patients with HIT. Clinical problems associated with HIT such as antiphospholipid antibody syndrome and venous gangrene are described. The management options of HIT patients during cardiac interventional procedures and coronary surgery as well as recent advances in therapeutic options are summarized.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a potentially serious complication of heparin therapy and is being encountered more frequently in patients with cardiovascular disease as use of anticoagulant therapy becomes more widespread. Our understanding of the pathophysiology of this immune-mediated condition has improved in recent years, with heparin-platelet factor 4 complex as the culprit antigen in most patients. New sensitive laboratory assays for the pathogenic antibody are now available and should permit an earlier, more reliable diagnosis, but their optimal application remains to be defined. For patients in whom HIT is diagnosed, immediate discontinuation of heparin infusions and elimination of heparin from all flushes and ports are mandatory. Further management of patients with HIT is problematic at present, as there are no readily available alternative anticoagulant agents in the United States with proven efficacy in acute coronary disease. The direct thrombin inhibitors appear to be the most promising alternatives to heparin, when continued use of heparin is contraindicated, and the results of several multicenter trials evaluating their application in patients with HIT are awaited.

Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists: potential induction and detection of drug-dependent antiplatelet antibodies

Development of acute, severe thrombocytopenia has been reported in several patients treated with a chimeric monoclonal antibody fragment to the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GPIIb/IIIa) complex. However, the propensity of oral GPIIb/IIIa antagonists to induce antibody-mediated thrombocytopenia or platelet dysfunction with chronic exposure is unknown. There is evidence to suggest that a small percentage of otherwise healthy individuals have preexisting serum antibodies to conformation-dependent epitopes in the GPIIb/IIIa complex that are induced by certain members of this class of compounds that function as mixed agonists/antagonists. Additional studies are needed to identify the epitopes recognized by these antibodies and the requirement for the drug or a drug-metabolite to be present for antibody binding and detection. Detailed immunologic studies of antibodies from patients in whom immune thrombocytopenia develops after receiving oral GPIIb/IIIa antagonists may also provide insight into the mechanism by which activated platelets are normally cleared from the circulation.

Two populations of endothelial cell antibodies cross-react with heparin

As endothelial cells (EC) express heparin-like glycosaminoglycans, such as heparan sulfate, it was essential to investigate the relation of anti-EC antibody (AECA) to heparin reactivity. AECA were detected in 43 of 131 autoimmune sera and anti-heparin antibodies (AHA) in 25. These autoimmune reactivities were significantly associated (P corrected < 0.0005). Seven AECA-positive/AHA-positive and three AECA-negative/AHA-positive sera were affinity-purified using protein G column followed by a heparin-Sepharose column. Two populations of AECA were recovered from the second column. One was eluted with 0.4 M NaCl which bound to EC and to solid-phase heparin with low affinity, but not to soluble heparin. The second population of AECA, which was eluted with 4 M guanidine HCl/2 M NaCl, recognized EC and solid-phase heparin with high affinity, but also soluble heparin. The latter population of AECA might thus be an important cause of autoimmune vascular thrombosis in systemic diseases.

Patients treated with unfractionated heparin during open heart surgery are at high risk to form antibodies reactive with heparin:platelet factor 4 complexes

Recent studies have demonstrated a strong association between type II (immunologically mediated) heparin-induced thrombocytopenia/thrombosis (HITP) and antibodies reactive with complexes consisting of heparin and platelet factor 4 (PF4), a heparin-binding protein normally found in platelet-alpha granules. However, the frequency with which such antibodies develop in patients given treatment with heparin has not yet been defined. We studied the development of heparin:PF4-specific antibodies in 51 patients who received a single dose of unfractionated heparin (UFH) during cardiac catheterization and were then given UFH or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) again during and after open heart surgery. Eleven of the 51 patients (22%) had antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4 when they were admitted for cardiac surgery; these antibodies were mainly of the immunoglobulin M (IgM) class and were apparently stimulated by exposure to UFH at cardiac catheterization. Seventeen of 34 patients (50%) without preexisting antibody who were given UFH during and for 1 to 3 days after surgery formed immunoglobulin G antibodies or IgM antibodies (or both) by the sixth postoperative day. Overall, 27 of 44 patients (61%) who were given UFH at surgery had antibodies by the time of hospital discharge. None of 6 patients without preexisting antibody who were given LMWH at surgery formed antibodies (p < 0.03). However, LMWH was given as a single injection only on the day of surgery. The titer of the antibodies formed by patients receiving UFH ranged from 1:10 to 1:200, significantly lower than those in patients with a clinical diagnosis of HITP. Moderate thrombocytopenia was common after open heart surgery, but platelet levels in patients who had preexisting antibodies or formed new antibodies did not differ significantly from those in patients without antibody. Clinically significant thrombosis did not develop in any patient and HITP was not diagnosed in any patient. Antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4 formed in only 3 of 66 patients (4.5%) undergoing other types of surgery. One of these patients had been given UFH 3 months previously; the other 2 may have been exposed to heparin used to flush intravenous lines postoperatively. No antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4 were found in any of 108 normal subjects. We conclude that UFH is more immunogenic than has been thought and that patients exposed to this anticoagulant during open heart surgery are at high risk to form low titer (</= 1:200) antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4. Further studies are needed to determine whether such antibodies are clinically significant--that is, whether sensitized patients are at risk to develop HITP if heparin treatment is continued for more than 1 to 3 days or is reinstituted at a later date.

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant use after myocardial infarction

Coronary thrombosis leading to myocardial infarction is a complex process involving the interaction of the arterial wall, the coagulation cascade, and platelets. Increased understanding of the molecular biology of thrombosis has prompted an evolution in antithrombotic therapy, from the early use of warfarin following myocardial infarction to agents targeting specific receptors or modulators in the thrombotic process. The complexity of thrombosis allows for numerous sites of pharmacologic intervention; the multiple pathways leading to platelet aggregation and thrombin formation provide the opportunity for combined therapies. This review presents the current clinical data on antiplatelet, anticoagulant, and specific antithrombin therapies following myocardial infarction.