Weight-Based Dosing for Once-Daily Enoxaparin Cannot Provide Adequate Anticoagulation for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis

Is There a Role for Anti-factor Xa Activity Assay in Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Management Among Orthopaedic Trauma Patients? Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of anti-factor Xa assay dosing of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) on rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding, and mortality among orthopaedic trauma patients.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), clinicaltrials.gov , and Scopus were systematically searched from inception of the database to 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Prospective, retrospective, and randomized controlled trial studies were included if they compared rates of VTE, DVT, PE, bleeding, and/or mortality between orthopaedic trauma patients receiving anti-factor Xa-based LMWH dosing and those receiving standard dosing.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts for eligibility. Study characteristics including study design, inclusion criteria, and intervention were extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Meta-analysis was performed using pooled proportion of events (effect size) with 95% confidence intervals. A random-effects model was used. Heterogeneity was quantified by Higgins I 2 . Heterogeneity and variability between subgroups indicated differences in the pooled estimate represented by a P -value.

RESULTS

Six hundred eighty-five studies were identified, and 10 studies including 2870 patients were included. In total, 30.3% and 69.7% received an adjusted and nonadjusted dose of LMWH, respectively. The rate of VTE and DVT were significantly lower in the anti-factor Xa-adjusted cohort, whereas there was no statistically significant difference in rates of PE, bleeding, or mortality between the cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that anti-factor Xa activity assay dosing of LMWH among orthopaedic trauma patients leads to a reduction in overall DVT rates, although not PE rates, without an increased risk of bleeding events.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Rate of prophylactic anti-Xa achievement and impact on venous thromboembolism following oncologic hepato-pancreatico-biliary surgery: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) patients experience competing risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding. We sought to evaluate the effect of anti-Xa levels on VTE and bleeding, and to characterize factors associated with subprophylaxis.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study evaluated adult HPB surgical patients; cohorts were described by anti-Xa levels as subprophylactic (<0.2 IU/mL), prophylactic (0.2-0.5 IU/mL), and supraprophylactic (>0.5 IU/mL). Primary outcome evaluated bleeding and VTE complications. Secondary outcomes evaluated factors associated with subprophylaxis.

RESULTS

We included 157 patients: 68 (43.6%) attained prophylactic anti-Xa and 89 (56.7%) were subprophylactic. Subprophylactic patients experienced more VTE compared to prophylactic patients (6.9% vs 0%; p = 0.028) without differences in bleeding complications (14.6% vs 5.9%; p = 0.081). Factors associated with subprophylactic anti-Xa included female sex (OR 2.90, p = 0.008), and Caprini score (OR 1.30, p = 0.035). Enoxaparin was protective against subprophylaxis compared to tinzaparin (OR 0.43, p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Many HPB patients have subprophylactic anti-Xa levels, placing them at risk of VTE. Enoxaparin may be preferential, however, studies evaluating optimized prophylaxis are needed.

Standard Fixed Enoxaparin Dosing for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Leads to Low Peak Anti-Factor Xa Levels in Both Head and Neck and Breast Free Flap Patients

INTRODUCTION

 Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious complication, particularly in cancer patients undergoing free flap reconstruction. Subcutaneous enoxaparin is the conventional prophylaxis for VTE prevention, and serum anti-factor Xa (afXa) levels are being increasingly used to monitor enoxaparin activity. In this study, free flap patients receiving standard enoxaparin prophylaxis were prospectively followed to investigate postoperative afXa levels and 90-day VTE and bleeding-related complications.

METHODS

 Patients undergoing free tissue transfer during an 8-month period were identified and prospectively followed. Patients received standard fixed enoxaparin dosing at 30 mg twice daily in head and neck (H&N) and 40 mg daily in breast reconstructions. Target peak prophylactic afXa range was 0.2 to 0.5 IU/mL. The primary outcome was the occurrence of 90-day postoperative VTE- and bleeding-related events. Independent predictors of afXa level and VTE incidence were analyzed for patients that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

 Seventy-eight patients were prospectively followed. Four (5.1%) were diagnosed with VTE, and six (7.7%) experienced bleeding-related complications. The mean afXa levels in both VTE patients and bleeding patients were subprophylactic (0.13 ± 0.09 and 0.11 ± 0.07 IU/mL, respectively). Forty-six patients (21 breast, 25 H&N) had valid postoperative peak steady-state afXa levels. Among these, 15 (33%) patients achieved the target prophylactic range: 5 (33%) H&N and 10 (67%) breast patients. The mean afXa level for H&N patients was significantly lower than for breast patients (p = 0.0021). Patient total body weight was the sole negative predictor of afXa level (R ² = 0.47, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

 Standard fixed enoxaparin dosing for postoperative VTE prophylaxis does not achieve target afXa levels for the majority of our free flap patients. H&N patients appear to be a particularly high-risk group that may require a more personalized and aggressive approach. Total body weight is the sole negative predictor of afXa level, supporting a role for weight-based enoxaparin dosing.

Enoxaparin titrated by anti-Xa levels reduces venous thromboembolism in trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Trauma is a major risk factor for the development of a venous thromboembolism (VTE). After observing higher than expected VTE rates within our center's Trauma Quality Improvement Program data, we instituted a change in our VTE prophylaxis protocol, moving to enoxaparin dosing titrated by anti-Xa levels. We hypothesized that this intervention would lower our symptomatic VTE rates.

METHODS

Adult trauma patients at a single institution meeting National Trauma Data Standard criteria from April 2015 to September 2019 were examined with regards to VTE chemoprophylaxis regimen and VTE incidence. Two groups of patients were identified based on VTE protocol-those who received enoxaparin 30 mg twice daily without routine anti-Xa levels ("pre") versus those who received enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily with dose titrated by serial anti-Xa levels ("post"). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to define statistically significant differences in VTE incidence between the two cohorts.

RESULTS

There were 1698 patients within the "pre" group and 1406 patients within the "post" group. The two groups were essentially the same in terms of demographics and risk factors for bleeding or thrombosis. There was a statistically significant reduction in VTE rate (p = 0.01) and deep vein thrombosis rate (p = 0.01) but no significant reduction in pulmonary embolism rate (p = 0.21) after implementation of the anti-Xa titration protocol. Risk-adjusted Trauma Quality Improvement Program data showed an improvement in rate of symptomatic pulmonary embolism from fifth decile to first decile.

CONCLUSION

A protocol titrating prophylactic enoxaparin dose based on anti-Xa levels reduced VTE rates. Implementation of this type of protocol requires diligence from the physician and pharmacist team. Further research will investigate the impact of protocol compliance and time to appropriate anti-Xa level on incidence of VTE.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, Level IV.

What Do We Know about Thromboprophylaxis and Its Monitoring in Critically Ill Patients?

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is an important complication in patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICU). Thromboprophylaxis is mainly performed with Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH) and, in some specific patients, with Unfractionated Heparin (UFH). These intensive units are an environment where individual patient variability is extreme and where traditional antithrombotic protocols are frequently ineffective. This was known for a long time, but the hospitalization of many patients with COVID-19 inflammatory storms suddenly highlighted this knowledge. It is therefore reasonable to propose variable antithrombotic prevention protocols based initially on a series of individual criteria (weight, BMI, and thrombotic risks). Secondly, they should be adjusted by the monitoring of anticoagulant activity, preferably by measuring the anti-Xa activity. However, we still face unresolved questions, such as once- or twice-daily LMWH injections, monitoring at the peak and/or trough, and poorly defined therapeutic targets. Equally surprisingly, we observed a lack of standardization of the anti-Xa activity kits.

Universal venous thromboembolism policy is effective but may not adequately protect hospitalized cancer patients with larger BMI

Routine VTE prophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients, but its effectiveness and safety in cancer patients is unclear. By observation, larger patients seemed poorly covered by the prophylaxis policy. The effectiveness and safety of VTE prophylaxis policy in the hospitalized patients, their potential risk factors such as BMI were examined. A retrospective chart review was conducted to determine VTE incidences, risk factors for VTE and major bleeding events between 2007 and 2016 on the solid tumor units (STU). Patients were divided into pre-policy (Pre-2012) or post-policy implementation groups (Post-2012). Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate effectiveness and safety of prophylaxis, while propensity score matching (1:3, VTE:Non-VTE) was used to reduce selection bias. The VTE incidence per patient was 1.30% (57/4392) pre-policy and 0.56% (18/3210) post-policy (p value = 0.0013). After propensity score matching, a reduction (32.3%) of VTE cases was observed after policy implementation (OR = 0.677, p = 0.32). BMI was found to be a significant predictor of VTE (OR = 1.094, 95% CI 1.021-1.172, p = 0.011). Between July 2014 and July 2016, 1.7% (19/1091) patients who received anticoagulants had a documented bleeding event. The policy positively impacted VTE events on the STU. A significant predictor of VTE was BMI and patients with high BMI may pose a risk of breaking through standard VTE prophylaxis dosing. There was no reported major bleeding for patients who developed an VTE event despite receiving prophylaxis in either the pre-policy or post-policy phase of the study, although a low incidence of minor bleeding was documented in the post-phase.

Twice-Daily Enoxaparin among Plastic Surgery Inpatients: An Examination of Pharmacodynamics, 90-Day Venous Thromboembolism, and 90-Day Bleeding

BACKGROUND

Low anti-factor Xa level, indicative of inadequate enoxaparin dosing, has a significant association with 90-day venous thromboembolism events. The authors examined the pharmacodynamics of enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily and its correlation with anti-factor Xa level, postoperative venous thromboembolism, and bleeding.

METHODS

Adult patients were admitted after plastic and reconstructive surgery and received enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily. Peak anti-factor Xa levels, which quantify enoxaparin's antithrombotic effect, were drawn, with a goal level of 0.2 to 0.4 IU/ml. Ninety-day symptomatic venous thromboembolism and clinically relevant bleeding were identified.

RESULTS

The authors enrolled 118 patients who received enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily. Of these patients, 9.6 percent had low peak anti-factor Xa levels (<0.2 IU/ml), 62.6 percent had in-range peak anti-factor Xa levels (0.2 to 0.4 IU/ml), and 27.8 percent had high anti-factor Xa levels (>0.4 IU/ml). With enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily, 90.4 percent of patients received at least adequate prophylaxis. Patient weight predicted the rapidity of enoxaparin metabolism. Zero acute 90-day venous thromboembolism occurred. Eight patients (6.8 percent) had clinically relevant 90-day bleeding: clinical consequences ranged from cessation of enoxaparin prophylaxis to transfusion to operative hematoma evacuation.

CONCLUSIONS

When enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily is provided, 90 percent of patients receive at least adequate venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (anti-factor Xa level >0.2 IU/ml). However, 27 percent of the overall population is overtreated (anti-factor Xa level >0.4 IU/ml). These pharmacodynamics data likely explain the low rate of 90-day acute venous thromboembolism (0 percent) and the high rate of clinically relevant bleeding (6.8 percent) observed. Future studies are needed to better optimize the risks and benefits of enoxaparin prophylaxis in plastic and reconstructive surgery patients.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.