Impact of Recombinant Activated Factor VII on Health-Related Quality of Life after Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Imaging of Intracranial Hemorrhage

Intracranial hemorrhage is common and is caused by diverse pathology, including trauma, hypertension, cerebral amyloid angiopathy, hemorrhagic conversion of ischemic infarction, cerebral aneurysms, cerebral arteriovenous malformations, dural arteriovenous fistula, vasculitis, and venous sinus thrombosis, among other causes. Neuroimaging is essential for the treating physician to identify the cause of hemorrhage and to understand the location and severity of hemorrhage, the risk of impending cerebral injury, and to guide often emergent patient treatment. We review CT and MRI evaluation of intracranial hemorrhage with the goal of providing a broad overview of the diverse causes and varied appearances of intracranial hemorrhage.

Recurrent stroke was associated with poor quality of life in patients with transient ischemic attack or minor stroke: finding from the CHANCE trial

AIMS

To examine the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke and assess the impact of recurrent stroke on HRQOL.

METHODS

Health-related quality of life data on patients participated in the Clopidogrel in High-risk patients with Acute Nondisabling Cerebrovascular Events (CHANCE) trial were analyzed. The available 90-day EuroQoL data (EQ-5D) were used to calculate EQ-5D index score. Poor HRQOL was defined as an EQ-5D index score ≤0.5. The characteristics of HRQOL and factors predicting poor HRQOL in these patients were then explored.

RESULTS

Among the total 5170 patients enrolled, 90-day HRQOL data were obtained from 5104 patients for analysis. The mean EQ-5D index score at day 90 was 0.88 ± 0.21 for all patients, but only 0.42 ± 0.35 for those with recurrent strokes. Poor 90-day HRQOL was found in 294 (5.8%) patients. Patients with poor HRQOL had more strokes during follow-up than patients with good HRQOL (94.9 vs. 4.7%, P < 0.001). Age, history of hypertension and diabetes, and NIHSS at baseline were independent risk factors for predicting poor HRQOL. Stroke recurrence, NIHSS at baseline, age, and minor stroke on admission became independent risk factors once stroke recurrence was added into the model.

CONCLUSIONS

Stroke recurrence was associated with poor HRQOL in patients with TIA or minor strokes. Interventions focusing on controlling risk factors and prevention of worsening of neurological function may prevent poor HRQOL in these patients.

Recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia

BACKGROUND

Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) is licensed for use in patients with haemophilia and inhibitory allo-antibodies and for prophylaxis and treatment of patients with congenital factor VII deficiency. It is also used for off-license indications to prevent bleeding in operations where blood loss is likely to be high, and/or to stop bleeding that is proving difficult to control by other means. This is the third version of the 2007 Cochrane review on the use of recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia, and has been updated to incorporate recent trial data.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of rFVIIa when used therapeutically to control active bleeding or prophylactically to prevent (excessive) bleeding in patients without haemophilia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and other medical databases up to 23 March 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rFVIIa with placebo, or one dose of rFVIIa with another, in any patient population (except haemophilia). Outcomes were mortality, blood loss or control of bleeding, red cell transfusion requirements, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed potentially relevant studies for inclusion, extracted data and examined risk of bias. We considered prophylactic and therapeutic rFVIIa studies separately.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-nine RCTs were included: 28 were placebo-controlled, double-blind RCTs and one compared different doses of rFVIIa. In the 'Risk of bias' assessment, most studies were found to have some threats to validity although therapeutic RCTs were found to be less prone to bias than prophylactic RCTs.Sixteen trials involving 1361 participants examined the prophylactic use of rFVIIa; 729 received rFVIIa. There was no evidence of mortality benefit (risk ratio (RR) 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 1.97). There was decreased blood loss (mean difference (MD) -297 mL; 95% CI -416 to -178) and decreased red cell transfusion requirements (MD -261 mL; 95% CI -367 to -154) with rFVIIa treatment; however, these values were likely overestimated due to the inability to incorporate data from trials (four RCTs in the outcome of blood loss and three RCTs in the outcome of transfusion requirements) showing no difference of rFVIIa treatment compared to placebo. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa in the number of participants transfused (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.01). However, there was a trend against rFVIIa with respect to thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.35; 95% CI 0.82 to 2.25).Thirteen trials involving 2929 participants examined the therapeutic use of rFVIIa; 1878 received rFVIIa. There were no outcomes where any observed advantage or disadvantage of rFVIIa over placebo could not have been observed by chance alone. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa for reducing mortality (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06). However, there was a trend against rFVIIa for increased thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.47).When all trials were pooled together to examine the risk of thromboembolic events, a significant increase in total arterial events was observed (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.05).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of rFVIIa as a more general haemostatic drug, either prophylactically or therapeutically, remains unproven. The results indicate increased risk of arterial events in patients receiving rFVIIa. The use of rFVIIa outside its current licensed indications should be restricted to clinical trials.

Recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia

BACKGROUND

Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) is licensed for use in patients with haemophilia and inhibitory allo-antibodies. It is also increasingly being used for off-license indications to prevent bleeding in operations where blood loss is likely to be high, and/or to stop bleeding that is proving difficult to control by other means.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of rFVIIa when used therapeutically to control active bleeding, or prophylactically to prevent (excessive) bleeding in patients without haemophilia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and other specialised databases up to 25 February 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rFVIIa with placebo, or one dose of rFVIIa with another, in any patient population (except haemophilia). Outcomes were mortality, blood loss or control of bleeding, red cell transfusion requirements, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed potentially relevant studies for inclusion, extracted data and examined risk of bias. We considered prophylactic and therapeutic rFVIIa studies separately.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs were included: 24 were placebo-controlled double-blind RCTs and one compared different doses of rFVIIa.Fourteen trials involving 1137 participants examined the prophylactic use of rFVIIa; 713 received rFVIIa. There was no evidence of mortality benefit (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.24). There was decreased blood loss (WMD -272 mL; 95% CI -399 to -146) and decreased red cell transfusion requirements (WMD -243 mL; 95% CI -393 to -92) with rFVIIa treatment; however these values were likely overestimated due to the inability to incorporate data from trials showing no difference of rFVIIa treatment compared to placebo. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa in the number of participants transfused (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.02). But there was a trend against rFVIIa with respect to thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.84 to 2.06).Eleven trials involving 2366 participants examined the therapeutic use of rFVIIa; 1507 received rFVIIa. There were no outcomes where any observed advantage, or disadvantage, of rFVIIa over placebo could not have been observed by chance alone. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa for reducing mortality (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03). However, there was a trend against rFVIIa for increased thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.21; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.58).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of rFVIIa as a more general haemostatic drug, either prophylactically or therapeutically, remains unproven. The use of rFVIIa outside its current licensed indications should be restricted to clinical trials.

Approach to and management of the acute stroke patient with atrial fibrillation: a literature review

Stroke remains an increasing worldwide cause of disability and mortality, and it is the second leading cause of death in industrialized countries. Patients with atrial fibrillation form a unique group with increased risk of cardioembolic stroke. Despite the widespread application of the National Institutes of Health stroke scale and guidelines, patients with atrial fibrillation represent a clinically challenging group that deserves a special approach during the acute stroke phase. The mechanism of stroke in these patients is either cardioembolic [especially with an international normalized ratio (INR) < 2.0] or hemorrhagic (especially with INR > 5.0) (Figure 1). Atrial fibrillation with valvular heart disease significantly increases the risk for ischemic stroke. Specifically, patients with mitral stenosis who develop atrial fibrillation increase their risk of cardioembolism by 3 to 7 times. Many patients with atrial fibrillation still develop ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke despite appropriate use of anticoagulation. Prior stroke, transient ischemic attacks, congestive heart failure, hypertension, age > 75, and diabetes mellitus are all well-established risk factors for the development of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. The CHADS-2 score is the most widely studied and clinically used method for stratifying patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. In our review, we present the most recent clinical guidelines and trends for the approach to and management of this patient group.

Recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia

BACKGROUND

Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) is licensed for use in patients with haemophilia and inhibitory allo-antibodies. It is also increasingly being used for off-license indications to prevent bleeding in operations where blood loss is likely to be high, and/or to stop bleeding that is proving difficult to control by other means.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of rFVIIa when used therapeutically to control active bleeding, or prophylactically to prevent (excessive) bleeding in patients without haemophilia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and other specialised databases up to March 2006. We also searched reference lists of articles and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rFVIIa with placebo, or one dose of rFVIIa with another, in any patient population with the exception of those with haemophilia. There was no restriction by outcomes examined, but this review focuses on mortality, blood loss or control of bleeding, red cell transfusion requirements, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed potentially relevant studies for inclusion. Data were extracted and methodological quality was examined. Studies using rFVIIa prophylactically and those using rFVIIa therapeutically have been considered separately. Data were pooled using fixed and random effects models, but random effects models were preferred because of the variability in clinical features of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria; all were placebo-controlled double-blind RCTs. Six trials involving 724 participants examined the prophylactic use of rFVIIa; 379 received rFVIIa. There were no outcomes by which any observed advantage, or disadvantage, of rFVIIa over placebo could not have been observed by chance alone. There were trends in favour of rFVIIa for a number of outcomes, particularly the number of participants transfused, pooled RR 0.85 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.01) but this was balanced by a trend against rFVIIa with respect to thromboembolic adverse events, pooled RR 1.25 (95% CI 0.76 to 2.07). Seven trials involving 1214 participants examined the therapeutic use of rFVIIa; 687 received rFVIIa. There were no outcomes where any observed advantage, or disadvantage, of rFVIIa over placebo could not have been observed by chance alone. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa for reducing mortality, RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.04), although no other clear trends in favour of rFVIIa were noted for other desired outcomes. Interpretation of these results must take into account one study which could not be included in the quantitative summary but which showed results strongly in favour of rFVIIa for the treatment of intra-cerebral haemorrhage. There was a trend against rFVIIa with respect to thromboembolic adverse events; the RR 1.50 (95% CI 0.86 to 2.62).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although rFVIIa has a role in the management of patients with haemophilia, its effectiveness as a more general haemostatic drug, either prophylactically or therapeutically, remains uncertain. Its effectiveness as a therapeutic agent, particularly for intra-cerebral haemorrhage, looks more encouraging than prophylactic use. The use of rFVIIa outside its current licensed indications should be very limited and its wider use await the results of ongoing and possibly newly commissioned RCTs. In the interim, rFVIIa use should be restricted to clinical trials.