Prophylactic heparin in patients with severe sepsis treated with drotrecogin alfa (activated)

Mediating Role of Platelet Count Increase in Unfractionated Heparin Treatment for Sepsis Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Aims/Background The role of heparin in sepsis therapy has been widely debated. The controversy surrounding heparin's use as an anticoagulant in sepsis may stem from differences in sepsis definitions, study designs, timing and dosage of drug administration, treatment duration, complications, and patient severity. In this study, we aimed to determine the optimal timing and dosage of heparin in patients with sepsis, identify specific subgroups that could benefit from heparin therapy, and explore laboratory markers to assess its efficacy. Methods This retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-IV dataset. Data from patients with sepsis were extracted based on the Sepsis 3.0 criteria. Patients were categorized according to heparin use. The effectiveness of early and appropriate heparin administration was assessed, and a subgroup analysis was performed to identify patients most likely to benefit from heparin therapy. Additionally, factors mediating the improvement in sepsis prognosis following heparin treatment were analyzed. Results We recruited 4149 participants who met the inclusion criteria, with an overall 28-day mortality rate of 19.5%. There were 2192 individuals in the heparin group and 1957 in the non-heparin group. After propensity score matching, heparin therapy demonstrated a significantly greater effect on reducing both 28-day and 90-day mortality compared to the non-heparin treatment (18.1% vs. 10.7%, p < 0.001; 18.8% vs. 12.6%, p < 0.001). However, the heparin group had a higher incidence of major bleeding (10.9% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.001), increased use of mechanical ventilation (54.3% vs. 45.1%, p < 0.001), and a longer intensive care unit stay (3.6 vs. 2.5 days, p < 0.001) compared to the non-heparin group. Early administration of high-dose heparin improved 28-day survival. Early and adequate heparin administration was more effective than late and insufficient dosing (p < 0.01), except in patients with sepsis who had low white blood cell counts, alkalosis, or reduced platelet counts. The increase in platelet count had a significant mediating effect on the entire cohort (p < 0.001 for the causal mediation effect), with a mediation proportion of 14%. Conclusion Early and adequate heparin administration can significantly improve the prognosis of sepsis. An increase in platelet count may serve as a potential indicator of the effectiveness of heparin therapy in sepsis.

Heparins May Not Be the Optimal Anticoagulants for Sepsis and Sepsis-Associated Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation

Historically, heparin has had the longest historical use as an anticoagulant and continues this day to be the primary therapeutic option for preventing thrombosis and thromboembolism in critically ill hospitalized patients. Heparin is also used to treat sepsis and sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) in various countries. However, the efficacy and safety of heparin for this indication remains controversial, as adequately powered randomized clinical studies have not demonstrated as yet a survival benefit in sepsis and sepsis-associated DIC, despite meta-analyses and propensity analyses reporting improved outcomes without increasing bleeding risk. Further, activated protein C and recombinant thrombomodulin showed greater improvements in outcomes compared with heparin, although these effects were inconclusive. In summary, further research is warranted, despite the ongoing clinical use of heparin for sepsis and sepsis-associated DIC. Based on Japanese guidelines, antithrombin or recombinant thrombomodulin may be a preferable choice if they are accessible.

Why anticoagulant studies on sepsis fail frequently --- start with SCARLET

The Sepsis Coagulopathy Asahi Recombinant LE Thrombomodulin (SCARLET) trial has many defects, and thus cannot be the terminator of recombinant thrombomodulin (rTM). On the contrary, it provides sufficient evidence for further research. Based on analysis focusing on the failure of SCARLET and several previous anticoagulant studies, it is most important for new studies to grasp the following two points: (1) The enrolled cases should have sufficient disease severity and a clear standard for disseminated intravascular coagulation; (2) Heparin should not be used in combination with the investigated drugs. Multiple post-hoc analyses show that no combination of heparin will not increase the risk of thromboembolism. In fact, the combination of heparin can mask the true efficacy of the investigated drug. Due to the complexity of sepsis treatment and the limitations of clinical studies, the results of all treatment studies should be repeatedly verified, rather than be determined at one stroke. Some research conclusions contrary to disease physiology, pharmacology and clinical practice may be deceptive, and should be cautious rather than be simply accepted. On the other hand, the dissenting voices in the "consensus" scene are often well discussed by the authors and should be highly valued.

Endothelial dysfunction and immunothrombosis in sepsis

Sepsis is a life-threatening clinical syndrome characterized by multiorgan dysfunction caused by a dysregulated or over-reactive host response to infection. During sepsis, the coagulation cascade is triggered by activated cells of the innate immune system, such as neutrophils and monocytes, resulting in clot formation mainly in the microcirculation, a process known as immunothrombosis. Although this process aims to protect the host through inhibition of the pathogen’s dissemination and survival, endothelial dysfunction and microthrombotic complications can rapidly lead to multiple organ dysfunction. The development of treatments targeting endothelial innate immune responses and immunothrombosis could be of great significance for reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with sepsis. Medications modifying cell-specific immune responses or inhibiting platelet–endothelial interaction or platelet activation have been proposed. Herein, we discuss the underlying mechanisms of organ-specific endothelial dysfunction and immunothrombosis in sepsis and its complications, while highlighting the recent advances in the development of new therapeutic approaches aiming at improving the short- or long-term prognosis in sepsis.

Immediate postoperative parenteral anticoagulant therapy in patients with mesenteric ischemia after intestinal resection: a retrospective cohort study at a single institute

BACKGROUND

Bowel gangrene represents a major fatal event in acute mesenteric ischemia. Intestinal resection is inevitable in patients with peritonitis and bowel gangrene. This retrospective study aimed to elucidate the benefit of postoperative parenteral anticoagulation in patients with intestinal resection.

METHODS

Patients with acute mesenteric ischemia and bowel gangrene were recruited retrospectively between January 2007 and December 2019. All patients underwent bowel resection. They were categorized into two groups: patients without immediate parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Group A) and those with immediate parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Group B). Thirty-day mortality and survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were included, with 29 patients in Group A and 56 patients in Group B. Patients in Group B had lower 30-day mortality (16.1%) and a higher 2-year survival rate (45.4%) than patients in Group A (30-day mortality: 51.7%, p = 0.001; 2-year survival rate: 19.0%, p = 0.001). In the 30-day mortality multivariate analysis, patients in Group B had a better outcome (odds ratio = 0.080, 95% confidence interval between 0.011 and 0.605, p = 0.014). Patients in Group B also had a better outcome in the survival multivariate analysis (hazard ratio: 0.435, 95% confidence interval between 0.213 and 0.887, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate postoperative parenteral anticoagulant therapy improves prognosis in patients with acute mesenteric ischemia treated by intestinal resection. Trial registration This research was retrospectively approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) I&II of Taichung Veterans General Hospital (TCVGH-IRB No.CE21256B) on July 28th, 2021. The informed consent waiver was also approved by IRB I&II of Taichung Veterans General Hospital. The Declaration of Helsinki and ICH-GCP guidelines were followed during this study.

The Challenge of Intermediate-Risk Pulmonary Embolism

BACKGROUND

Intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism is a common disease that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality; however, a standardized treatment protocol is not well-established.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

Treatments available for intermediate-risk pulmonary embolisms include anticoagulation, systemic thrombolytics, catheter-directed therapies, surgical embolectomy, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Despite these options, there is no clear consensus on the optimal indication and timing of these interventions.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

Anticoagulation remains the cornerstone of treatment for pulmonary embolism; however, over the past 2 decades, there have been advances in the safety and efficacy of catheter-directed therapies. For massive pulmonary embolism, systemic thrombolytics and, sometimes, surgical thrombectomy are considered first-line treatments. Patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism are at high risk of clinical deterioration; however, it is unclear whether anticoagulation alone is sufficient. The optimal treatment of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism in the setting of hemodynamic stability with right heart strain present is not well-defined. Therapies such as catheter-directed thrombolysis and suction thrombectomy are being investigated given their potential to offload right ventricular strain. Several studies have recently evaluated catheter-directed thrombolysis and embolectomies and demonstrated the efficacy and safety of these interventions. Here, we review the literature on the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolisms and the evidence behind those interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

There are many treatments available in the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Although the current literature does not favor 1 treatment as superior, multiple studies have shown growing data to support catheter-directed therapies as potential options for these patients. Multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams remain a key feature in improving the selection of advanced therapies and optimization of care.

Heparan sulfates and heparan sulfate binding proteins in sepsis

Heparan sulfates (HSs) are the main components in the glycocalyx which covers endothelial cells and modulates vascular homeostasis through interactions with multiple Heparan sulfate binding proteins (HSBPs). During sepsis, heparanase increases and induces HS shedding. The process causes glycocalyx degradation, exacerbating inflammation and coagulation in sepsis. The circulating heparan sulfate fragments may serve as a host defense system by neutralizing dysregulated Heparan sulfate binding proteins or pro-inflammatory molecules in certain circumstances. Understanding heparan sulfates and heparan sulfate binding proteins in health and sepsis is critical to decipher the dysregulated host response in sepsis and advance drug development. In this review, we will overview the current understanding of HS in glycocalyx under septic condition and the dysfunctional heparan sulfate binding proteins as potential drug targets, particularly, high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) and histones. Moreover, several drug candidates based on heparan sulfates or related to heparan sulfates, such as heparanase inhibitors or heparin-binding protein (HBP), will be discussed regarding their recent advances. By applying chemical or chemoenzymatic approaches, the structure-function relationship between heparan sulfates and heparan sulfate binding proteins is recently revealed with structurally defined heparan sulfates. Such homogenous heparan sulfates may further facilitate the investigation of the role of heparan sulfates in sepsis and the development of carbohydrate-based therapy.

Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Statement for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in the Critical Care Unit

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a preventable complication of critical illness, and this guideline aims to convey a pragmatic approach to the problem. Guidelines have multiplied over the last decade, and their utility has become increasingly conflicted as the reader interprets all suggestions or recommendations as something that must be followed. The nuances of grade of recommendation vs level of evidence are often ignored, and the difference between a "we suggest" vs a "we recommend" is overlooked. There is a general unease among clinicians that failure to follow the guidelines translates to poor medical practice and legal culpability. We attempt to overcome these limitations by highlighting ambiguity when it occurs and refraining from dogmatic recommendations in the absence of robust evidence. Readers and practitioners may find the lack of specific recommendations unsatisfactory, but we believe that true ambiguity is better than inaccurate certainty. We have attempted to comply with the guidelines on how to create guidelines.1 And to overcome the poor compliance with these guidelines.2 Some observers have expressed concern that DVT prophylaxis guidelines may cause more harm than good.3 We have placed greater emphasis on large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with clinical end point and de-emphasized RCTs with surrogate end points and also de-emphasized hypothesis generating studies (observational studies, small RCTs, and meta-analysis of these studies). We have de-emphasized RCTs in non-intensive care unit populations like postoperative patients or those with cancer and stroke. We have also considered resource limitation settings and have avoided recommending costly and poorly proven therapeutic options.

HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE

Jagiasi BG, Chhallani AA, Dixit SB, Kumar R, Pandit RA, Govil D, et al. Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Statement for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in the Critical Care Unit. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(S2):S51-S65.

Venous Thromboembolism in Sepsis: From Bench to Bedside

Septic patients were commonly affected by coagulation disorders; thus, they are at high risk of thrombotic complications. In the last decades, novel knowledge has emerged about the interconnected and reciprocal influence of immune and coagulation systems. This phenomenon is called immunothrombosis, and it indicates an effective response whereby immune cells and the coagulation cascade cooperate to limit pathogen invasion and endothelial damage. When this network becomes dysregulated due to a systemic inflammatory activation, as occurs during sepsis, it can result in pathological thrombosis. Endothelium, platelets and neutrophils are the main characters involved in this process, together with the TF and coagulation cascade, playing a critical role in both the host defense and in thrombogenesis. A deeper understanding of this relationship may allow us to answer the growing need for clinical instruments to establish the thrombotic risk and treatments that consider more the connection between coagulation and inflammation. Heparin remains the principal therapeutical response to this phenomenon, although not sufficiently effective. To date, no other significant alternatives have been found yet. In this review, we discuss the role of sepsis-related inflammation in the development and resolution of venous thromboembolism and its clinical implications, from bench to bedside.

Anticoagulants for thrombosis prophylaxis in acutely ill patients admitted to hospital: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of different types and doses of anticoagulant drugs for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients who are acutely ill and admitted to hospital.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and national health authority databases. The search was last updated on 16 November 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that evaluated low or intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin, low or intermediate dose unfractionated heparin, direct oral anticoagulants, pentasaccharides, placebo, or no intervention for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill adult patients in hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Random effects, bayesian network meta-analyses used four co-primary outcomes: all cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and serious adverse events at or closest timing to 90 days. Risk of bias was also assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool. The quality of evidence was graded using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework.

RESULTS

44 randomised controlled trials that randomly assigned 90 095 participants were included in the main analysis. Evidence of low to moderate quality suggested none of the interventions reduced all cause mortality compared with placebo. Pentasaccharides (odds ratio 0.32, 95% credible interval 0.08 to 1.07), intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin (0.66, 0.46 to 0.93), direct oral anticoagulants (0.68, 0.33 to 1.34), and intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (0.71, 0.43 to 1.19) were most likely to reduce symptomatic venous thromboembolism (very low to low quality evidence). Intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (2.63, 1.00 to 6.21) and direct oral anticoagulants (2.31, 0.82 to 6.47) were most likely to increase major bleeding (low to moderate quality evidence). No conclusive differences were noted between interventions regarding serious adverse events (very low to low quality evidence). When compared with no intervention instead of placebo, all active interventions did more favourably with regard to risk of venous thromboembolism and mortality, and less favourably with regard to risk of major bleeding. The results were robust in prespecified sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-molecular-weight heparin in an intermediate dose appears to confer the best balance of benefits and harms for prevention of venous thromboembolism. Unfractionated heparin, in particular the intermediate dose, and direct oral anticoagulants had the least favourable profile. A systematic discrepancy was noted in intervention effects that depended on whether placebo or no intervention was the reference treatment. Main limitations of this study include the quality of the evidence, which was generally low to moderate due to imprecision and within-study bias, and statistical inconsistency, which was addressed post hoc.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020173088.

Chasing the Ghost: Hyperinflammation Does Not Cause Sepsis

Sepsis is infection sufficient to cause illness in the infected host, and more severe forms of sepsis can result in organ malfunction or death. Severe forms of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), or disease following infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are examples of sepsis. Following infection, sepsis is thought to result from excessive inflammation generated in the infected host, also referred to as a cytokine storm. Sepsis can result in organ malfunction or death. Since COVID-19 is an example of sepsis, the hyperinflammation concept has influenced scientific investigation and treatment approaches to COVID-19. However, decades of laboratory study and more than 100 clinical trials designed to quell inflammation have failed to reduce sepsis mortality. We examine theoretical support underlying widespread belief that hyperinflammation or cytokine storm causes sepsis. Our analysis shows substantial weakness of the hyperinflammation approach to sepsis that includes conceptual confusion and failure to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between hyperinflammation and sepsis. We conclude that anti-inflammation approaches to sepsis therapy have little chance of future success. Therefore, anti-inflammation approaches to treat COVID-19 are likewise at high risk for failure. We find persistence of the cytokine storm concept in sepsis perplexing. Although treatment approaches based on the hyperinflammation concept of pathogenesis have failed, the concept has shown remarkable resilience and appears to be unfalsifiable. An approach to understanding this resilience is to consider the hyperinflammation or cytokine storm concept an example of a scientific paradigm. Thomas Kuhn developed the idea that paradigms generate rules of investigation that both shape and restrict scientific progress. Intrinsic features of scientific paradigms include resistance to falsification in the face of contradictory data and inability of experimentation to generate alternatives to a failing paradigm. We call for rejection of the concept that hyperinflammation or cytokine storm causes sepsis. Using the hyperinflammation or cytokine storm paradigm to guide COVID-19 treatments is likewise unlikely to provide progress. Resources should be redirected to more promising avenues of investigation and treatment.

Association Between Different DVT Prevention Methods and Outcomes of Septic Shock Caused by Intestinal Perforation in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Septic shock, largely caused by intestinal perforation, is the most common critical illness in intensive care unit (ICU). As an important quality control strategy in ICU, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prevention is routinely used in the treatment of septic shock. Nevertheless, the effects of DVT prevention on septic shock are not fully revealed. This study was thus designed to investigate the effects of DVT prevention on septic shock caused by intestinal perforation in China.

Methods

A total of 463 hospitals were enrolled in a survey, led by the China National Critical Care Quality Control Center (China NCCQC) from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018. The association between DVT prevention, including pharmacological prophylaxis and mechanical prophylaxis, and outcomes, such as prognosis, complications, hospital stays, and hospitalization costs, was determined in the present study.

Main Results

Notably, the increased rates of DVT prevention were not associated with the onset of complications in patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation (p > 0.05). In addition, even though increased DVT prevention did not affect hospital stays, it significantly decreased the discharge rates without doctor's order in patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation (p < 0.05). Nevertheless, it should be noted that the rates of pharmacological prophylaxis but not mechanical prophylaxis were significantly associated with the costs of septic shock caused by intestinal perforation (p < 0.05). Although increased total rates of DVT prevention and the rates of mechanical prophylaxis did not reduce the mortality in patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation, the higher frequent intervention using pharmacological prophylaxis indicated the lower mortality of these patients (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

DVT prevention by any means is a safe therapeutic strategy for treating septic shock caused by intestinal perforation, and pharmacological prophylaxis reduced the mortality of patients with septic shock caused by intestinal perforation.

Favorable Outcomes of Anticoagulation With Unfractioned Heparin in Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy: A Retrospective Analysis of MIMIC-III Database

Backgrounds: Anticoagulation in sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to investigate whether unfractioned heparin (UFH) could improve clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC).

Methods: Septic patients with SIC were identified from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-III database. Cox-proportional hazards model, logistic regression model and linear regression were used to assess the associations between UFH administration and 28-day mortality, hospital mortality, occurrence of bleeding complications and length of stay, respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to match the imbalance between patients in the UFH group and the control group. Patients were further stratified according to SIC score and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II).

Results: A total of 1,820 septic patients with SIC were included in the data analysis. After PSM, 652 pairs of patients were matched between the patients in the UFH group and the control group. UFH was significantly associated with reduced 28-day mortality (HR, 0.323, 95% CI, 0.258–0.406; p < 0.001) and hospital mortality (HR, 0.380, 95% CI, 0.307–0.472; p < 0.001) without increasing the risks of intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.480, 95% CI, 0.955–2.294; p = 0.080) or gastrointestinal bleeding (OR, 1.094, 95% CI, 0.503–2.382; p = 0.820). For subgroup analysis, it didn't change the favorable results of UFH on mortality and UFH didn't increase the risk of hemorrhage in patients with severe disease.

Conclusions: The analysis of MIMIC-III database indicated that anticoagulant therapy with UFH may be associated with a survival benefit in patients with SIC.

Unfractionated heparin improves the clinical efficacy in adult sepsis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The anticoagulant treatment and clinical efficacy of heparin in sepsis remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the clinical efficacy of unfractionated heparin (UFH) in adult septic patients.

Method

A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, WEIPU database, CNKI database, WANFANG database was performed from inception to January 2021. We included Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the main outcome was 28 d mortality. Data analysis was performed with Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 software. The meta-analysis included 2617 patients from 15 RCTs.

Results

Comparing to control group, UFH could reduce 28 d mortality (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.94) especially for patient with Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) > 15, (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.96). In UFH group, the platelet (PLT) (MD: 9.18; 95% CI: 0.68 to 17.68) was higher, the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) was shorter (MD: -8.01; 95% CI: − 13.84 to − 2.18) and the prothrombin time (PT) results (P > 0.05) failed to reach statistical significance. UFH decreased multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) incidence (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.84), length of stay (LOS) in ICU (MD: -4.94; 95% CI: − 6.89 to − 2.99) and ventilation time (MD: -3.01; 95% CI: − 4.0 to − 2.02). And UFH had no adverse impact on bleeding (RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.54 to 2.23).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests that UFH may reduce 28 d mortality and improve the clinical efficacy in sepsis patients without bleeding adverse effect.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-021-01545-w.

Signaling pathways and intervention therapies in sepsis

Sepsis is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by dysregulated host systemic inflammatory and immune response to infection. Over decades, advanced understanding of host-microorganism interaction has gradually unmasked the genuine nature of sepsis, guiding toward new definition and novel therapeutic approaches. Diverse clinical manifestations and outcomes among infectious patients have suggested the heterogeneity of immunopathology, while systemic inflammatory responses and deteriorating organ function observed in critically ill patients imply the extensively hyperactivated cascades by the host defense system. From focusing on microorganism pathogenicity, research interests have turned toward the molecular basis of host responses. Though progress has been made regarding recognition and management of clinical sepsis, incidence and mortality rate remain high. Furthermore, clinical trials of therapeutics have failed to obtain promising results. As far as we know, there was no systematic review addressing sepsis-related molecular signaling pathways and intervention therapy in literature. Increasing studies have succeeded to confirm novel functions of involved signaling pathways and comment on efficacy of intervention therapies amid sepsis. However, few of these studies attempt to elucidate the underlining mechanism in progression of sepsis, while other failed to integrate preliminary findings and describe in a broader view. This review focuses on the important signaling pathways, potential molecular mechanism, and pathway-associated therapy in sepsis. Host-derived molecules interacting with activated cells possess pivotal role for sepsis pathogenesis by dynamic regulation of signaling pathways. Cross-talk and functions of these molecules are also discussed in detail. Lastly, potential novel therapeutic strategies precisely targeting on signaling pathways and molecules are mentioned.

Coagulopathies in Intensive Care Medicine: Balancing Act between Thrombosis and Bleeding

Patient Blood Management advocates an individualized treatment approach, tailored to each patient's needs, in order to reduce unnecessary exposure to allogeneic blood products. The optimization of hemostasis and minimization of blood loss is of high importance when it comes to critical care patients, as coagulopathies are a common phenomenon among them and may significantly impact morbidity and mortality. Treating coagulopathies is complex as thrombotic and hemorrhagic conditions may coexist and the medications at hand to modulate hemostasis can be powerful. The cornerstones of coagulation management are an appropriate patient evaluation, including the individual risk of bleeding weighed against the risk of thrombosis, a proper diagnostic work-up of the coagulopathy's etiology, treatment with targeted therapies, and transfusion of blood product components when clinically indicated in a goal-directed manner. In this article, we will outline various reasons for coagulopathy in critical care patients to highlight the aspects that need special consideration. The treatment options outlined in this article include anticoagulation, anticoagulant reversal, clotting factor concentrates, antifibrinolytic agents, desmopressin, fresh frozen plasma, and platelets. This article outlines concepts with the aim of the minimization of complications associated with coagulopathies in critically ill patients. Hereditary coagulopathies will be omitted in this review.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Critically ill adults are at increased risk of VTE, including DVT, and pulmonary embolism. Various agents exist for venous thromboprophylaxis in this population.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the comparative efficacy and safety of prophylaxis agents for prevention of VTE in critically ill adults?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating efficacy of thromboprophylaxis agents among critically ill patients. We searched six databases (including PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline) from inception through January 2021 for RCTs of patients in the ICU receiving pharmacologic, mechanical, or combination therapy (pharmacologic agents and mechanical devices) for thromboprophylaxis. Two reviewers performed screening, full-text review, and extraction. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to rate certainty of effect estimates.

RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs (9,619 patients). Compared with control treatment (a composite of no prophylaxis, placebo, or compression stockings only), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduced the incidence of DVT (OR, 0.59 [95% credible interval [CrI], 0.33-0.90]; high certainty) and unfractionated heparin (UFH) may reduce the incidence of DVT (OR, 0.82 [95% CrI, 0.47-1.37]; low certainty). LMWH probably reduces DVT compared with UFH (OR, 0.72 [95% CrI, 0.46-0.98]; moderate certainty). Compressive devices may reduce risk of DVT compared with control treatments; however, this is based on low-certainty evidence (OR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.50-1.50]). Combination therapy showed unclear effect on DVT compared with either therapy alone (very low certainty).

INTERPRETATION

Among critically ill adults, compared with control treatment, LMWH reduces incidence of DVT, whereas UFH and mechanical compressive devices may reduce the risk of DVT. LMWH is probably more effective than UFH in reducing incidence of DVT and should be considered the primary pharmacologic agent for thromboprophylaxis. The efficacy and safety of combination pharmacologic therapy and mechanical compressive devices were unclear.

TRIAL REGISTRY

Open Science Framework; URL: https://osf.io/694aj.

Protein C Pathway in Paediatric and Neonatal Sepsis

Protein C plays a major role in the physiological regulation of coagulation pathways through inactivation of factor Va, factor VIIIa, and plasminogen activator inhibitor. Protein C is involved in the control of inflammation during sepsis, by inhibiting release of pro-inflammatory cytokines, thereby controlling neutrophil, and monocyte effects on injured tissue. Recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC) reduced mortality in adult sepsis in earlier studies but had no significant benefit in more recent trials. Protein C levels are reduced during paediatric and neonatal sepsis, which may play a major role in the development of disseminated intravascular thrombosis, purpura fulminans, and multiorgan dysfunction. The role of protein C in paediatric sepsis requires further clinical and immunological evaluation to define the patient subgroups who may benefit from this therapy. Newer versions of rhAPC are under development with less risk of haemorrhage potentially broadening the scope of this intervention.

Extracellular histones in lung dysfunction: a new biomarker and therapeutic target?

Extracellular histones released from injured or dying cells following trauma and other severe insults can act as potent damage-associated molecular patterns. In fact, elevated levels of histones are present in human circulation in hyperinflammatory states such as acute respiratory distress syndrome and sepsis. The molecular mechanisms owing to histone-induced pathologies are at the very beginning of elucidating. However, neutralization of histones with antibodies, histone-binding or histone-degrading proteins, and heparan sulfates have shown promising therapeutic effects in pre-clinical acute respiratory distress syndrome and sepsis models. Various cell types undergoing necrosis and apoptosis or activated neutrophils forming neutrophil extracellular traps have been implicated in excessive release of histones which further augments tissue injury and may culminate in multiple organ failure. At the molecular level, an uncontrolled inflammatory cascade has been considered as the major event; however, histone-activated coagulation and thrombosis represent additional pathologic events reflecting coagulopathy. Furthermore, epigenetic regulation and chemical modifications of circulating histones appear to be critically important in their biological functions as evidenced by increased cytotoxicity associated with citrullinated histone. Herein, we will briefly review the current knowledge on the role of histones in acute respiratory distress syndrome and sepsis, and discuss the future potential of anti-histone therapy for treatment of these life-threatening disorders.

Microvascular thrombosis: experimental and clinical implications

A significant amount of clinical and research interest in thrombosis is focused on large vessels (eg, stroke, myocardial infarction, deep venous thrombosis, etc.); however, thrombosis is often present in the microcirculation in a variety of significant human diseases, such as disseminated intravascular coagulation, thrombotic microangiopathy, sickle cell disease, and others. Further, microvascular thrombosis has recently been demonstrated in patients with COVID-19, and has been proposed to mediate the pathogenesis of organ injury in this disease. In many of these conditions, microvascular thrombosis is accompanied by inflammation, an association referred to as thromboinflammation. In this review, we discuss endogenous regulatory mechanisms that prevent thrombosis in the microcirculation, experimental approaches to induce microvascular thrombi, and clinical conditions associated with microvascular thrombosis. A greater understanding of the links between inflammation and thrombosis in the microcirculation is anticipated to provide optimal therapeutic targets for patients with diseases accompanied by microvascular thrombosis.

Re-Evaluating Biologic Pharmacotherapies that Target the Host Response during Sepsis

Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) caused by the systemic inflammatory response during sepsis is responsible for millions of deaths worldwide each year, and despite broad consensus concerning its pathophysiology, no specific or effective therapies exist. Recent efforts to treat and/or prevent MODS have included a variety of biologics, recombinant proteins targeting various components of the host response to the infection (e.g., inflammation, coagulation, etc.) Improvements in molecular biology and pharmaceutical engineering have enabled a wide range of utility for biologics to target various aspects of the systemic inflammatory response. The majority of clinical trials to date have failed to show clinical benefit, but some have demonstrated promising results in certain patient populations. In this review we summarize the underlying rationale and outcome of major clinical trials where biologics have been tested as a pharmacotherapy for MODS in sepsis. A brief description of the study design and overall outcome for each of the major trials are presented. Emphasis is placed on discussing targets and/or trials where promising results were observed. Post hoc analyses of trials where therapy demonstrated harm or additional risk to certain patient subgroups are highlighted, and details are provided about specific trials where more stringent inclusion/exclusion criteria are warranted.

Trends in sepsis mortality over time in randomised sepsis trials: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of mortality in the control arm, 2002-2016

Background

Epidemiologic data have shown an increasing incidence and declining mortality rate in sepsis. However, confounding effects due to differences in disease classification might have contributed to these trends.

To assess if a declining mortality over time could be supported by data derived from high-quality prospective studies, we performed a meta-analysis using data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on sepsis. The primary aim was to assess whether the mortality in sepsis trials has changed over time. The secondary aim was to investigate how many of the included trials could show efficacy of the studied intervention regarding 28-day mortality.

Methods

We searched PubMed for RCTs enrolling patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, published between 2002 and 2016. The included trials were assessed for quality and sorted by date of first inclusion. A meta-analysis was performed to synthesise data from the individual sepsis trials.

Results

Of 418 eligible articles, 44 RCTs on sepsis were included in the analysis, enrolling 13,315 patients in the usual care arm between 1991 and 2013. In this time period, mortality decreased by 0.42% annually (p = 0.04) to give a total decline of 9.24%. In subgroup analyses with adjustments for APACHE II, SAPS II and SOFA scores, the observed time trend was not significant (p = 0.45, 0.23 and 0.98 respectively). Only four of the included trials showed any efficacy with regard to mortality.

Conclusions

Data from RCTs show a declining trend in 28-day mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock patients during the years from 1991 to 2013. However, when controlling for severity at study inclusion, there was no significant change in mortality over time. The number of trials presenting new treatment options was low.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42018091100. Registered 27 August 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2528-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Heparin: An essential drug for modern medicine

Heparin is a life-saving drug, which belongs to few clinically used drugs without defined molecular structures in modern medicine. Heparin is the mostly negatively charged biopolymer with a broad distributions in molecular weight, charge density, and biological activities. Heparin is mainly composed of repeating trisulfated disaccharide units, which is made by mast cells that are enriched in the intestines, lungs or livers of animals. Porcine intestines and bovine lungs are two mostly used sources for heparin isolation. Heparin is well known for its anticoagulant and antithrombotic pharmacological effects. The anticoagulant activity of heparin is attributable to a 3-O-sulfate and 6-O-sulfate containing pentasaccharide sequence or a minimum eight-repeating disaccharide units containing the pentasaccharide sequence that catalyzes the suicidal inactivation of factor Xa or thrombin by a serpin or serine protease inhibitor named antithrombin III, respectively. Thus, heparin is responsible for the simultaneous inhibition of both thrombin generation and thrombin activity in the blood circulation. Moreover, heparin has many pharmacological properties such as anti-inflammatory, anti-viral, anti-angiogenesis, anti-neoplastic, and anti-metastatic effects though high affinity interactions with a variety of proteases, protease inhibitors, chemokines, cytokines, growth factors, and their respective receptors. The one drug multiple molecular targeting properties make heparin a very special drug in that various clinical trials are still conducting worldwide even 100 years after its discovery. In this review, we will summarize the structure-function relationship and the molecular mechanisms of heparin. We will also provide an overview of different clinical and potential clinical applications of heparin.

Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation: An Update on Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Therapeutic Strategies

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is an acquired clinicobiological syndrome characterized by widespread activation of coagulation leading to fibrin deposition in the vasculature, organ dysfunction, consumption of clotting factors and platelets, and life-threatening hemorrhage. Disseminated intravascular coagulation is provoked by several underlying disorders (sepsis, cancer, trauma, and pregnancy complicated with eclampsia or other calamities). Treatment of the underlying disease and elimination of the trigger mechanism are the cornerstone therapeutic approaches. Therapeutic strategies specific for DIC aim to control activation of blood coagulation and bleeding risk. The clinical trials using DIC as entry criterion are limited. Large randomized, phase III clinical trials have investigated the efficacy of antithrombin (AT), activated protein C (APC), tissue factor pathway inhibitor (TFPI), and thrombomodulin (TM) in patients with sepsis, but the diagnosis of DIC was not part of the inclusion criteria. Treatment with APC reduced 28-day mortality of patients with severe sepsis, including patients retrospectively assigned to a subgroup with sepsis-associated DIC. Treatment with APC did not have any positive effects in other patient groups. The APC treatment increased the bleeding risk in patients with sepsis, which led to the withdrawal of this drug from the market. Treatment with AT failed to reduce 28-day mortality in patients with severe sepsis, but a retrospective subgroup analysis suggested possible efficacy in patients with DIC. Clinical studies with recombinant TFPI or TM have been carried out showing promising results. The efficacy and safety of other anticoagulants (ie, unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin) or transfusion of platelet concentrates or clotting factor concentrates have not been objectively assessed.

More than an anticoagulant: Do heparins have direct anti-inflammatory effects?

The heparins, well-known for their anticoagulant properties, may also have anti-inflammatory effects that could contribute to their effectiveness in the treatment of venous thromboembolism and other vascular diseases. This review focuses on the inflammatory pathophysiology that underlies the development of thrombosis and the putative effects of heparin on these pathways. We present evidence supporting the use of heparin for other indications, including autoimmune disease, malignancy, and disseminated intravascular coagulation. These considerations highlight the need for further research to elucidate the mechanisms of the possible pleiotropic effects of the heparins, with a view to advancing treatments based upon heparin derivatives.

Prophylaxis and Incidence of Symptomatic Deep Vein Thrombosis in Indian Patients with Sepsis: DETECT-Deep Vein Thrombosis Registry

PURPOSE

To assess thromboprophylaxis rate and incidence of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in Indian patients with acute sepsis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adult patients with sepsis, within 48 h of sepsis onset/hospital admission were included. DVT was assessed using Doppler ultrasonography if clinical signs were present. Data were collected at inclusion, discharge, and 30 ± 7 days (if discharged before 30 days).

RESULTS

The study included 278 patients (men: 69.4%; mean age: 56.3 ± 17.99 years). Out of 275 patients (data missing for 3 patients), 188 (68.4%; 95% confidence interval: 62.5-73.8) received DVT prophylaxis (185 at admission and 3 at discharge; pharmacological prophylaxis: n = 88, mechanical prophylaxis: n = 65, pharmacological + mechanical prophylaxis: n = 35) and 87 received no prophylaxis. In line with American College of Chest Physicians 2008 recommendations, among patients who received pharmacological prophylaxis (n = 123), low-molecular-weight heparin was given to 85.4% (n = 105) patients (duration: 9.1 ± 6.36 days), unfractionated heparin to 12.2% (n = 15) patients (duration: 9.2 ± 9.18 days), and fondaparinux to 5.7% (n = 7) patients (duration: 6.8 ± 3.30 days); 27/63 patients at high-risk of bleeding received mechanical prophylaxis; no patient received aspirin. Of 9 patients who developed DVT, 7 received no thromboprophylaxis (data missing for 2 patients). In total, 186/274 (67.9%) patients recovered from sepsis.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-third patients received thromboprophylaxis. The substantial role of thromboprophylaxis in DVT prevention mandates monitoring and control of thromboprophylaxis through internal audits in hospitals.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012."

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Anticoagulant Therapy in Sepsis. The Importance of Timing

Sepsis associated coagulopathy is due to the inflammation-induced activation of coagulation pathways concomitant with dysfunction of anticoagulant and fibrinolytic systems, leading to different degrees of haemostasis dysregulation. This response is initially beneficial, contributing to antimicrobial defence, but when control is lost coagulation activation leads to widespread microvascular thrombosis and subsequent organ failure. Large clinical trials of sepsis-related anticoagulant therapies failed to show survival benefits, but posthoc analysis of databases and several smaller studies showed beneficial effects of anticoagulants in subgroups of patients with early sepsis-induced disseminated intravascular coagulation. A reasonable explanation could be the difference in timing of anticoagulant therapy and patient heterogeneity associated with large trials. Proper selection of patients and adequate timing are required for treatment to be successful. The time when coagulation activation changes from advantageous to detrimental represents the right moment for the administration of coagulation-targeted therapy. In this way, the defence function of the haemostatic system is preserved, and the harmful effects of overwhelming coagulation activation are avoided.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012".

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Coagulation and sepsis

Severe sepsis is almost invariably associated with systemic activation of coagulation. There is ample evidence that demonstrates a wide-ranging cross-talk between hemostasis and inflammation, which is probably implicated in the pathogenesis of organ dysfunction in patients with sepsis. Inflammation not only leads to initiation and propagation of coagulation activity, but coagulation also markedly influences inflammation. Molecular mechanisms that play a role in inflammation-induced effects on coagulation have been recognized in much detail. Pro-inflammatory cells and cyto- and chemokines can activate the coagulation system and downregulate crucial physiological anticoagulant mechanisms. Initiation of coagulation activation and consequent thrombin generation is caused by expression of tissue factor on activated monocytes and endothelial cells and is ineffectually offset by tissue factor pathway inhibitor. At the same time, endothelial-associated anticoagulant pathways, in particular the protein C system, is impaired by pro-inflammatory cytokines. Also, fibrin removal is severely obstructed by inactivation of the endogenous fibrinolytic system, mainly as a result of upregulation of its principal inhibitor, plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1). Increased fibrin generation and impaired break down lead to deposition of (micro)vascular clots, which may contribute to tissue ischemia and ensuing organ dysfunction. The foundation of the management of coagulation in sepsis is the explicit and thorough treatment of the underlying disorder by antibiotic treatment and source control measures. Adjunctive strategies focused at the impairment of coagulation, including anticoagulants and restoration of physiological anticoagulant mechanisms, may supposedly be indicated and have been found advantageous in experimental and initial clinical trials.

Analysis of Risk Factors for Lower-limb Deep Venous Thrombosis in Old Patients after Knee Arthroplasty

Background:

Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a common complication of arthroplasty in old patients. We analyzed risk factors for lower-limb DVT after arthroplasty in patients aged over 70 years to determine controllable risk factors.

Methods:

This was a retrospective study of 1,025 patients aged >70 years treated with knee arthroplasty at our hospital between January 2009 and December 2013. Of 1,025 patients, 175 had postoperative lower-limb DVT. We compared medical history, body mass index (BMI), ambulatory blood pressure, preoperative and postoperative fasting blood glucose (FBG), preoperative blood total cholesterol, triglyceride, high- and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and preoperative homocysteine (Hcy) between thrombus and non-thrombus groups. B-mode ultrasonography was used to detect lower-limb DVT before the operation and 7 days after the operation in all patients. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for DVT.

Results:

Incidence of diabetes (P = 0.014), BMI (P = 0.003), preoperative FBG (P = 0.004), postoperative FBG (P = 0.012), and preoperative Hcy (P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the thrombus group. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the non-thrombus group had early postoperative activity (P < 0.001) and used a foot pump (P < 0.001). Operative duration was significantly longer in the thrombus group (P = 0.012). Within the thrombus group, significantly more patients had bilateral than unilateral knee arthroplasty (P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic analysis revealed BMI, preoperative Hcy, postoperative FBG, long operative duration, bilateral knee arthroplasty, and time to the activity after the operation to be predictive factors of DVT. At 6-month follow-up of the thrombus group, 4.7% of patients had pulmonary embolism and 18.8% had recurrent DVT; there were no deaths.

Conclusions:

Obesity, inactivity after operation, elevated preoperative Hcy and postoperative FBG, long operative duration, and bilateral knee arthroplasty were risk factors for DVT in patients aged over 70 years.

Endothelial and Microcirculatory Function and Dysfunction in Sepsis

The microcirculation is a series of arterioles, capillaries, and venules that performs essential functions of oxygen and nutrient delivery, customized to the unique physiologic needs of the supplied organ. The homeostatic microcirculatory response to infection can become harmful if overactive and/or dysregulated. Pathologic microcirculatory dysfunction can be directly visualized by intravital microscopy or indirectly measured via detection of circulating biomarkers. Although several treatments have been shown to protect the microcirculation during sepsis, they have not improved patient outcomes when applied indiscriminately. Future outcomes-oriented studies are needed to test sepsis therapeutics when personalized to a patient's microcirculatory dysfunction.

Heparins attenuated histone-mediated cytotoxicity in vitro and improved the survival in a rat model of histone-induced organ dysfunction

Background

The beneficial effects of heparin in the treatment of severe sepsis, septic shock, and sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) have recently been reported. However, the mechanisms underlying the therapeutic benefits of heparin in these conditions have not yet been clearly elucidated. The purpose of this study was to confirm the effect of heparin of neutralizing histone toxicity.

Methods

Rat models of histone H3-induced organ dysfunction were administered in a low or high dose of unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), or argatroban, and the therapeutic effects of each anticoagulant were examined. In another series, the survival of the histone H3-administered animals was evaluated. Furthermore, the effect of each of the aforementioned anticoagulants on cell death induced by histone H3 was examined in cultured vascular endothelial cells and leukocytes.

Results

Although UFH, LMWH, and argatroban significantly suppressed the histone-induced decrease of the WBC and platelet counts in the animal models of organ dysfunction, only UFH and LMWH attenuated hepatic and renal dysfunction. In addition, the mortality was significantly reduced only by high-dose UFH and LMWH. The in vitro study revealed that both vascular endothelial cell death and leukocyte cell death were significantly attenuated by UFH and LMWH but not by argatroban.

Conclusions

The histone-neutralizing effect of heparin may contribute to the beneficial effects of heparins observed in the animal study. The results of the in vitro study further confirmed the above contention and suggested that heparin binds to histones to attenuate the cytotoxic actions of the latter. Since heparin has been demonstrated to protect animals from the organ damage induced by histones and consequently reduce the mortality, administration of heparin could become a treatment of choice for patients suffering from severe sepsis.

Diagnosis and treatment of disseminated intravascular coagulation

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a condition in which systemic activation of coagulation without a specific localization occurs, resulting in extensive formation of intravascular fibrin, particularly in small and midsize vessels. Disseminated intravascular coagulation may lead to several altered coagulation parameters, including a low platelet count, abnormal global clotting assays, low levels of physiological anticoagulant proteases, or increased fibrin degradation products. Also, more complex assays for activation of coagulation factors or pathways may indicate involvement of these molecules in DIC. None of these tests alone, however, can accurately ascertain or rebuff a diagnosis of DIC. Nonetheless, a combination of readily available routine assays may be instrumental in establishing a diagnosis of DIC and can also be useful to point to a subset of patients with DIC that may need definite, often costly, interventions in the hemostatic system. Current insights on relevant etiological pathways that may contribute to the occurrence of DIC have led to innovative therapeutic and adjunctive approaches to patient with DIC. Management options directed at the amelioration of hemostatic activation may tentatively be indicated and were found to be advantageous in experimental and clinical investigations. These treatments encompass elimination of tissue factor-mediated thrombin generation or restitution of normal anticoagulant function.

Heparin therapy reduces 28-day mortality in adult severe sepsis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There are approximately 19 million new cases of sepsis worldwide each year. Among them, more than one quarter of patients die. We aimed to assess the effects of heparin on short-term mortality in adult patients with sepsis and severe sepsis.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases; the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register) and conference proceedings (Web of Knowledge (Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Sciences & Humanities)) from inception to July 2014, expert contacts and relevant websites. Controlled trials of heparin versus placebo in sepsis or severe sepsis were identified. In total two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, and four authors independently extracted data; consensus was reached by conference. We used the chi-square test and I2 to assess statistical heterogeneity (P <0.05). The primary analysis was based on the fixed-effect model to produce pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of nine publications were included in the meta-analysis. Heparin decreased 28-day mortality (n = 3,482, OR = 0.656, 95% CI = 0.562 to 0.765, P <0.0001). According to the meta-analysis of 28-day mortality, heterogeneity was not found among the eight randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (I2 = 0.0%). Heparin had no effect on bleeding events in sepsis (seven RCTs, n = 2,726; OR = 1.063; 95% CI = 0.834 to 1.355; P = 0.623; and I2 = 20.9%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the sample size may be a source of heterogeneity, but experimental design was not.

CONCLUSIONS

Heparin may reduce 28-day mortality in patients with severe sepsis, at the same time, there was no increase in the risk of bleeding in the heparin group. We recommend the use of heparin for sepsis and severe sepsis.

Diagnosis and treatment of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) according to four DIC guidelines

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is categorized into bleeding, organ failure, massive bleeding, and non-symptomatic types according to the sum of vectors for hypercoagulation and hyperfibrinolysis. The British Committee for Standards in Haematology, Japanese Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis, and the Italian Society for Thrombosis and Haemostasis published separate guidelines for DIC; however, there are several differences between these three sets of guidelines. Therefore, the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) recently harmonized these differences and published the guidance of diagnosis and treatment for DIC. There are three different diagnostic criteria according to the Japanese Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare, ISTH, and Japanese Association of Acute Medicine. The first and second criteria can be used to diagnose the bleeding or massive bleeding types of DIC, while the third criteria cover organ failure and the massive bleeding type of DIC. Treatment of underlying conditions is recommended in three types of DIC, with the exception of massive bleeding. Blood transfusions are recommended in patients with the bleeding and massive bleeding types of DIC. Meanwhile, treatment with heparin is recommended in those with the non-symptomatic type of DIC. The administration of synthetic protease inhibitors and antifibrinolytic therapy is recommended in patients with the bleeding and massive bleeding types of DIC. Furthermore, the administration of natural protease inhibitors is recommended in patients with the organ failure type of DIC, while antifibrinolytic treatment is not. The diagnosis and treatment of DIC should be carried out in accordance with the type of DIC.

A 61-year-old man with disseminated intravascular coagulation: a case report

BACKGROUND

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) can frequently be observed in patients with severe inflammatory response. It is still correlated with a poor prognosis. Activation of coagulation activity leads to occlusions of small vessels resulting in various organ failure symptoms. In addition, secondary fibrinolysis leads to an increased risk of bleedings and means a therapeutic dilemma. Here, we present a case of a 61-year-old Caucasian man with a severe case of DIC and its clinical complications.

METHODS

We report the case of a man with a severe case of DIC. Data collection was performed retrospectively.

RESULTS

We report the case of a 61-year-old Caucasian man with contact to pigeon droppings in his medical history. This was followed by a rhinopharyngitis, an exanthema, and a recurring priapism. Thrombotic occlusions were predominant on admission, and necrosis of the lower legs, the hands, and the genital resulted in amputation. Hypoperfusion of the rectum and the bladder lead to the creation of a descendostoma and an uretrostoma. Anticoagulation was managed by continuous infusion of unfractionated heparin and activated protein C supplementation. Long-term anticoagulation is managed with rivaroxaban.

CONCLUSIONS

Cryptococcus soil inhalation may cause severe DIC resulting in extremity amputations; however, effective anticoagulation and activated protein C supplementation might extenuate the progress. As multiple complications might occur, an interdisciplinary cooperation is essential.

Modulation of Protein C Activation by Histones, Platelet Factor 4, and Heparinoids

Objective—

Histones are detrimental in late sepsis. Both activated protein C (aPC) and heparin can reverse their effect. Here, we investigated whether histones can modulate aPC generation in a manner similar to another positively charged molecule, platelet factor 4, and how heparinoids (unfractionated heparin or oxygen-desulfated unfractionated heparin with marked decrease anticoagulant activity) may modulate this effect.

Approach and Results—

We measured in vitro and in vivo effects of histones, platelet factor 4, and heparinoids on aPC formation, activated partial thromboplastin time, and murine survival. In vitro, histones and platelet factor 4 both affect thrombin/thrombomodulin aPC generation following a bell-shaped curve, with a peak of >5-fold enhancement. Heparinoids shift these curves rightward. Murine aPC generation studies after infusions of histones, platelet factor 4, and heparinoids supported the in vitro data. Importantly, although unfractionated heparin and 2-O, 3-O desulfated heparin both reversed the lethality of high-dose histone infusions, only mice treated with 2-O, 3-O desulfated heparin demonstrated corrected activated partial thromboplastin times and had significant levels of aPC.

Conclusions—

Our data provide a new contextual model of how histones affect aPC generation, and how heparinoid therapy may be beneficial in sepsis. These studies provide new insights into the complex interactions controlling aPC formation and suggest a novel therapeutic interventional strategy.

Evaluation of recombinant activated protein C for severe sepsis at a tertiary academic medical center

Purpose

Early clinical trials of recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC) for severe sepsis excluded patients at high risk of bleeding. Recent literature suggests bleeding rates are higher in clinical practice and may be associated with worsened outcomes. Our objective was to evaluate baseline demographics; incidence, and risk factors for major bleeding; and mortality of patients receiving rhAPC for severe sepsis at our institution.

Methods

A retrospective study was performed for all patients receiving rhAPC for treatment of severe sepsis at a tertiary academic medical center from January 2002 to June 2009. Demographic information, clinical variables, intensive care unit, and hospital outcomes were recorded.

Results

Of the 156 patients that received rhAPC, 54 (34.6%) did not meet institutional criteria for safe use at baseline due to bleeding precaution or contraindication. Twenty-three (14.7%) patients experienced a major bleeding event. Multivariate analysis demonstrated baseline International Normalized Ratio ≥2.5 (odds ratio [OR] 3.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28–10.56; P = 0.03) and platelet count ≤100 × 10³/mm³ (OR 2.86, 95% CI: 1.07–7.67; P = 0.01) as significant predictors of a major bleed. Overall hospital mortality was 57.7%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated the presence of ≥3 organ dysfunctions (OR 2.46, 95% CI: 1.19–5.09; P < 0.05) and medical intensive care unit admission (OR 1.99, 95% CI: 1.00–3.98; P = 0.05) were independent variables associated with hospital mortality.

Conclusion

Patients receiving rhAPC at our institution had higher APACHE II scores, mortality, and major bleeding events than published postmarketing studies. Risk factors for major bleeding other than package-labeling contraindications and bleeding precautions were identified in our patient population.

Low ADAMTS-13 activity during hemorrhagic events with disseminated intravascular coagulation

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a life-threatening complication, and its control is essential for therapeutic success. Recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin alfa (rTM) is a novel therapeutic agent for DIC. The efficacy of rTM in the treatment of DIC is reportedly superior to that of conventional anti-DIC treatments, such as unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin, but hemorrhagic events occasionally interfere with the therapeutic benefits of rTM. We assessed the clinical features of 20 consecutive patients who were given rTM for DIC associated with various hematologic disorders. Eight patients achieved remission of both primary disease and DIC, eight died due to progression of the primary disease, and four died of various hemorrhagic complications. Assessment of 16 biomarkers for coagulation showed that the four patients who died of hemorrhagic complications despite remission of their primary disease showed lower ADAMTS-13 (a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with a thrombospondin Type 1 motif, member 13) plasma activity than other patients (P = 0.016). The optimal cut-off level of ADAMTS-13 for predicting risk of hemorrhagic complications was 42 % (P = 0.007). Plasma ADAMTS-13 activity determined at diagnosis of DIC may help predict the risk of hemorrhagic events during and/or following DIC treatment with hematologic disorders.

Guidance for diagnosis and treatment of DIC from harmonization of the recommendations from three guidelines

Three guidelines have recently been published for the diagnosis and treatment of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) in adults. This communication seeks to harmonize the recommendations in these guidelines using a modified GRADE system. The scoring system for diagnosis of DIC using global coagulation tests is known to correlate with key clinical observations and outcomes (Moderate quality). The cornerstone of DIC treatment is the treatment of the underlying condition (Moderate quality). In general, transfusion of platelets or plasma (components) in patients with DIC should be reserved for patients who are bleeding (Low quality). Therapeutic doses of heparin should be considered in cases of DIC where clinical features of thrombosis predominate. Heparin is not recommended in those patients with a high risk of bleeding, (Moderate quality). However, prophylactic doses of unfractionated heparin or low molecular we ight heparin is recommended in critically ill and non-bleeding patients with DIC for prevention of venous thromboembolism (Moderate to High quality). Although further prospective evidence from randomized controlled trials is required, administration of antithrombin or recombinant thrombomodulin may be considered in certain patients with DIC. In general, patients with DIC should not be treated with antifibrinolytic agents (Low quality). However those who present with severe bleeding, that is characterized by a markedly hyperfibrinolytic state such as leukemia (Low quality) and trauma (Moderate quality), may be treated with antifibrinolytic agents. © 2013 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Disseminated intravascular coagulation: a review for the internist

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a syndrome characterized by systemic intravascular activation of coagulation, leading to widespread deposition of fibrin in the circulation. Recent knowledge on important pathogenetic mechanisms that may lead to DIC has resulted in novel preventive and therapeutic approaches to patients with DIC. The diagnosis of DIC can be made by sensitive laboratory tests; however, most of these tests are not readily available in a clinical setting. A reliable diagnosis can also be made on the basis of a small series of laboratory tests that can be combined in a scoring algorithm. The cornerstone of the management of DIC is the specific and vigorous treatment of the underlying disorder. Strategies aimed at the inhibition of coagulation activation may theoretically be justified and have been found beneficial in experimental and clinical studies. These strategies comprise inhibition of tissue factor-mediated activation of coagulation or restoration of physiological anticoagulant pathways.

Human recombinant protein C for severe sepsis and septic shock in adult and paediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a common and frequently fatal condition. Human recombinant activated protein C (APC) has been introduced to reduce the high risk of death associated with severe sepsis or septic shock. This systematic review is an update of a Cochrane review originally published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the benefits and harms of APC for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 6); MEDLINE (2010 to June 2012); EMBASE (2010 to June 2012); BIOSIS (1965 to June 2012); CINAHL (1982 to June 2012) and LILACS (1982 to June 2012). There was no language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized clinical trials assessing the effects of APC for severe sepsis or septic shock in adults and children. We excluded studies on neonates. We considered all-cause mortality at day 28 and at the end of study follow up, and hospital mortality as the primary outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently performed trial selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction in duplicate. We estimated relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We measured statistical heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic. We used a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one new randomized clinical trial in this update which includes six randomized clinical trials involving 6781 participants in total, five randomized clinical trials in adult (N = 6307) and one randomized clinical trial in paediatric (N = 474) participants. All trials had high risk of bias and were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. APC compared with placebo did not significantly affect all-cause mortality at day 28 compared with placebo (780/3435 (22.7%) versus 767/3346 (22.9%); RR 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.16; I(2) = 56%). APC did not significantly affect in-hospital mortality (393/1767 (22.2%) versus 379/1710 (22.1%); RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.16; I(2) = 20%). APC was associated with an increased risk of serious bleeding (113/3424 (3.3%) versus 74/3343 (2.2%); RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.94; I(2) = 0%). APC did not significantly affect serious adverse events (463/3334 (13.9%) versus 439/3302 (13.2%); RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.18; I(2) = 0%). Trial sequential analyses showed that more trials do not seem to be needed for reliable conclusions regarding these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This updated review found no evidence suggesting that APC should be used for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC seems to be associated with a higher risk of bleeding. The drug company behind APC, Eli Lilly, has announced the discontinuation of all ongoing clinical trials using this drug for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC should not be used for sepsis or septic shock outside randomized clinical trials.

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in adults with septic shock

BACKGROUND

There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, we assigned 1697 patients with infection, systemic inflammation, and shock who were receiving fluids and vasopressors above a threshold dose for 4 hours to receive either DrotAA (at a dose of 24 μg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or placebo for 96 hours. The primary outcome was death from any cause 28 days after randomization.

RESULTS

At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.28; P=0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P=0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P=0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock. (Funded by Eli Lilly; PROWESS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00604214.).