Dry Needling and Antithrombotic Drugs

Many clinicians increasingly use dry needling in clinical practice. However, whether patients' intake of antithrombotic drugs should be considered as a contraindication for dry needling has not been investigated to date. As far as we know, there are no publications in analyzing the intake of antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents in the context of dry needling techniques. A thorough analysis of existing medications and how they may impact various needling approaches may contribute to improved evidence-informed clinical practice. The primary purpose of this paper is to review the current knowledge of antithrombotic therapy in the context of dry needling. In addition, reviewing guidelines of other needling approaches, such as electromyography, acupuncture, botulinum toxin infiltration, and neck ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy, may provide specific insights relevant for dry needling. Based on published data, taking antithrombotic medication should not be considered an absolute contraindication for dry needling techniques. As long as specific dry needling and individual risks are properly considered, it does not change the risk and safety profile of dry needling. Under specific circumstances, the use of ultrasound guidance is recommended when available.

Comparison of Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage Expansion and Outcomes Among Patients on Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin k Antagonists

BACKGROUND

With increasing use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and availability of new reversal agents, the risk of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (tICH) requires better understanding. We compared hemorrhage expansion rates, mortality, and morbidity following tICH in patients treated with vitamin k antagonists (VKA: warfarin) and DOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran).

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of patients from 2010 to 2017 was performed to identify patients with imaging diagnosis of acute traumatic intraparenchymal, subdural, subarachnoid, and epidural hemorrhage with preadmission use of DOACs or VKAs. We identified 39 patients on DOACs and 97 patients on VKAs. Demographic information, comorbidities, hemorrhage size, and expansion over time, as well as discharge disposition and Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) were collected. Primary outcome was development of new or enlargement of tICH within the first 48 h of initial CT imaging.

RESULTS

Of 136 patients with mean (SD) age 78.7 (13.2) years, most common tICH subtype was subdural hematoma (N = 102/136; 75%), and most common mechanism was a fall (N = 130/136; 95.6%). Majority of patients in the DOAC group did not receive reversal agents (66.7%). Hemorrhage expansion or new hemorrhage occurred in 11.1% in DOAC group vs. 14.6% in VKA group (p = 0.77) at a median of 8 and 11 h from initial ED admission, respectively (p = 0.82). Patients in the DOAC group compared to VKA group had higher median discharge GOS (4 vs. 3 respectively, p = 0.03), higher percentage of patients with good outcome (GOS 4-5, 66.7% vs. 40.2% respectively, p = 0.005), and higher rate of discharge to home or rehabilitation (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

We report anticoagulation-associated tICH outcomes predominantly due to fall-related subdural hematomas. Patients on DOACs had lower tICH expansion rates although not statistically significantly different from VKA-treated patients. DOAC-treated patients had favorable outcomes versus VKA group following tICH despite low use of reversal strategies. DOAC use may be a safer alternative to VKA in patients at risk of traumatic brain hemorrhage.

Correlation of Thromboelastography with Apparent Rivaroxaban Concentration: Has Point-of-Care Testing Improved?

BACKGROUND

Concern remains over reliable point-of-care testing to guide reversal of rivaroxaban, a commonly used factor Xa inhibitor, in high-acuity settings. Thromboelastography (TEG), a point-of-care viscoelastic assay, may have the ability to detect the anticoagulant effect of rivaroxaban. The authors ascertained the association of apparent rivaroxaban concentration with thromboelastography reaction time, i.e., time elapsed from blood sample placement in analyzer until beginning of clot formation, as measured using TEG and TEG6S instruments (Haemonetics Corporation, USA), hypothesizing that reaction time would correlate to degree of functional factor Xa impairment.

METHODS

The authors prospectively performed a diagnostic accuracy study comparing coagulation assays to apparent (i.e., indirectly assessed) rivaroxaban concentration in trauma patients with and without preinjury rivaroxaban presenting to a single center between April 2016 and July 2018. Blood samples at admission and after reversal or 24 h postadmission underwent TEG, TEG6S, thrombin generation assay, anti-factor Xa chromogenic assay, prothrombin time (PT), and ecarin chromogenic assay testing. The authors determined correlation of kaolin TEG, TEG6S, and prothrombin time to apparent rivaroxaban concentration. Receiver operating characteristic curve compared capacity to distinguish therapeutic rivaroxaban concentration (i.e., greater than or equal to 50 ng/ml) from nontherapeutic concentrations.

RESULTS

Eighty rivaroxaban patients were compared to 20 controls. Significant strong correlations existed between rivaroxaban concentration and TEG reaction time (ρ = 0.67; P < 0.001), TEG6S reaction time (ρ = 0.68; P < 0.001), and prothrombin time (ρ = 0.73; P < 0.001), however reaction time remained within the defined normal range for the assay. Rivaroxaban concentration demonstrated strong but not significant association with coagulation assays postreversal (n = 9; TEG reaction time ρ = 0.62; P = 0.101; TEG6S reaction time ρ = 0.57; P = 0.112) and small nonsignificant association for controls (TEG reaction time: ρ = -0.04; P = 0.845; TEG6S reaction time: ρ = -0.09; P = 0.667; PT-neoplastine: ρ = 0.19; P = 0.301). Rivaroxaban concentration (area under the curve, 0.91) and TEG6S reaction time (area under the curve, 0.84) best predicted therapeutic rivaroxaban concentration and exhibited similar receiver operating characteristic curves (P = 0.180).

CONCLUSIONS

Although TEG6S demonstrates significant strong correlation with rivaroxaban concentration, values within normal range limit clinical utility rendering rivaroxaban concentration the gold standard in measuring anticoagulant effect.

An Update on the Reversal of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) include thrombin inhibitor dabigatran and coagulation factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and betrixaban. NOACs have several benefits over warfarin, including faster time to the achieve effect, rapid onset of action, fewer documented food and drug interactions, lack of need for routine INR monitoring, and improved patient satisfaction. Local hemostatic measures, supportive care, and withholding the next NOAC dose are usually sufficient to achieve hemostasis among patients presenting with minor bleeding. The administration of reversal agents should be considered in patients on NOAC's with major bleeding manifestations (life-threatening bleeding, or major uncontrolled bleeding), or those who require rapid anticoagulant reversal for an emergent surgical procedure. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved two reversal agents for NOACs: idarucizumab for dabigatran and andexanet alfa for apixaban and rivaroxaban. The American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA), and Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) have released an updated guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation that provides indications for the use of these reversal agents. In addition, the final results of the ANNEXA-4 study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of andexanet alfa were recently published. Several agents are in different phases of clinical trials, and among them, ciraparantag has shown promising results. However, their higher cost and limited availability remains a concern. Here, we provide a brief review of the available reversal agents for NOACs (nonspecific and specific), recent updates on reversal strategies, lab parameters (including point-of-care tests), NOAC resumption, and agents in development.

Laboratory measures of coagulation among trauma patients on NOAs: results of the AAST-MIT

Background

Warfarin is associated with poor outcomes after trauma, an effect correlated with elevations in the international normalized ratio (INR). In contrast, the novel oral anticoagulants (NOAs) have no validated laboratory measure to quantify coagulopathy. We sought to determine if use of NOAs was associated with elevated activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) or INR levels among trauma patients or increased clotting times on thromboelastography (TEG).

Methods

This was a post-hoc analysis of a prospective observational study across 16 trauma centers. Patients on dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban were included. Laboratory data were collected at admission and after reversal. Admission labs were compared between medication groups. Traditional measures of coagulopathy were compared with TEG results using Spearman's rank coefficient for correlation. Labs before and after reversal were also analyzed between medication groups.

Results

182 patients were enrolled between June 2013 and July 2015: 50 on dabigatran, 123 on rivaroxaban, and 34 apixaban. INR values were mildly elevated among patients on dabigatran (median 1.3, IQR 1.1-1.4) and rivaroxaban (median 1.3, IQR 1.1-1.6) compared with apixaban (median 1.1, IQR 1.0-1.2). Patients on dabigatran had slightly higher than normal aPTT values (median 35, IQR 29.8-46.3), whereas those on rivaroxaban and apixaban did not. Fifty patients had TEG results. The median values for R, alpha, MA and lysis were normal for all groups. Prothrombin time (PT) and aPTT had a high correlation in all groups (dabigatran p=0.0005, rivaroxaban p<0.0001, and apixaban p<0.0001). aPTT correlated with the R value on TEG in patients on dabigatran (p=0.0094) and rivaroxaban (p=0.0028) but not apixaban (p=0.2532). Reversal occurred in 14%, 25%, and 18% of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban patients, respectively. Both traditional measures of coagulopathy and TEG remained within normal limits after reversal.

Discussion

Neither traditional measures of coagulation nor TEG were able to detect coagulopathy in patients on NOAs.

Level of evidence

Level IV.

[Peri-Interventional Management of Direct Oral Anticoagulants - Balancing Benefits and Risks]

Zusammenfassung. Das periprozedurale Management von direkten oralen Antikoagulanzien löst bei vielen Klinikern noch Unsicherheit aus. Dies mag daran liegen, dass mit Apixaban, Dabigatran, Edoxaban und Rivaroxaban Substanzen mit unterschiedlichen Wirkansätzen und Pharmakokinetik auf dem Markt vertreten sind. Der Umgang mit DOAK bedarf einer individuellen Risikoeinschätzung betreffend Blutungen und Thromboembolien, insbesondere im perioperativen/periinterventionellen Management. Ein Therapie-Monitoring ist im Regelfall nicht erforderlich. Situativ kann die Bestimmung der Serumkonzentration von Interesse sein. Es stehen für die einzelnen Substanzen hierfür unterschiedliche Verfahren zur Verfügung. Die Möglichkeit einer Verfälschung weiterer Gerinnungsmarker muss berücksichtigt werden. Im Falle einer schweren Blutungskomplikation muss PPSB angewendet werden. Das einzige bisweilen verfügbare Antidot stellt Praxbind® (Idarucizumab) dar. Aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse lassen aber mutmassen, dass zukünftig weitere Therapieoptionen auch für Substanzen, welche den Faktor Xa hemmen, bald zur Verfügung stehen werden.

Novel oral anticoagulants and trauma: The results of a prospective American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multi-Institutional Trial

BACKGROUND

The number of anticoagulated trauma patients is increasing. Trauma patients on warfarin have been found to have poor outcomes, particularly after intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). However, the effect of novel oral anticoagulants (NOAs) on trauma outcomes is unknown. We hypothesized that patients on NOAs would have higher rates of ICH, ICH progression, and death compared with patients on traditional anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational trial across 16 trauma centers. Inclusion criteria was any trauma patient admitted on aspirin, clopidogrel, warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban. Demographic data, admission vital signs, mechanism of injury, injury severity scores, laboratory values, and interventions were collected. Outcomes included ICH, progression of ICH, and death.

RESULTS

A total of 1,847 patients were enrolled between July 2013 and June 2015. Mean age was 74.9 years (SD ± 13.8), 46% were female, 77% were non-Hispanic white. At least one comorbidity was reported in 94% of patients. Blunt trauma accounted for 99% of patients, and the median Injury Severity Score was 9 (interquartile range, 4-14). 50% of patients were on antiplatelet agents, 33% on warfarin, 10% on NOAs, and 7% on combination therapy or subcutaneous agents.Patients taking NOAs were not at higher risk for ICH on univariate (24% vs. 31%) or multivariate analysis (incidence rate ratio, 0.78; confidence interval 0.61-1.01, p = 0.05). Compared with all other agents, patients on aspirin (90%, 81 mg; 10%, 325 mg) had the highest rate (35%) and risk (incidence rate ratio, 1.27; confidence interval, 1.13-1.43; p < 0.001) of ICH. Progression of ICH occurred in 17% of patients and was not different between medication groups. Study mortality was 7% and was not significantly different between groups on univariate or multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Patients on NOAs were not at higher risk for ICH, ICH progression, or death.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.

Management of Patients on Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in the Acute Care and Periprocedural Setting: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are now widely used as alternatives to warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and management of venous thromboembolism. In clinical practice, there is still widespread uncertainty on how to manage patients on NOACs who bleed or who are at risk for bleeding. Clinical trial data related to NOAC reversal for bleeding and perioperative management are sparse, and recommendations are largely derived from expert opinion. Knowledge of time of last ingestion of the NOAC and renal function is critical to managing these patients given that laboratory measurement is challenging because of the lack of commercially available assays in the United States. Idarucizumab is available as an antidote to rapidly reverse the effects of dabigatran. At present, there is no specific antidote available in the United States for the oral factor Xa inhibitors. Prothrombin concentrate may be considered in life-threatening bleeding. Healthcare institutions should adopt a NOAC reversal and perioperative management protocol developed with multidisciplinary input.

Bleeding with Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs Warfarin: Clinical Experience

The risk of bleeding in the setting of anticoagulant therapy continues to be re-evaluated following the introduction of a new generation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Interruption of DOAC therapy and supportive care may be sufficient for the management of patients who present with mild or moderate bleeding, but in those with life-threatening bleeding, a specific reversal agent is desirable. We review the phase 3 clinical studies of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, in the context of bleeding risk and management.

Anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation and chronic heart failure: the risk and drug of choice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review seeks to provide an evidence-based update on the issue of atrial fibrillation and chronic heart failure with an emphasis on anticoagulation and the expanding use of the novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs).

RECENT FINDINGS

There is an increasing appreciation of the important reciprocal relationship between atrial fibrillation and heart failure and the negative prognostic impact that each condition has on the other. There are now four NOACs approved for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. There are increasing data to support their use in atrial fibrillation with heart failure, including in patients with nonmechanical or rheumatic valvular disease, and to facilitate direct current cardioversion. The choice of NOAC is heavily dependent on individual patient characteristics.

SUMMARY

The use of and indications for NOACs for patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation are rapidly increasing.

Bleeding with direct oral anticoagulants vs warfarin: clinical experience

The risk of bleeding in the setting of anticoagulant therapy continues to be re-evaluated following the introduction of a new generation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Interruption of DOAC therapy and supportive care may be sufficient for the management of patients who present with mild or moderate bleeding, but in those with life-threatening bleeding, a specific reversal agent is desirable. We review the phase 3 clinical studies of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, in the context of bleeding risk and management.

The Role of Nonvitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) in Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Anticoagulation is important in stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Until recently, heparins and vitamin K antagonists were the only available therapy for stroke reduction in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) including direct thrombin inhibitor (dabigatran) and direct factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) are now available and offer new options for stroke prevention. This article reviews the available data on the use of NOACs for primary and secondary stroke prevention in AF patients and describes specific patient populations to guide clinician in making the informed decision regarding appropriate use of those agents. It also addresses the use of NOACs early after acute stroke and use of thrombolysis while on NOAC.

Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants: Practical Considerations for Emergency Medicine Physicians

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation- (NVAF-) related stroke and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are cardiovascular diseases associated with significant morbidity and economic burden. The historical standard treatment of VTE has been the administration of parenteral heparinoid until oral warfarin therapy attains a therapeutic international normalized ratio. Warfarin has been the most common medication for stroke prevention in NVAF. Warfarin use is complicated by a narrow therapeutic window, unpredictable dose response, numerous food and drug interactions, and requirements for frequent monitoring. To overcome these disadvantages, direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs)—dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban—have been developed for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolic events (SEE) in patients with NVAF and for the treatment of VTE. Advantages of DOACs include predictable pharmacokinetics, few drug-drug interactions, and low monitoring requirements. In clinical studies, DOACs are noninferior to warfarin for the prevention of NVAF-related stroke and the treatment and prevention of VTE as well as postoperative knee and hip surgery VTE prophylaxis, with decreased bleeding risks. This review addresses the practical considerations for the emergency physician in DOAC use, including dosing recommendations, laboratory monitoring, anticoagulation reversal, and cost-effectiveness. The challenges of DOACs, such as the lack of specific laboratory measurements and antidotes, are also discussed.

The laboratory's 2015 perspective on direct oral anticoagulant testing

The introduction of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy into clinical use in the past 5 years has had significant impact on the clinical laboratory. Clinicians' desire to determine plasma drug presence or measure drug concentration, and more recent observations regarding the limitations and utility of coagulation testing in the setting of DOAC treatment, suggest that early published recommendations regarding laboratory testing should be reassessed. These initial recommendations, furthermore, were often based on drug-spiked plasma studies, rather than samples from patients receiving DOAC therapy. We have demonstrated that reagent sensitivity varies significantly whether drug-spiked samples or samples from DOAC-treated patients are tested. Data from drug-enriched samples must therefore be interpreted with caution or be used as a guide only. We present laboratory assays that can be used to determine drug presence and to measure drug concentration, and provide recommended testing algorithms. As DOAC therapy may significantly impact on specialty coagulation assays, we review those tests with the potential to give false-positive and false-negative results.