No Difference in Risk for Thrombocytopenia During Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism and Deep Venous Thrombosis With Either Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin or Unfractionated Heparin

Being precise with anticoagulation to reduce adverse drug reactions: are we there yet?

Anticoagulants are potent therapeutics widely used in medical and surgical settings, and the amount spent on anticoagulation is rising. Although warfarin remains a widely prescribed oral anticoagulant, prescriptions of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have increased rapidly. Heparin-based parenteral anticoagulants include both unfractionated and low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs). In clinical practice, anticoagulants are generally well tolerated, although interindividual variability in response is apparent. This variability in anticoagulant response can lead to serious incident thrombosis, haemorrhage and off-target adverse reactions such as heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia (HIT). This review seeks to highlight the genetic, environmental and clinical factors associated with variability in anticoagulant response, and review the current evidence base for tailoring the drug, dose, and/or monitoring decisions to identified patient subgroups to improve anticoagulant safety. Areas that would benefit from further research are also identified. Validated variants in VKORC1, CYP2C9 and CYP4F2 constitute biomarkers for differential warfarin response and genotype-informed warfarin dosing has been shown to reduce adverse clinical events. Polymorphisms in CES1 appear relevant to dabigatran exposure but the genetic studies focusing on clinical outcomes such as bleeding are sparse. The influence of body weight on LMWH response merits further attention, as does the relationship between anti-Xa levels and clinical outcomes. Ultimately, safe and effective anticoagulation requires both a deeper parsing of factors contributing to variable response, and further prospective studies to determine optimal therapeutic strategies in identified higher risk subgroups.

Different Types of Vasculitis Complicated by Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia-Analysis of Four Cases and Literature Review

Vasculitis and HIT have different etiologies, although both involve autoimmune mechanisms. Treatment of vasculitis often requires the use of an anticoagulant such as heparin, which can lead to the development of HIT and subsequent life-threatening complications. The analysis covered patients hospitalized in the Department of Internal Medicine, Nephrology and Dialysis in the period from September 2020 to March 2023. After analyzing the data, we selected four patients in whom vasculitis treatment was complicated by HIT. These included two patients with ANCA vasculitis and two patients with anti-GBM disease. We also described similar cases reported in the literature.

Platelet factor 4 polyanion immune complexes: heparin induced thrombocytopenia and vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

This is a review article on heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, an adverse effect of heparin therapy, and vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia, occurring in some patients administered certain coronavirus vaccines.

MAIN BODY/TEXT

Immune-mediated thrombocytopenia occurs when specific antibodies bind to platelet factor 4 /heparin complexes. Platelet factor 4 is a naturally occurring chemokine, and under certain conditions, may complex with negatively charged molecules and polyanions, including heparin. The antibody-platelet factor 4/heparin complex may lead to platelet activation, accompanied by other cascading reactions, resulting in cerebral sinus thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis, lower limb arterial thrombosis, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, skin necrosis, and thrombotic stroke. If untreated, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia can be life threatening. In parallel, rare incidents of spontaneous vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia can also occur in some patients administered certain coronavirus vaccines. The role of platelet factor 4 in vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome further reinforces the importance the platelet factor 4/polyanion immune complexes and the complications that this might pose to susceptible individuals. These findings demonstrate, how auxiliary factors can complicate heparin therapy and drug development. An increasing interest in biomanufacturing heparins from non-animal sources has driven a growing interest in understanding the biology of immune-mediated heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and therefore, the development of safe and effective biosynthetic heparins.

SHORT CONCLUSION

In conclusion, these findings further reinforce the importance of the binding of platelet factor 4 with known and unknown polyanions, and the complications that these might pose to susceptible patients. In parallel, these findings also demonstrate how auxiliary factors can complicate the heparin drug development.

Management of Outpatient Warfarin Therapy amid COVID-19 Pandemic: A Practical Guide

Many healthcare resources have been and continue to be allocated to the management of patients with COVID-19. Therefore, the ongoing care of patients receiving oral anticoagulation with warfarin is likely to be compromised amid this unprecedented crisis. This article discusses a stepwise algorithm for the management of outpatient warfarin therapy. Alternative management strategies are presented and discussed, including alternative pharmacological therapy options and self-monitoring. Our algorithm aims to help clinicians safely optimize the treatment of patients requiring anticoagulation therapy in the context of the global response to the current pandemic.

BILATERAL ADRENAL HEMORRHAGE WITH ADRENAL INSUFFICIENCY AFTER DALTEPARIN USE POST HIP ATHROPLASTIES

Objective

Multiple case reports have implicated the use of heparin for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis with bilateral adrenal hemorrhage. Only 1 previous report has described this with the low molecular weight product, dalteparin. We report a case following bilateral hip arthroplasties.

Methods

Clinical and laboratory data are presented.

Results

A 69-year-old woman underwent bilateral total hip arthroplasties with dalteparin 5,000 international units subcutaneously daily for 30 days postoperatively. The patient's past medical history was unremarkable. She was discharged 5 days post-surgery and required readmission 1 day later for epigastric pain, nausea, and vomiting. Her platelet count was 91 × 10⁹/L (normal, 150 to 400 × 10⁹/L). She was discharged after 4 days with pain resolution. She presented 4 weeks later with nausea and vomiting for several days. Serum sodium was 123 mmol/L (normal, 133 to 145 mmol/L), potassium was 6.0 mmol/L (normal, 3.7 to 5.3 mmol/L), total calcium was 3.37 mmol/L (normal, 2.25 to 2.80 mmol/L), creatinine was 404 μmol/L (normal, 0 to 85 μmol/L), and her platelet count was normal. On short adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation test, baseline plasma cortisol was 123 nmol/L and the peak was 129 nmol/L. She was treated with hydrocortisone, fludrocortisone, and 0.9% saline with resolution of symptoms and normalization of electrolytes, calcium, and renal function. Computed tomography showed bilateral adrenal masses. Core needle biopsy was consistent with necrosis. There were no bleeding disorders on hematologic work 3 months later. The most likely etiology of bilateral adrenal hemorrhage was heparin-induced thrombocytopenia from dalteparin.

Conclusion

This case highlights the importance of vigilance for the complication of bilateral adrenal hemorrhage with adrenal insufficiency in patients receiving dalteparin for DVT prophylaxis.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT): Review of incidence, diagnosis, and management

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a life and limb-threatening complication of heparin exposure. Here, we review the pathogenesis, incidence, diagnosis, and management of HIT. The first step in thwarting devastating complications from this entity is to maintain a high index of clinical suspicion, followed by an accurate clinical scoring assessment using the 4Ts. Next, appropriate stepwise laboratory testing must be undertaken in order to rule out HIT or establish the diagnosis. In the interim, all heparin must be stopped immediately, and the patient administered alternative anticoagulation. Here we review alternative anticoagulation choice, therapy alternatives in the difficult-to-manage patient with HIT, and the problem of overdiagnosis.

Cost-Effectiveness of Extended Thromboprophylaxis in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery from a Canadian Health Care System Perspective

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence to support extended thromboprophylaxis after colorectal surgery to minimize the incidence of postdischarge venous thromboembolic events. However, the absolute number of events is small, and extended thromboprophylaxis requires significant resources from the health care system.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of extended thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing colorectal surgery for malignancy or IBD.

DESIGN

An individualized patient microsimulation model (1,000,000 patients; 1-month cycle length) comparing extended thromboprophylaxis (28-day course of enoxaparin) to standard management (inpatient administration only) after colorectal surgery was constructed.

SETTINGS

The sources for this study were The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Participant User File and literature searches.

OUTCOMES

Costs (Canadian dollars), quality-adjusted life-years, and venous thromboembolism-related deaths prevented over a 1-year time horizon starting with hospital discharge were determined. The results were stratified by malignancy or IBD.

RESULTS

In patients with malignancy, extended prophylaxis was associated with higher costs (+113$; 95% CI, 102-123), but increased quality-adjusted life-years (+0.05; 95% CI, 0.04-0.06), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2473$/quality-adjusted life-year. For IBD, extended prophylaxis also had higher costs (+116$; 95% CI, 109-123), more quality-adjusted life-years (+0.05; 95% CI, 0.04-0.06), and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2475$/quality-adjusted life-year. Extended prophylaxis prevented 16 (95% CI, 4-27) venous thromboembolism-related deaths per 100,000 patients and 22 (95% CI, 6-38) for malignancy and IBD. There was a 99.7% probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 50,000$/quality-adjusted life-year. To account for statistical uncertainty around variables, sensitivity analysis was performed and found that extended prophylaxis is associated with lower overall costs when the incidence of postdischarge venous thromboembolic events reaches 1.8%.

LIMITATIONS

Significant differences in health care systems may affect the generalizability of our results.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the rarity of venous thromboembolic events, extended thromboprophylaxis is a cost-effective strategy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A976. COSTO-EFECTIVIDAD DE LA TROMBOPROFILAXIS EXTENDIDA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL DESDE UNA PERSPECTIVA DEL SISTEMA DE SALUD CANADIENSE:: Cada vez hay más pruebas que apoyen la tromboprofilaxis extendida después de la cirugía colorrectal para minimizar la incidencia de eventos tromboembólicos venosos después del alta hospitalaria. Sin embargo, el número absoluto de eventos es pequeño y la tromboprofilaxis extendida requiere recursos significativos del sistema médico.Determinar la rentabilidad (relación costo-efectividad) de la tromboprofilaxis extendida en pacientes sometidos a cirugía colorrectal por neoplasia maligna o enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.Un modelo de microsimulación de paciente individualizado (1,000,000 de pacientes; ciclo de 1 mes) que compara la tromboprofilaxis extendida (curso de enoxaparina de 28 días) con el tratamiento estándar (solo para pacientes hospitalizados) después de la cirugía colorrectal.Archivo de usuario participante del Proyecto de Mejoramiento de la Calidad Quirúrgica del Colegio Nacional de Cirujanos Americanos (ACS-NSQIP) y búsquedas bibliográficas.Costos (en dólares Canadienses), años de vida ajustados por la calidad y muertes relacionadas con el tromboembolismo venoso prevenidas en un horizonte temporal de 1 año a partir del alta hospitalaria. Los resultados fueron estratificados por malignidad o enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.En pacientes con neoplasias malignas, la profilaxis extendida se asoció con costos más altos (+113 $; IC del 95%, 102-123), pero con un aumento de la calidad de vida ajustada por años de vida (+0.05; IC del 95%, 0.04-0.06), lo que resultó en un incremento de relación costo-efectividad de 2473 $/año de vida ajustado por calidad. Para la enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, la profilaxis extendida también tuvo costos más altos (+116 $; 95% IC, 109-123), más años de vida ajustados por calidad (+0.05; 95% IC, 0.04-0.06) y una relación costo-efectividad incremental de 2475 $/año de vida ajustado por calidad. La profilaxis prolongada evitó 16 (95% IC, 4-27) muertes relacionadas con tromboembolismo venoso por cada 100,000 pacientes y 22 (95% IC, 6-38) por malignidad y enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, respectivamente. Hubo un 99.7% de probabilidad de costo-efectividad en un límite de disposición a pagar de 50,000 $/año de vida ajustado por calidad. Para tener en cuenta la incertidumbre estadística en torno a los variables, se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad y se encontró que la profilaxis extendida se asocia con menores costos generales cuando la incidencia de eventos tromboembólicos venosos después del alta hospitalaria alcanza 1.8%.Las diferencias significativas en los sistemas de salud pueden afectar la generalización de nuestros resultados.A pesar de la escasez de eventos tromboembólicos venosos, la tromboprofilaxis extendida es una estrategia rentable. Vea el video del resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A976.

Disease burden, complication rates, and health-care costs of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the USA: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia can be a life-threatening and limb-threatening complication of heparin therapy. Incidence and complication rates of this condition have been extrapolated from studies with modest sample sizes, and despite the availability of therapeutic interventions the outcomes of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia are not well understood. We aimed to estimate disease burden, complication rates, and costs of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the USA.

METHODS

In this population-based study we analysed data from 2009 to 2013 from the Nationwide (National) Inpatient Sample (NIS), a large, all-payer inpatient health-care database in the USA. To validate the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) code for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (289.84), we defined the sensitivity and specificity of this code using patient data from 2013 from a local hospital (Froedtert Memorial Lutheran Hospital, Milwaukee, WI, USA). The primary outcomes assessed were the incidence of hospital discharges with codes for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and of discharges for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia associated with cardiopulmonary bypass, haemodialysis, hip or knee arthroplasty, trauma or injury (or both), and gingival or periodontal disease (or both). We also assessed the incidence of thrombosis, bleeding, limb or digit amputation, mortality, length of hospital stay, and associated hospital charges.

FINDINGS

Between 2009 and 2013, 97 566 discharges from the NIS assigned the ICD-9-CM code for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and 149 911 247 discharges coded for non-heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, were analysed. Overall, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was identified in 97 566 (0·065%; SE 0·0012) of 150 008 813 discharges, corresponding to approximately one in 1500 hospital admissions. Patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass had the highest rates of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (7702 [0·63%; SE 0·03] of 1 230 362), followed by those undergoing haemodialysis (23 012 [0·47%; 0·01] of 4 908 100), those with gingival or periodontal disease, or both (106 [0·12%; 0·03] of 88 621), and those with trauma or injury, or both (541 [0·09%; 0·01] of 602 944); patients with hip (845 [0·04%; 0·004] of 1 943 353) and knee (676 [0·02%; 0·002] of 3 022 602) arthroplasty had the lowest rates of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Thrombosis (29 079 [29·8%; SE 0·4] of 97 566) and bleeding (6044 [6·2%; 0·2] of 97 566) were common complications in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and 1446 (23·9%; 1·2) of 6044 patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia who had haemorrhage died. 742 (0·76%; SE 0·06) of 97 566 patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia discharges underwent amputations compared with 173 043 (0·12%; 0·001) of 149 911 247 with non-heparin-induced thrombocytopenia discharges (adjusted odds ratio 5·095 [95% CI 4·309-6·023]; p<0·0001). Overall, in-hospital mortality was 9842 (10·1%; SE 0·2) of 97 508 in discharge summaries coded for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia compared with 3 206 700 (2·1%; 0·01) of 149 811 891 in discharges for non-heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (adjusted odds ratio 4·075 [95% CI 3·846-4·317]; p<0·0001). The median length of stay among live discharges was 8·9 days (IQR 4·6-17·1) and total hospital charges were US$83 072 (IQR 37 240-188 419) for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia discharges compared with 2·6 days (1·4-4·8) and $21 360 (11 426-41 917) for non-heparin-induced thrombocytopenia discharges (p<0·0001 for both). 333 discharges from a local hospital were analysed to assess the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the heparin-induced thrombocytopenia ICD-9-CM code; sensitivity was 90·9% (95% CI 57·1-99·5) and specificity was 94·4% (91·1-96·6).

INTERPRETATION

Complication rates for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia remain high and more effective preventive and treatment interventions are needed.

FUNDING

None.

Anticoagulation for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

The choice of the appropriate perioperative thromboprophylaxis for people with cancer depends on the relative benefits and harms of different anticoagulants.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence for the relative efficacy and safety of anticoagulants for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

This update of the systematic review was based on the findings of a comprehensive literature search conducted on 14 June 2018 that included a major electronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2018, Issue 6), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching of conference proceedings; checking of references of included studies; searching for ongoing studies; and using the 'related citation' feature in PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled people with cancer undergoing a surgical intervention and assessed the effects of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to unfractionated heparin (UFH) or to fondaparinux on mortality, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding outcomes, and thrombocytopenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardized form, we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, interventions outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality, PE, symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), asymptomatic DVT, major bleeding, minor bleeding, postphlebitic syndrome, health related quality of life, and thrombocytopenia. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach (GRADE Handbook).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 7670 identified unique citations, we included 20 RCTs with 9771 randomized people with cancer receiving preoperative prophylactic anticoagulation. We identified seven reports for seven new RCTs for this update.The meta-analyses did not conclusively rule out either a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared with UFH for the following outcomes: mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 1.07; risk difference (RD) 9 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 19 fewer to 4 more; moderate-certainty evidence), PE (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.47; RD 3 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 5 fewer to 3 more; moderate-certainty evidence), symptomatic DVT (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.69; RD 3 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 7 fewer to 7 more; moderate-certainty evidence), asymptomatic DVT (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.05; RD 11 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 23 fewer to 4 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.48; RD 0 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 10 fewer to 15 more; moderate-certainty evidence), minor bleeding (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.33; RD 1 more per 1000, 95% CI 34 fewer to 47 more; moderate-certainty evidence), reoperation for bleeding (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.50; RD 4 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 22 fewer to 26 more; moderate-certainty evidence), intraoperative transfusion (mean difference (MD) -35.36 mL, 95% CI -253.19 to 182.47; low-certainty evidence), postoperative transfusion (MD 190.03 mL, 95% CI -23.65 to 403.72; low-certainty evidence), and thrombocytopenia (RR 3.07, 95% CI 0.32 to 29.33; RD 6 more per 1000, 95% CI 2 fewer to 82 more; moderate-certainty evidence). LMWH was associated with lower incidence of wound hematoma (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.92; RD 26 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 39 fewer to 7 fewer; moderate-certainty evidence). The meta-analyses found the following additional results: outcomes intraoperative blood loss (MD -6.75 mL, 95% CI -85.49 to 71.99; moderate-certainty evidence); and postoperative drain volume (MD 30.18 mL, 95% CI -36.26 to 96.62; moderate-certainty evidence).In addition, the meta-analyses did not conclusively rule out either a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared with Fondaparinux for the following outcomes: any VTE (DVT or PE, or both; RR 2.51, 95% CI 0.89 to 7.03; RD 57 more per 1000, 95% CI 4 fewer to 228 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.23; RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 16 fewer to 7 more; low-certainty evidence), minor bleeding (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.05; RD 8fewer per 1000, 95% CI 33 fewer to 52 more; low-certainty evidence), thrombocytopenia (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.30; RD 14 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 20 fewer to 48 more; low-certainty evidence), any PE (RR 3.13, 95% CI 0.13 to 74.64; RD 2 more per 1000, 95% CI 1 fewer to 78 more; low-certainty evidence) and postoperative drain volume (MD -20.00 mL, 95% CI -114.34 to 74.34; low-certainty evidence) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference between perioperative thromboprophylaxis with LMWH versus UFH and LMWH compared with fondaparinux in their effects on mortality, thromboembolic outcomes, major bleeding, or minor bleeding in people with cancer. There was a lower incidence of wound hematoma with LMWH compared to UFH.

Comparison of antithrombotic efficacy between edoxaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor, and fondaparinux, an indirect factor Xa inhibitor under low and high shear rates

Edoxaban is an oral, direct factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor under late-phase clinical development. This study compared the antithrombotic efficacy of edoxaban with that of an indirect FXa inhibitor, fondaparinux, in in vivo venous and arterial thrombosis models and in ex vivo perfusion chamber thrombosis model under low and high shear rates in rats. Venous and arterial thrombi were induced by platinum wire insertion into the inferior vena cava and by application of FeCl3 to the carotid artery, respectively. The perfusion chamber thrombus was formed by blood perfusion into a collagen-coated capillary at 150 s-1 (low shear rate) and 1,600 s-1 (high shear rate). Effective doses of edoxaban that reduced thrombus formation by 50% (ED50) in venous and arterial thrombosis models were 0.076 and 0.093 mg/kg/h, respectively. In contrast, ED50 of fondaparinux in the arterial thrombosis model (>10 mg/kg/h) was markedly higher compared to ED50 in the venous thrombosis model (0.021 mg/kg/h). In the perfusion chamber thrombosis model, the ratio of ED50 under high shear rate (1.13 mg/kg/h) to that under low shear rate (0.63 mg/kg/h) for edoxaban was 1.9, whereas that for fondaparinux was more than 66. While the efficacy of fondaparinux markedly decreased in arterial thrombosis and in a high-shear state, edoxaban exerted consistent antithrombotic effects regardless of flow conditions. These results suggest that shear rate is a key factor in different antithrombotic effects between edoxaban and fondaparinux.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Blood. 2017;129:2864-2872. [PMID: 28416511 DOI: 10.1182/blood-2016-11-709873]

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune complication of heparin therapy caused by antibodies to complexes of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. Pathogenic antibodies to PF4/heparin bind and activate cellular FcγRIIA on platelets and monocytes to propagate a hypercoagulable state culminating in life-threatening thrombosis. It is now recognized that anti-PF4/heparin antibodies develop commonly after heparin exposure, but only a subset of sensitized patients progress to life-threatening complications of thrombocytopenia and thrombosis. Recent scientific developments have clarified mechanisms underlying PF4/heparin immunogenicity, disease susceptibility, and clinical manifestations of disease. Insights from clinical and laboratory findings have also been recently harnessed for disease prevention. This review will summarize our current understanding of HIT by reviewing pathogenesis, essential clinical and laboratory features, and management.

Comparison of LMWH versus UFH for hemorrhage and hospital mortality in the treatment of acute massive pulmonary thromboembolism after thrombolytic treatment : randomized controlled parallel group study

PURPOSE

Current guidelines recommend the use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for most haemodynamically stable patients with pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE), however, it is not clear whether LMWH is preferable to unfractionated heparin (UFH) for the treatment of massive PTE. We aimed to compare the use of LMWH versus UFH after thrombolytic treatment in the management of acute massive PTE for hemorrhage and hospital mortality.

METHODS

The study, a randomized, single center, parallel design trial, included the patients who had confirmed the diagnosis of massive PTE according to clinical findings and computerized thorax angiography and no contraindication to the treatment between January 2011 and October 2013. After thrombolytic treatment, the patients assigned to therapy with LMWH or UFH. Any hemorrhage, major hemorrhage, and hospital mortality were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 121 patients, 71 female (58.7 %) and 50 male (41.3 %), who had massive PTE with an average age 62.6 ± 15.7 (ranges 22-87) were included for analyses in the study. They were allocated to either LMWH (n = 60) or UFH (n = 61) group. Although the occurrence of any adverse event (21.7 vs 27.9 %) and each individual type of adverse event were all lower in the LMWH group compared to UFH group (6.7 vs 11.5 %, 3.3 vs 9.8 %, and 15.0 vs 19.7 % for death, major hemorrhage, and any hemorrhage, respectively), the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that LMWH might be a better option in the management of the patients with massive PTE. Multi-center larger randomized controlled trials are required to confirm our results.

Model-based exposure-response analysis of apixaban to quantify bleeding risk in special populations of subjects undergoing orthopedic surgery

Population pharmacokinetic (PK) and exposure-response analyses of apixaban were performed using data from phase I-III studies to predict bleeding risks for patients receiving apixaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. after total knee or hip replacement (TKR, THR) surgery (N = 5,510). Renal function, age, gender, and body weight impacted apixaban exposure. Bleeding risk increased as a function of exposure. Predicted bleeding frequencies for TKR and THR populations at risk for high apixaban exposure (female, age > 75 years, calculated creatinine clearance (cCrCL) < 30 ml/min, body weight < 50 kg) (6.85 and 10.3%, respectively) were comparable to the reference population (male/female, age 65-75 years, cCrCL ≥ 80 ml/min, body weight 65-85 kg) (6.18 and 9.32%, respectively). A 100% increase in apixaban exposure is expected to raise bleeding frequencies to 7.25% (TKR) and 10.9% (THR), whereas a 200% increase would raise them to 8.49 and 12.7%. Coexistence of combined patient risk factors or doubling of exposure is not likely to result in a substantial, clinically relevant increase in bleeding risk with 2.5 mg b.i.d. apixaban.

Low molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

The choice of the appropriate perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer depends on the relative benefits and harms of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and unfractionated heparin (UFH).

OBJECTIVES

To update a systematic review of the evidence for the relative efficacy and safety of LMWH and UFH for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search for trials of anticoagulation in patients with cancer including a February 2013 electronic search of: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE. We also handsearched conference proceedings, reviewed reference list of included studies, used the 'related citations' feature in PubMed, and searched clinicaltrials.gov for ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled patients with cancer undergoing a surgical intervention and compared the effects of LMWH to UFH on mortality, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding outcomes, or thrombocytopenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently used a standardized form to extract in duplicate data on participants, interventions, outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Where possible, we conducted meta-analyses using the random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 9559 identified unique citations, we included 16 RCTs with 12,890 patients with cancer, all using preoperative prophylactic anticoagulation. We identified no new study with this update. The overall quality of evidence was moderate. The meta-analyses did not conclusively rule out either a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared with UFH for the following outcomes: mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.08), PE (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.34 to 1.54), symptomatic DVT (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.28), asymptomatic DVT (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.01),major bleeding (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.37), and minor bleeding (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.79). LMWH was associated with lower incidence of wound hematoma (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.88) but higher volume of intraoperative transfusion (mean difference (MD) 74 mL; 95% CI 47 to 102). The meta-analyses found no statistically significant differences for any of the following outcomes: reoperation for bleeding (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.06 to 8.48) , intraoperative blood loss (MD= -6mL; 95% CI -87 to 74), postoperative transfusion (MD= 79mL; 95% CI -54 to 211), postoperative drain volume (MD= 27mL; 95% CI -44 to 98), and thrombocytopenia (RR 1.33; 95% CI 0.59 to 3.00).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no difference between perioperative thromboprophylaxis with LMWH versus UFH in their effects on mortality, thromboembolic outcomes, major bleeding, or minor bleeding in patients with cancer. Further trials are needed to evaluate the benefits and harms of different heparin thromboprophylaxis strategies in this population more thoroughly.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the setting of perioperative bridging for podiatric surgery: a case report

Heparin is an anticoagulant commonly used to treat and prevent deep venous thrombosis. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and possible thrombosis are serious complications associated with its use. This can occasionally complicate treatment of patients undergoing podiatric surgery. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is often not immediately recognized and is underreported in podiatric medicine literature. The goal of this case report is to highlight the multiple risk factors associated with the development of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and to aid with early recognition, understanding of pathogenesis, and treatment options.

Correlation of ELISA Optical Density With Clinical Diagnosis of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Background:

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for antiplatelet factor 4 (anti-PF4)/heparin antibodies is expressed in terms of optical density (OD). Previous studies have shown correlation between OD and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) diagnosis. However, these were mainly laboratory based.

Objective:

Retrospective correlation of clinical HIT to ELISA OD.

Patients/Methods:

We conducted a retrospective study involving 104 patients with a positive ELISA for anti-PF4/heparin antibodies between 2008 and May 2012. For each patient, a clinical diagnosis was adjudicated based on different features including “4T scores,” laboratory results, and a 3-month clinical follow-up.

Results:

In this study, 28.8% of the patients were HIT positive, and 71.2% HIT negative. Patients with positive diagnosis had significantly higher mean OD (2.15 ± 0.76 vs 0.83 ± 0.62). Patients with OD <1.0 only had 3.4% positive diagnosis versus 45.5% for OD 1.0 to 2.0 and 78% for >2.0 units.

Conclusion:

This study is a clinical confirmation that ELISA OD results are correlated with the probability of a clinical diagnosis of HIT.

Analysis of disease patterns and cost of treatments for prevention of deep venous thrombosis after total knee or hip replacement: results from the Practice Analysis of THromboprophylaxis after Orthopaedic Surgery (PATHOS) study

Introduction

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a well-known complication of total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR). Various drugs have been introduced in an attempt to reduce the mortality as well as the short-term and long-term morbidity associated with the development of VTE. The aim of this study was to analyze drug utilization for thromboprophylaxis and the cost of illness in real clinical practice in patients with THR or TKR.

Materials and methods

A multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study based on local health unit administrative databases was conducted. All patients (≥18 years old) discharged for THR/TKR procedures between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2008 were included in the study. The date of first hospital discharge was the index date; patients were followed up for a period of 12 months.

Results

A total of 10,389 patients were included: 3516 males (33.8%, 69.4 ± 10.4 years) and 6873 females (66.2%, 71.7 ± 9.0 years), of which 5483 (52.8%) were discharged for THR and 4906 (47.2%) for TKR. First antithrombotic treatments after discharge were enoxaparin (3937, 37.9%), heparin (3752, 36.1%), antiplatelet agents (658, 6.3%), vitamin K antagonists (276, 2.7%), fondaparinux (136, 1.3%), combinations (185, 1.8%), and no therapy (1445, 13.9%). Overall, we observed 2347 (22.6%) treatment changes; median duration of antithrombotic treatment was 23 days (range 11–47) for THR and 22 days (range 11–46) for TKR. During the follow-up period, we observed 129 cases of VTE (120 per 10,000 patients), five post-thrombotic syndrome (4.8 per 10,000 patients), and three heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (2.9 per 10,000 patients). Median cost for both THR and TKR was €9052.00 (range €8063.00–€9084.96), with a median length of stay of 9.0 days (range 6.0–12.0).

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

The performance of adverse effects search filters in MEDLINE and EMBASE

BACKGROUND

 Search filters can potentially improve the efficiency of searches involving electronic databases such as medline and embase. Although search filters have been developed for identifying records that contain adverse effects data, little is known about the sensitivity of such filters.

OBJECTIVES

 This study measured the sensitivity of using available adverse effects filters to retrieve papers with adverse effects data.

METHODS

  A total of 233 included studies from 26 systematic reviews of adverse effects were used for analysis. Search filters from medline and embase were tested for their sensitivity in retrieving the records included in these reviews. In addition, the sensitivity of each individual search term used in at least one search filter was measured.

RESULTS

 Subheadings proved the most useful search terms in both medline and embase. No indexing terms in medline achieved over 12% sensitivity. The sensitivity of published search filters varied in medline from 3% to 93% and in embase from 57% to 97%. Whether this level of sensitivity is acceptable will be dependent on the purpose of the search.

CONCLUSIONS

 Although no adverse effects search filter captured all the relevant records, high sensitivity could be achieved. Search filters may therefore be useful in retrieving adverse effects data.

Prevention of VTE in nonsurgical patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

This guideline addressed VTE prevention in hospitalized medical patients, outpatients with cancer, the chronically immobilized, long-distance travelers, and those with asymptomatic thrombophilia.

METHODS

This guideline follows methods described in Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines in this supplement.

RESULTS

For acutely ill hospitalized medical patients at increased risk of thrombosis, we recommend anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), low-dose unfractionated heparin (LDUH) bid, LDUH tid, or fondaparinux (Grade 1B) and suggest against extending the duration of thromboprophylaxis beyond the period of patient immobilization or acute hospital stay (Grade 2B). For acutely ill hospitalized medical patients at low risk of thrombosis, we recommend against the use of pharmacologic prophylaxis or mechanical prophylaxis (Grade 1B). For acutely ill hospitalized medical patients at increased risk of thrombosis who are bleeding or are at high risk for major bleeding, we suggest mechanical thromboprophylaxis with graduated compression stockings (GCS) (Grade 2C) or intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) (Grade 2C). For critically ill patients, we suggest using LMWH or LDUH thromboprophylaxis (Grade 2C). For critically ill patients who are bleeding or are at high risk for major bleeding, we suggest mechanical thromboprophylaxis with GCS and/or IPC at least until the bleeding risk decreases (Grade 2C). In outpatients with cancer who have no additional risk factors for VTE we suggest against routine prophylaxis with LMWH or LDUH (Grade 2B) and recommend against the prophylactic use of vitamin K antagonists (Grade 1B).

CONCLUSIONS

Decisions regarding prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients should be made after consideration of risk factors for both thrombosis and bleeding, clinical context, and patients' values and preferences.

Low molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

The choice of the appropriate perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer depends on the relative benefits and harms of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and unfractionated heparin (UFH).

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence for the relative efficacy and safety of LMWH and UFH for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search for trials of anticoagulation in cancer patients including a February 2010 electronic search of: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI Web of Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled cancer patients undergoing a surgical intervention and compared the effects of LMWH to UFH on mortality, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding outcomes, and thrombocytopenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors used a standardized form to independently extract in duplicate data on risk of bias, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest. Where possible, we conducted meta-analyses using the random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 8187 identified citations, we included 16 RCTs with 11,847 patients in the meta-analyses, all using preoperative prophylactic anticoagulation. The overall quality of evidence was moderate. The meta-analysis did not conclusively rule out either a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared to UFH for the following outcomes: mortality (RR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.10), symptomatic DVT (RR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.23 to 2.28), PE (RR = 0.59; 95% CI 0.25 to1.41), minor bleeding (RR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.66) and major bleeding (RR = 0.84; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.36). LMWH was associated with lower incidence of wound hematoma (RR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.43, 0.84) while UFH was associated with higher incidence of intra-operative transfusion (RR = 1.16; 95% CI 0.69,1.62).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no difference between perioperative thromboprophylaxis with LMWH verus UFH in their effects on mortality and embolic outcomes in patients with cancer. Further trials are needed to more carefully evaluate the benefits and harms of different heparin thromboprophylaxis strategies in this population.

Heparin-associated thrombocytopenia in 24,401 patients with venous thromboembolism: findings from the RIETE Registry

BACKGROUND

Whether the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) with unfractionated heparin (UFH) confers a higher risk of thrombocytopenia than does treatment with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) remains controversial, and very few data are available from routine clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the incidence, risk factors and prognosis of heparin-associated thrombocytopenia (HAT) according to the type of heparin therapy, UFH or LMWH.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Data were obtained from the international prospective Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbolica venosa (RIETE), which included 25,369 patients with confirmed VTE until February 2009. Among them, 24,401 patients were treated either with UFH or with LMWH, and had available information about the 6-month occurrence of confirmed thrombocytopenia, defined as a platelet count ≤ 150,000 mm(-3) .

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-one patients receiving UFH and/or LMWH developed thrombocytopenia within a 6-month period. The incidence of HAT was significantly higher in the UFH group (1.36%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-2.17) than in the LMWH group (0.54%, 95% CI 0.44-0.64). As compared with LMWH, UFH significantly increased the risk of HAT in female patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 4.90%, 95% CI 2.58-9.31, P = 0.001) but not in male patients (adjusted HR 1.60%, 95% CI 0.64-3.97, P = 0.31); P = 0.027 for comparison. In each gender, the UFH-associated excess risk was confined to patients with VTE unrelated to cancer. The poor prognosis of patients with thrombocytopenia was not influenced by the type of heparin therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In routine clinical practice, treatment of VTE with UFH seems to confer a higher risk of thrombocytopenia than does treatment with LMWH, especially in women and non-cancerous patients.

Management of anticoagulation therapy in the perioperative patient

With the increasing use of oral anticoagulation therapy the appropriate management of perioperative anticoagulation is of surgical importance. There is a delicate balance between the risk of a perioperative thromboembolic event and the risk of operative bleeding from anticoagulation. Whilst there are a range of options available to the clinician, there appears to be no precise agreement about how to best manage this problem.

Risk of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients receiving thromboprophylaxis

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a clinicopathological syndrome associated with heparin therapy that is characterized by a decrease in platelet counts and/or the development of a new thrombosis. Two types of HIT exist, type I is nonimmune and self-resolves, whereas type II is immune-mediated and clinically important. The formation of antibodies against the platelet factor 4-heparin complexes results in platelet activation and thrombin formation, which lead to an increased risk of thrombosis. Unfractionated heparin is associated with a higher risk of HIT than low-molecular-weight heparins. Surgical patients, particularly those undergoing orthopedic or cardiac surgery, are at higher risk of HIT than medical patients. Treatment of HIT involves heparin cessation together with anticoagulation with direct thrombin inhibitors or indirect factor Xa inhibitors.

New synthetic antithrombotic agents for venous thromboembolism: pentasaccharides, direct thrombin inhibitors, direct Xa inhibitors

Heparin and low molecular weight heparins have limitations in their efficacy and safety for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). New synthetic antithrombotic drugs, designed with the intention of improving the therapeutic window for prophylaxis and treatment, are in various stages of development. Synthetic pentasaccharides include fondaparinux and its long-acting analogue idraparinux. Dabigatran is a direct thrombin inhibitor that has undergone clinical trials for VTE prophylaxis and treatment. Direct factor Xa inhibitors include rivaroxiban, which has shown promising results for VTE prophylaxis and is being studied for VTE treatment, as well as apixaban and betrixaban, which are at earlier stages of clinical validation. These newer agents may represent viable options for prophylaxis and therapy as further clinical studies are performed.

Incidence of thrombocytopenia in hospitalized patients with venous thromboembolism

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULT

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

CONCLUSION

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

How I treat the antiphospholipid syndrome

This article discusses how we approach medical decision making in the treatment of the various facets of the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), including secondary prophylaxis in the setting of venous and arterial thrombosis, as well as treatment for the prevention of recurrent miscarriages and fetal death. The role of primary thromboprophylaxis is also discussed in depth. Great emphasis is given to incorporating the most up-to-date and relevant evidence base both from the APS literature, and from large, recent, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of primary and secondary thrombotic prophylaxis in the general population setting (ie, the population that has not been specifically investigated for APS).

[Update in pulmonary thromboembolic disease]

Pulmonary embolism is part of venous thromboembolism, an important health problem which leads to significant mortality and morbidity with high economic and social burden. A prompt diagnosis and treatment as well as an appropriate prophylaxis are determinant factors in prognosis. This disease continues to demand particular attention namely in the investigation of risk factors, clinical probability algorithms development, diagnostic work-up evaluation, characterization of new therapeutic strategies and thromboprophylaxis recommendations. The present review looks into the current scientific knowledge regarding pulmonary embolism.

Economic and practical aspects of thromboprophylaxis with unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins in hospitalized medical patients

Acutely ill medical patients are at significant risk of developing venous thromboembolic (VTE) complications during or after their hospitalization. Venous thromboembolic events, such as proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), place a high and unacceptable burden on health care resources, up to US$1.5 billion annually in the United States. However, the burden of VTE can be reduced by use of appropriate thromboprophylaxis. Prophylaxis of VTE with either a low-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH) or a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in medical inpatients is effective, well tolerated and cost-effective, compared with no prophylaxis. Low-molecular-weight heparins have a number of practical benefits over UFH, including once-daily subcutaneous injection and the potential to be used in the outpatient setting. These clinical advantages could translate to improved patient adherence to therapy and provide economic benefits, where LMWHs are more cost-effective compared with UFH.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: when a low platelet count is a mandate for anticoagulation

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune-mediated disorder caused by the development of antibodies to platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. The thrombocytopenia is typically moderate, with a median platelet count nadir of ~50 to 60 × 109 platelets/L. Severe thrombocytopenia has been described in patients with HIT, and in these patients antibody levels are high and severe clinical outcomes have been reported (eg, disseminated intravascular coagulation with microvascular thrombosis). The timing of the thrombocytopenia in relation to the initiation of heparin therapy is critically important, with the platelet count beginning to drop within 5 to 10 days of starting heparin. A more rapid drop in the platelet count can occur in patients who have been recently exposed to heparin (within the preceding 3 months), due to preformed anti-heparin/PF4 antibodies. A delayed form of HIT has also been described that develops within days or weeks after the heparin has been discontinued. In contrast to other drug-induced thrombocytopenias, HIT is characterized by an increased risk for thromboembolic complications, primarily venous thromboembolism. Heparin and all heparin-containing products should be discontinued and an alternative, non-heparin anticoagulant initiated. Alternative agents that have been used effectively in patients with HIT include lepirudin, argatroban, bivalirudin, and danaparoid, although the last agent is not available in North America. Fondaparinux has been used in a small number of patients with HIT and generally appears to be safe. Warfarin therapy should not be initiated until the platelet count has recovered and the patient is systemically anticoagulated, and vitamin K should be administered to patients receiving warfarin at the time of diagnosis of HIT.

Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

Non-thrombotic PE does not represent a distinct clinical syndrome. It may be due to a variety of embolic materials and result in a wide spectrum of clinical presentations, making the diagnosis difficult. With the exception of severe air and fat embolism, the haemodynamic consequences of non-thrombotic emboli are usually mild. Treatment is mostly supportive but may differ according to the type of embolic material and clinical severity.

Treatment and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition)

This chapter about the recognition, treatment, and prevention of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is part of the Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do, or do not, outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patient values may lead to different choices. Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following: For patients receiving heparin in whom the clinician considers the risk of HIT to be > 1.0%, we recommend platelet count monitoring over no platelet count monitoring (Grade 1C). For patients who are receiving heparin or have received heparin within the previous 2 weeks, we recommend investigating for a diagnosis of HIT if the platelet count falls by >/= 50%, and/or a thrombotic event occurs, between days 5 and 14 (inclusive) following initiation of heparin, even if the patient is no longer receiving heparin therapy when thrombosis or thrombocytopenia has occurred (Grade 1C). For patients with strongly suspected (or confirmed) HIT, whether or not complicated by thrombosis, we recommend use of an alternative, nonheparin anticoagulant (danaparoid [Grade 1B], lepirudin [Grade 1C], argatroban [Grade 1C], fondaparinux [Grade 2C], or bivalirudin [Grade 2C]) over the further use of unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) therapy or initiation/continuation of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) [Grade 1B]. The guidelines include specific recommendations for nonheparin anticoagulant dosing that differ from the package inserts. For patients with strongly suspected or confirmed HIT, we recommend against the use of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) [coumarin] therapy until after the platelet count has substantially recovered (usually, to at least 150 x 10(9)/L) over starting VKA therapy at a lower platelet count (Grade 1B); that VKA therapy be started only with low maintenance doses (maximum, 5 mg of warfarin or 6 mg of phenprocoumon) over higher initial doses (Grade 1B); and that the nonheparin anticoagulant (eg, lepirudin, argatroban, danaparoid) be continued until the platelet count has reached a stable plateau, the international normalized ratio (INR) has reached the intended target range, and after a minimum overlap of at least 5 days between nonheparin anticoagulation and VKA therapy rather than a shorter overlap (Grade 1B). For patients receiving VKAs at the time of diagnosis of HIT, we recommend use of vitamin K (10 mg po or 5 to 10 mg IV) [Grade 1C].

Review of the Relationship Between Venous Thromboembolism, Malignancy and Its Treatment

Venous thromboembolism is a common complication that develops in approximately 20% of patients with cancer. Presence of tumor and other risk factors, such as inflammation, surgery, obesity, and medications, have the potential to alter the intravascular coagulation homeostasis and lead to thrombosis. Although malignancy may predispose patients to venous thromboembolism, many chemotherapy agents also increase the risk. In this article, some of the agents tamoxifen, asparaginase, fluorouracil, thalidomide, lenalidomide, bevacizumab, and hematopoietic growth factors are discussed. Many patients will experience a thrombotic event despite optimal prophylaxis. Thus, this article will address the guidelines for treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism. In general, the venous thromboembolism risk should be assessed before certain antineoplastic regimens are prescribed to patients with cancer.

A descriptive evaluation of unfractionated heparin use during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

The mainstay of oral anticoagulant therapy, warfarin sodium, crosses the placenta during pregnancy and may cause fetal complications. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) do not cross the placenta and have demonstrated utility in the prevention and treatment of thrombosis during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to review treatment strategy, indication, and maternal and fetal outcomes in anticoagulated pregnancies at Kaiser Permanente Colorado.

PATIENTS/METHODS

We identified 103 pregnancies in 93 mothers prescribed an anticoagulant during a pregnancy occurring between January 1, 1998 and March 31, 2005.

RESULTS

The majority of patients were treated with UFH (89.3%). Indications for anticoagulation included venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (53.4%), history of pregnancy loss (29.1%), acute VTE (16.5%), and history of cerebral vascular accident (CVA) (1.0%). There were no maternal deaths. Fetal demise occurred in 8 pregnancies (7.8%) at a median 14 weeks gestation (range 7-22 weeks). No fetal demise occurred in pregnancies treated for acute VTE or history of CVA. There were two occurrences of pulmonary embolism (1.9%) and two hemorrhagic events requiring transfusion (1.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Maternal and fetal adverse events were infrequent in our population of anticoagulated pregnancies. UFH remains a viable option among more expensive LMWH products.