What We Know (and Do not Know) Regarding the Pathogenesis of Pulmonary Thrombosis in COVID-19.

The clinical course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is often complicated by the onset of venous thrombosis and thromboembolism (VTE), encompassing also pulmonary thrombosis. Recent statistics attests that the cumulative frequency of VTE can be as high as 30% in COVID-19 hospitalized patients, increasing to nearly 40 to 70% (depending on systematic screening) in those with severe illness, mechanical ventilation, or intensive care unit admission. The risk of venous thrombosis seems mostly limited to the active phase of disease, and is directly associated with some genetic (i.e., inherited prothrombotic predisposition) and demographical factors (male sex, overweight/obesity), disease severity (risk increasing progressively from hospitalization to development of severe illness, being the highest in patients needing mechanical ventilation and/or intensive care), presence and extent of pulmonary disease, coexistence of multiple risk factors (immobilization, mechanical ventilation, co- or superinfections), along with increased values of inflammatory and thrombotic biomarkers. At least three different phenotypes of pulmonary thrombosis may develop in COVID-19 patients, one caused by typical embolization from peripheral venous thrombosis (e.g., deep vein thrombosis), a second type triggered by local inflammation of nearby pulmonary tissue, and a third one mostly attributable to the prothrombotic state consequent to the pronounced systemic inflammatory response (i.e., the so-called cytokine storm) that is frequently observed in COVID-19. Although the pathogenesis of these three conditions has different features, their discrimination is essential for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The prognosis of COVID-19 patients who develop pulmonary thrombosis is also considerably worse than those who do not, thus probably needing frequent monitoring and more aggressive therapeutic management.

D-dimer: old dogmas, new (COVID-19) tricks.

D-dimer is a fibrin degradation product encompassing multiple cross-linked D domains and/or E domains present in the original fibrinogen molecule, whose generation is only theoretically possible when hemostasis and fibrinolysis pathways are concomitantly activated. D-dimer measurement has now become a pillar in the diagnosis/exclusion and prognostication of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), when incorporated into validated clinical algorithms and especially using age-adjusted diagnostic thresholds. Although emerging evidence is also supporting its use for predicting the duration of anticoagulant therapy in certain categories of patients, the spectrum of clinical applications is constantly expanding beyond traditional thrombotic pathologies to the diagnosis of acute aortic dissection, acute intestinal ischemia and cerebral venous thrombosis among others, embracing also clinical management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Recent findings attest that D-dimer elevations are commonplace in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) infection (especially in those with thrombosis), its value predicts the clinical severity (up to death) of COVID-19 and remains more frequently increased in COVID-19 patients with post-discharge clinical sequelae. Further, D-dimer-based anticoagulant escalation may be associated with a lower risk of death in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and, finally, D-dimer elevation post-COVID-19 vaccination mirrors an increased risk of developing vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT).

Review and evolution of guidelines for diagnosis of COVID-19 vaccine induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT).

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a life-threatening infectious disease caused by Severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). In response to the still ongoing pandemic outbreak, a number of COVID-19 vaccines have been quickly developed and deployed. Although minor adverse events, either local (e.g., soreness, itch, redness) or systematic (fever, malaise, headache, etc.), are not uncommon following any COVID-19 vaccination, one rare vaccine-associated event can cause fatal consequences due to development of antibodies against platelet factor 4 (PF4), which trigger platelet activation, aggregation, and possible resultant thrombosis, often at unusual vascular sites. Termed thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) by reporting government agencies, the term vaccine-induced (immune) thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is more widely adopted by workers in the field. In response to increasing reports of VITT, several expert groups have formulated guidelines for diagnosis and/or management of VITT. Herein, we review some key guidelines related to diagnosis of VITT, and also provide some commentary on their development and evolution.

Monitoring Therapy during Treatment of von Willebrand Disease.

von Willebrand factor (VWF) is an adhesive plasma protein that primarily acts to bridge platelets to sites of vascular injury and thus prevent bleeding. von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder and is caused by deficiency and/or defects of VWF, leading to low levels of plasma VWF or dysfunctional VWF. Factor VIII (FVIII) is also reduced in many patients with VWD, since VWF stabilizes and protects FVIII from degradation. Treatment of VWD primarily entails replacement of VWF, and sometimes FVIII, to protect against bleeding. This may entail use of VWF/FVIII concentrates, and/or desmopressin (1-deamino-8-d-arginine vasopressin) to release endogenous VWF in some patients. Adjunct therapies include antifibrinolytics and hormonal therapies in women. Optimal treatment of VWD entails measuring the effects of treatment, either as a trial before surgery or during therapeutic management. This is usually accomplished by performance of the same tests that are used to help diagnose VWD, although additional monitoring (clinically and/or by laboratory testing) may also be performed. The current review provides an overview of the treatment of VWD but is primarily focused on the monitoring of such therapy.

Laboratory testing in the era of direct or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants: a practical guide to measuring their activity and avoiding diagnostic errors.

A new generation of antithrombotic agents has recently emerged. These provide direct inhibition of either thrombin (factor IIa [FIIa]) or FXa, and are increasingly replacing the classical anticoagulants (heparin and coumarins such as warfarin) in clinical practice for a variety of conditions. These agents have been designated several acronyms, including NOACs, DOACs, and TSOACs, respectively, referring to new (novel; non-vitamin K antagonist) oral anticoagulants, direct oral anticoagulants, and target-specific oral anticoagulants, and currently include dabigatran (FIIa inhibitor), and rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and betrixaban (FXa inhibitors). The pervading mantra that NOACs do not require laboratory monitoring is countered by ongoing recognition that laboratory testing for drug effects is needed in many situations. Moreover, since these agents "do not require" laboratory monitoring, some clinicians inappropriately take this to mean that they do not affect hemostasis tests. This review aims to briefly review the laboratory studies that have evaluated the NOACs against a wide range of laboratory assays to assess utility for qualitative or quantitative measurements of these drugs, as well as interferences that may cause misdiagnosis of hemostatic defects. Point of care testing, including use of alternate samples such as urine and serum, is also under development but is not covered extensively in this review. The main aims of this article are to provide practical guidance to general laboratory testing for NOACs, as well as to help avoid diagnostic errors associated with hemostasis testing performed on samples from treated patients, as these currently comprise major challenges to hemostasis laboratories in the era of the NOACs.

Unfractionated heparin: optimizing laboratory monitoring and reducing unwanted interference in everyday hemostasis test practice.

Unfractionated heparin (UFH) serves as a commonly used anticoagulant. It is widely utilized for a variety of reasons, including to 1) anticoagulate patients and help treat and / or prevent thrombosis, 2) maintain patency in artificial blood flow circuits, and 3) anticoagulate blood samples collected for laboratory testing (typically for biochemical assays or blood gas analysis). As such, the presence of UFH is nearly ubiquitous in a hospital setting. Therefore, in laboratory practice, UFH may be present in samples intended for monitoring patients on UFH therapy or intended for biochemical tests, or it may interfere with other (hemostasis) laboratory tests. The aim of this manuscript is to review the role of UFH from the perspective of optimizing laboratory testing to monitor UFH therapy and to avoid or overcome unwanted interference with other laboratory tests.

Moderate red wine consumption and cardiovascular disease risk: beyond the "French paradox".

The term FRENCH PARADOX was coined in 1992 to describe the relatively low incidence of cardiovascular disease in the French population, despite a relatively high dietary intake of saturated fats, and potentially attributable to the consumption of red wine. After nearly 20 years, several studies have investigated the fascinating, overwhelmingly positive biological and clinical associations of red wine consumption with cardiovascular disease and mortality. Light to moderate intake of red wine produces a kaleidoscope of potentially beneficial effects that target all phases of the atherosclerotic process, from atherogenesis (early plaque development and growth) to vessel occlusion (flow-mediated dilatation, thrombosis). Such beneficial effects involve cellular signaling mechanisms, interactions at the genomic level, and biochemical modifications of cellular and plasma components. Red wine components, especially alcohol, resveratrol, and other polyphenolic compounds, may decrease oxidative stress, enhance cholesterol efflux from vessel walls (mainly by increasing levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol), and inhibit lipoproteins oxidation, macrophage cholesterol accumulation, and foam-cell formation. These components may also increase nitric oxide bioavailability, thereby antagonizing the development of endothelial dysfunction, decrease blood viscosity, improve insulin sensitivity, counteract platelet hyperactivity, inhibit platelet adhesion to fibrinogen-coated surfaces, and decrease plasma levels of von Willebrand factor, fibrinogen, and coagulation factor VII. Light to moderate red wine consumption is also associated with a favorable genetic modulation of fibrinolytic proteins, ultimately increasing the surface-localized endothelial cell fibrinolysis. Overall, therefore, the "French paradox" may have its basis within a milieu containing several key molecules, so that favorable cardiovascular benefits might be primarily attributable to combined, additive, or perhaps synergistic effects of alcohol and other wine components on atherogenesis, coagulation, and fibrinolysis. Conversely, chronic heavy alcohol consumption and binge drinking are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events. In conclusion, although mounting evidence strongly supports beneficial cardiovascular effects of moderate red wine consumption (one to two drinks per day; 10-30 g alcohol) in most populations, clinical advice to abstainers to initiate daily alcohol consumption has not yet been substantiated in the literature and must be considered with caution on an individual basis.

Laboratory testing in pharmacies.

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is traditionally defined as laboratory diagnostics performed at or near the site where clinical care is delivered. POCT thereby combines sample collection, analysis, and reporting of results into a robust integrated testing structure, with a simple user interface. The availability of reliable devices and consolidated tests for patient screening, diagnosis and monitoring has allowed broad diffusion of POCT to the patient's bedside, physician offices, pharmacies, other healthcare facilities, supermarkets, and even into the patient's home. However, current evidence clearly shows that POCT can be subjective, and might even amplify the traditional problems encountered in the preanalytical, analytical and postanalytical phases of the total testing process. This may especially be seen in inappropriateness of the test request, collection of unsuitable biological materials, inaccurate test performances, larger analytical imprecision, unsuitable report formatting, delayed reporting of critical value, and report recording/retrieval. POCT patient care service in the pharmacy can be regarded as a valuable option for the present and future since it might be beneficial for all parties. However, several economic, clinical and regulatory issues should also be addressed before this opportunity can turn into a real advantage for patients and the entire healthcare system. The most appropriate allocation of POCT within the diagnostic pathway, as well as its adjuvant role in screening, diagnosis and monitoring of diseases should also be clearly established in order to prevent widespread and deregulated implementation.

Periodontitis, coronary heart disease and myocardial infarction: treat one, benefit all.

: Periodontal disease is conventionally defined as an inflammatory condition affecting the tissues surrounding and supporting the teeth (i.e. gum and periodontium). Recent statistics show that the prevalence of this condition is continuously growing worldwide, thus raising severe healthcare concerns, not only for local problems emerging from poor oral health, but also for the potential risk of developing systemic complications. Therefore, this article aims to provide an update on the intriguing association between periodontitis, coronary heart disease (CHD) and/or myocardial infarction (MI). Taken together, the available published information seems to support the existence of a significant association between periodontitis and CHD, whilst the risk of acute ischemic cardiac events appears magnified in patients with preexisting coronary artery disease. This epidemiological link is supported by reliable biological evidence, showing that periodontal disease may unfavourably modulate the cardiovascular risk, whereby patients with periodontitis have increased frequency of overweight, hypertension, endothelial dysfunction, dyslipidaemia, platelet hyper-reactivity, and may also be characterized by a prothrombotic state. Apart from these critical atherogenic factors, translocation of periodontal microorganisms into the bloodstream, and their further accumulation within atherosclerotic plaques, would contribute to enhance plaque instability and the risk of developing acute ischemic coronary events. Interesting evidence is also emerging that local or systemic statins administration could be beneficial for safeguarding periodontal health, thus enlightening the intriguing relationship existing between CHD and periodontitis.

The bidirectional relationship of cancer and hemostasis and the potential role of anticoagulant therapy in moderating thrombosis and cancer spread.

The relationship between hemostasis and malignancy is well recognized, with both elements interacting in a "vicious cycle" where cancers overexpress procoagulants and thrombin, which in turn promote both prothrombotic potential and tumor growth, invasion, and spread. Indeed, venous thromboembolism, particularly idiopathic venous thrombosis, occurs frequently as a paraneoplastic phenomenon, and in turn several components of primary and secondary hemostasis (namely platelets, tissue factor, and thrombin) play an important role in primary tumor growth and metastasization. Despite the many and various mechanisms involved in this multifaceted relationship, anticoagulants might represent an attractive anticancer therapy, in that current research supports the hypothesis that such drugs may offer a better control of cancer progression. The main biological and clinical evidence on the relationship between cancer and hemostasis are briefly summarized in this review, as is the potential benefits of anticoagulant therapy in this setting.

Dark chocolate: consumption for pleasure or therapy?

Traditional chocolate is derived from the cocoa bean, which is one of the most concentrated sources of flavanols, a subgroup of the natural antioxidant plant compounds called flavonoids. Accumulating evidence from the past 10 years demonstrates that moderate consumption of chocolate, especially dark chocolate, may exert protective effects against the development of cardiovascular disease. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain this positive influence, including metabolic, antihypertensive, anti-inflammatory, and anti-thrombotic effects, as well as effects on insulin sensitivity and vascular endothelial function. Should these results be confirmed in randomised, controlled, cross-over, multi-dose trials, then the pleasure associated with chocolate consumption might also be justified from health and psychological perspectives. However, since dark chocolate has substantially higher levels of flavonoids than milk chocolate, and milk proteins may inhibit absorption of flavonoids, it might be preferable to consume dark chocolate than the white (milk) variety.

Lack of grading agreement among international hemostasis external quality assessment programs.

: Laboratory quality programs rely on internal quality control and external quality assessment (EQA). EQA programs provide unknown specimens for the laboratory to test. The laboratory's result is compared with other (peer) laboratories performing the same test. EQA programs assign target values using a variety of methods statistical tools and performance assessment of 'pass' or 'fail' is made. EQA provider members of the international organization, external quality assurance in thrombosis and hemostasis, took part in a study to compare outcome of performance analysis using the same data set of laboratory results. Eleven EQA organizations using eight different analytical approaches participated. Data for a normal and prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and a normal and reduced factor VIII (FVIII) from 218 laboratories were sent to the EQA providers who analyzed the data set using their method of evaluation for aPTT and FVIII, determining the performance for each laboratory record in the data set. Providers also summarized their statistical approach to assignment of target values and laboratory performance. Each laboratory record in the data set was graded pass/fail by all EQA providers for each of the four analytes. There was a lack of agreement of pass/fail grading among EQA programs. Discordance in the grading was 17.9 and 11% of normal and prolonged aPTT results, respectively, and 20.2 and 17.4% of normal and reduced FVIII results, respectively. All EQA programs in this study employed statistical methods compliant with the International Standardization Organization (ISO), ISO 13528, yet the evaluation of laboratory results for all four analytes showed remarkable grading discordance.

Laboratory assessment and perioperative management of patients on antiplatelet therapy: from the bench to the bedside.

The contribution of platelets in the pathophysiology of thromboses has established antiplatelet therapy as a cornerstone for prevention or treatment of these disorders. However, patients on antiplatelet drugs undergoing surgery face the life-threatening dilemma between the risk of perioperative thrombosis by ceasing therapy and restoring platelet function versus the risk of surgical bleeding by its continuation. According to their mechanism of action, antiplatelet drugs can be conventionally classified as agents that inhibit cyclooxygenase, block the platelet adenosine diphosphate P2Y12 receptor, inhibit phosphodiesterase, or block platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa. Although several tests have been developed to assess platelet inhibition by most of these compounds, studies to date have not been able to reliably evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of these tests to predict hemorrhage and/or blood loss, and accordingly perioperative assessment of drug-induced platelet inhibition cannot be recommended as yet. Although several management options are available to counteract the hemorrhagic risk of surgical patients using antiplatelet agents, perioperative discontinuation of these drugs is the preferable choice wherever possible. The use of platelet transfusions should be limited where necessary to the treatment of major, life-threatening bleeding. The contribution of newer hemostatic agents, such as desmopressin and recombinant activated factor VII, is yet to be fully determined, and there remain many challenges and unresolved issues in the clinical care of these patients.