Predictors for the prescription of pharmacological prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism during hospitalization in Internal Medicine: a sub-analysis of the FADOI-NoTEVole study.

Patients hospitalized in Internal Medicine Units (IMUs) may frequently experience both an increased risk for thrombosis and bleeding. The use of risk assessment models (RAMs) could aid their management. We present a post-hoc analysis of the FADOI-NoTEVole study, an observational, retrospective, multi-center study conducted in 38 Italian IMUs. The primary aim of the study was to evaluate the predictors associated with the prescription of thromboprophylaxis during hospitalization. The secondary objective was to evaluate RAMs adherence. Univariate analyses were conducted as preliminary evaluations of the variables associated with prescribing pharmacological thromboprophylaxis during hospital stay. The final multivariable logistic model was obtained by a stepwise selection method, using 0.05 as the significance level for entering an effect into the model. Thromboprophylaxis was then correlated with the RAMs and the number of predictors found in the multivariate analysis. Thromboprophylaxis was prescribed to 927 out of 1387 (66.8%) patients with a Padua Prediction score (PPS) ≥ 4. Remarkably, 397 in 1230 (32.3%) patients with both PPS ≥ 4 and an IMPROVE bleeding risk score (IBS) < 7 did not receive it. The prescription of thromboprophylaxis mostly correlated with reduced mobility (OR 2.31; 95% CI 1.90-2.81), ischemic stroke (OR 2.38; 95% CI 1.34-2.91), history of previous thrombosis (OR 2.46; 95% CI 1.49-4.07), and the presence of a central venous catheter (OR 3.00; 95% CI 1.99-4.54). The bleeding risk assessment using the IBS did not appear to impact physicians' decisions. Our analysis provides insight into how indications for thromboprophylaxis were determined, highlighting the difficulties faced by physicians with patients admitted to IMUs.

Rates of venous thromboembolism and use of thromboprophylaxis after major orthopedic surgery in patients with congenital hemophilia A or B: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a well-recognized complication after total joint replacement (TJR). Persons with hemophilia A or B are considered at low postoperative VTE risk due to their coagulation factor deficiencies, and administering pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis is often considered contraindicated. However, using factor replacement therapy could increase the postoperative VTE risk. OBJECTIVES: To analyze best available evidences of VTE rates in persons with hemophilia A or B undergoing lower limb TJR and the use of postoperative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: We systematically screened 4 online biomedical databases to identify studies reporting VTE rates in patients with hemophilia after TJR. Case reports and case series with less than 10 patients were excluded. RESULTS: Twenty-six observational studies were included in this systematic review, reporting 1181 TJRs in patients with hemophilia A or B. Eight studies had VTE rates as the primary outcome. Five studies reported screen-detected VTE, while 21 reported symptomatic VTE events. Overall, 17 VTE events were reported (1.4%; 95% CI, 0.9%-2.3%), including 10 (6.6%) after 151 surgeries with postoperative VTE screening and 7 (0.7%) after 1080 surgeries without postoperative screening. Thromboprophylaxis protocols were specified in 21 studies; postoperative thromboprophylaxis was used in 15 (1.3%) surgeries. This information was not available for 29.0% of the analyzed population. CONCLUSION: Despite the low thromboprophylaxis use in patients with hemophilia, rates of symptomatic VTE after TJR appeared to be low. We also highlighted the need to better report the thrombotic outcome in persons with hemophilia to face the ongoing changes in the hemophilia landscape.

High-dose dexamethasone treatment for COVID-19 severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective study.

Low-dose dexamethasone reduces mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We retrospectively analyzed the efficacy of high-dose dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS and evaluated factors affecting the composite outcome (death or invasive mechanical ventilation). From March 4th to April 1st 2020, 98 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were included. Those who after at least 7 days from symptom onset presented a worsening of the respiratory function or of inflammatory biomarkers were started on intravenous high-dose dexamethasone (20 mg daily for 5 days, followed by 10 mg daily for 5 days). Most patients were males (62%) with a mean age of 69 years. Hypertension and cardiovascular disease (CVD) were prevalent. Following dexamethasone treatment, a significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 (277.41 [178.5-374.8] mmHg vs. 146.75 [93.62-231.16] mmHg, p < 0.001), PaO2 (88.15 [76.62-112.0] mmHg vs. 65.65 [57.07-81.22] mmHg, p < 0.001), and SpO2 (96 [95-98]% vs. 94 [90-96]%, p < 0.001) was observed. A concomitant decrease in C-reactive protein and ferritin levels was found (132.25 [82.27-186.5] mg/L vs. 7.3 [3.3-24.2] mg/L and 1169 [665-2056] ng/mL vs. 874.0 [569.5-1434] ng/mL, respectively; p < 0.001 for both vs. baseline). CVD was found to increase the risk of the composite outcome (RR 7.64, 95% CI 1.24-47.06, p = 0.028). In hospitalized patients with COVID-19-related ARDS, high-dose dexamethasone rapidly improves the clinical status and decreases inflammatory biomarkers. CVD was found to increase the risk of the composite outcome. These data support the importance of randomized clinical trials with high-dose dexamethasone in COVID-19 patients.