Treatment of critical bleeding events in patients with immune thrombocytopenia: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Critical bleeding events in adults and children with ITP are medical emergencies; however, evidence-based treatment protocols are lacking. Due to the severe thrombocytopenia, (typically platelet count less than 20 × 109/L), a critical bleed portends a high risk of death or disability. We plan to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatments for critical bleeding in patients with ITP that will inform evidence-based recommendations. METHODS: Literature searches will be conducted in four electronic databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and PubMed. Eligible studies will be randomized controlled trials or observational studies that enrolled patients with ITP describing one or more interventions for the management of critical bleeding. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction, and risk of bias evaluation will be conducted independently and in duplicate using Covidence and Excel. Outcomes will be pooled for meta-analysis where appropriate or summarized descriptively. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology will be used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Primary outcomes of interest will include frequency of critical bleeds, mortality and bleeding-related mortality, bleeding resolution, platelet count, and disability. DISCUSSION: Evidence-based treatments for critical bleeding in patients with ITP are needed to improve patient outcomes and standardize care in the emergency setting. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42020161206.

Definition of a critical bleed in patients with immune thrombocytopenia: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Platelet Immunology.

BACKGROUND: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an autoimmune disease characterized by low platelet counts and increased risk of bleeding. In preparation for an upcoming guideline, the ITP Emergency Management Guideline Panel, including clinical experts in hematology, emergency medicine, research methodology, and patient representatives, identified the need for a standardized definition of a critical ITP bleed. The goal of the definition was to distinguish critical bleeds from bleeds that may not require urgent treatment, typically in the context of severe thrombocytopenia. METHODS: The panel met in person and virtually to achieve consensus on the criteria for critical bleeding events among patients with ITP. Existing ITP bleeding scores and published definitions of major bleeds in patients receiving anticoagulation informed the definition of a critical ITP bleed. The Platelet Immunology Scientific Standardization Committee (SSC) of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis endorsed the definition. RESULTS: A critical ITP bleed was defined as: (a) a bleed in a critical anatomical site including intracranial, intraspinal, intraocular, retroperitoneal, pericardial, or intramuscular with compartment syndrome; or (2) an ongoing bleed that results in hemodynamic instability or respiratory compromise. CONCLUSION: The definition of a critical ITP bleed was developed by the ITP Emergency Management Guideline Panel and endorsed by the Platelet Immunology SSC. It incorporates both anatomic and physiologic risk and pertains to patients with confirmed or suspected ITP who typically have severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count below 20 × 109 /L).

American Society of Hematology 2019 guidelines for immune thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Despite an increase in the number of therapies available to treat patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), there are minimal data from randomized trials to assist physicians with the management of patients. OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the management of ITP. METHODS: In 2015, ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 8 adult clinical experts, 5 pediatric clinical experts, 2 methodologists with expertise in ITP, and 2 patient representatives. The panel was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The panel reviewed the ASH 2011 guideline recommendations and prioritized questions. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including evidence-to-decision frameworks, to appraise evidence (up to May 2017) and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 21 recommendations covering management of ITP in adults and children with newly diagnosed, persistent, and chronic disease refractory to first-line therapy who have non-life-threatening bleeding. Management approaches included: observation, corticosteroids, IV immunoglobulin, anti-D immunoglobulin, rituximab, splenectomy, and thrombopoietin receptor agonists. CONCLUSIONS: There was a lack of evidence to support strong recommendations for various management approaches. In general, strategies that avoided medication side effects were favored. A large focus was placed on shared decision-making, especially with regard to second-line therapy. Future research should apply standard corticosteroid-dosing regimens, report patient-reported outcomes, and include cost-analysis evaluations.