Anticoagulant Reversal Strategies in the Emergency Department Setting: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

Bleeding is the most common complication of anticoagulant use. The evaluation and management of the bleeding patient is a core competency of emergency medicine. As the prevalence of patients receiving anticoagulant agents and variety of anticoagulants with different mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics, indications, and corresponding reversal agents increase, physicians and other clinicians working in the emergency department require a current and nuanced understanding of how best to assess, treat, and reverse anticoagulated patients. In this project, we convened an expert panel to create a consensus decision tree and framework for assessment of the bleeding patient receiving an anticoagulant, as well as use of anticoagulant reversal or coagulation factor replacement, and to address controversies and gaps relevant to this topic. To support decision tree interpretation, the panel also reached agreement on key definitions of life-threatening bleeding, bleeding at a critical site, and emergency surgery or urgent invasive procedure. To reach consensus recommendations, we used a structured literature review and a modified Delphi technique by an expert panel of academic and community physicians with training in emergency medicine, cardiology, hematology, internal medicine/thrombology, pharmacology, toxicology, transfusion medicine and hemostasis, neurology, and surgery, and by other key stakeholder groups.

Propensity matched analysis examining the effect of passive reversal of direct oral anticoagulants on blood loss and the need for transfusions among traumatic geriatric hip fractures.

BACKGROUND: Reversal of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is currently recommended prior to emergent surgery, such as surgical intervention for traumatic geriatric hip fractures. However, reversal methods are expensive and timely, often delaying surgical intervention, which is a predictor of outcomes. The study objective was to examine the effect of DOAC reversal on blood loss and transfusions among geriatric patients with hip fractures. METHODS: This retrospective propensity-matched study across six level I trauma centers included geriatric patients on DOACs with isolated fragility hip fractures requiring surgical intervention (2014-2017). Outcomes included: intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative pRBCs, and hospital length of stay (HLOS). RESULTS: After matching there were 62 patients (31 reversed, 31 not reversed), 29 patients were not matched. The only reversal method utilized was passive reversal (waiting ≥ 24 hours for elimination). Passively reversed patients had a longer time to surgery (mean, 43 vs. 18 hours, p < 0.01). Most patients (92%) had blood loss (90% passively reversed, 94% not reversed); the median volume of blood loss was 100 mL for both those groups, p = 0.97. Thirteen percent had pRBCs transfused (13% passively reversed and 13% not reversed); the median volume of pRBCs transfused was 525 mL for those passively reversed and 314 mL for those not reversed, p = 0.52. The mean HLOS was significantly longer for those passively reversed (7 vs. 5 days, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Passive DOAC reversal for geriatric patients with isolated hip fracture requiring surgery may be contributing to delayed surgery and an increased HLOS without having a significant effect on blood loss or transfusions. These data suggest that passive DOAC reversal may not be necessary prior to surgical repair of isolated hip fracture.

Processes for Trauma Care at Six Level I Trauma Centers During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: As the COVID-19 pandemic spread, patient care guidelines were published and elective surgeries postponed. However, trauma admissions are not scheduled and cannot be postponed. There is a paucity of information available on continuing trauma care during the pandemic. The study purpose was to describe multicenter trauma care process changes made during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This descriptive survey summarized the response to the COVID-19 pandemic at six Level I trauma centers. The survey was completed in 05/2020. Questions were asked about personal protective equipment, ventilators, intensive care unit (ICU) beds, and negative pressure rooms. Data were summarized as proportions. RESULTS: The survey took an average of 5 days. Sixty-seven percent reused N-95 respirators; 50% sanitized them with 25% using ultraviolet light. One hospital (17%) had regional resources impacted. Thirty-three percent created ventilator allocation protocols. Most hospitals (83%) designated more beds to the ICU; 50% of hospitals designated an ICU for COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients were isolated in negative pressure rooms at all hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Level I trauma centers created processes to provide optimal trauma patient care and still protect providers. Other centers can use the processes described to continue care of trauma patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Partial warfarin reversal prior to hip fracture surgical intervention in geriatric trauma patients effects on blood loss and transfusions.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin reversal is typically sought prior to surgery for geriatric hip fractures; however, patients often proceed to surgery with partial warfarin reversal. The effect of partial reversal (defined as having an international normalized ratio [INR] > 1.5) remains unclear. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. Geriatric patients (≥65 y/o) admitted to six level I trauma centers from 01/2014-01/2018 with isolated hip fractures requiring surgery who were taking warfarin pre-injury were included. Warfarin reversal methods included: vitamin K, factor VIIa, (a)PCC, fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and the "wait and watch" method. An INR of ≤ 1.5 defined complete reversal. The primary outcome was the volume of blood loss during surgery; other outcomes included packed red blood cell (pRBC) and FFP transfusions, and time to surgery. RESULTS: There were 135 patients, 44% partially reversed and 56% completely reversed. The median volume of blood loss was 100 mL for both those completely and partially reversed, p = 0.72. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with blood loss by study arm, 95% vs. 95%, p > 0.99. Twenty-five percent of those completely reversed and 39% of those partially reversed had pRBCs transfused, p = 0.08. Of those completely reversed 5% received an FFP transfusion compared to 14% of those partially reversed, p = 0.09. There were no statistically significant differences observed for the volume of pRBC or FFP transfused, or for time to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Partial reversal may be safe for blood loss and blood product transfusions for geriatric patients with isolated hip fractures. Complete warfarin reversal may not be necessary prior to hip fracture surgery, especially for mildly elevated INRs.

Reversal agents for direct oral anticoagulants: considerations for hospital physicians and intensivists.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) include dabigatran etexilate, a direct thrombin inhibitor, and specific inhibitors of activated coagulation factor X (FXa; e.g. apixaban, betrixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban). DOACs are associated with lower rates of major and fatal bleeding events compared with warfarin. Clinicians may need to achieve rapid reversal of anticoagulation effects of the DOACs in an emergency setting. Idarucizumab and andexanet alfa, which reverse the anticoagulant effects of dabigatran and FXa inhibitors, respectively, are DOAC reversal agents available in the US. Other reversal agents (e.g. ciraparantag for heparins, DOACs) are in development. Alternative nonspecific agents (e.g. fresh frozen plasma, prothrombin complex concentrate) are available. Nonspecific prohemostatic agents can counteract the anticoagulant action of DOACs in emergency situations, when specific reversal agents are unavailable. However, specific reversal agents are efficacious and safe and should be preferred when available. In this review, we discuss practical issues in the initiation of DOAC therapy, situations where reversal may be needed, coagulation assays, reversal agents, and post-reversal complications in the context of published evidence and guidelines.