Acute portal vein thrombosis in noncirrhotic patients - different prognoses based on presence of inflammatory markers: a long-term multicenter retrospective analysis.

Background: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a partial or complete thrombotic occlusion of the portal vein and is rare in noncirrhotic patients.Patients and methods: 78 adult patients with noncirrhotic acute PVT without known malignity were evaluated. Patients with initial CRP level 61-149 mg/l were excluded.Results: Patients were divided into two groups - the first one (33 patients) was characterized with signs of inflammation and CRP over 149 mg/l. The second group (45 patients) was without signs of inflammation and CRP level less than 61 mg/l. The frequency of prothrombotic hematologic factors was statistically significantly different in levels of factor VIII and MTHFR 677 C mutation. All patients from both groups underwent the same oncologic and hemato-oncologic screening which was positive in 23 patients (51.1%) in the group without signs of inflammation. In the group of patients with clinical and laboratory signs of inflammation oncologic and hemato-oncologic screening was positive only in 1 patient (3.0%). Complete portal vein recanalization was achieved in 19.2%, partial recanalization in 26.9%.Conclusions: Patients with clinical signs of inflammation and acute PVT have a low risk of malignancy in contrast to patients without signs of inflammation and acute PVT, which have a high risk of oncologic or hemato-oncologic disease. Patients with negative hemato-oncologic screening should be carefully observed over time because we expect they are at higher risk for the development of hemato-oncologic disease, independent from the presence and number of procoagulation risk factors.

Anti-Xa activity of enoxaparin and nadroparin in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Clinical studies have clearly revealed that low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are an effective alternative to unfractionated heparin in the therapy of acute coronary syndrome (ACS); however, data on the comparison of different LMWHs are sparse. AIM: To compare the inhibition of coagulation factor Xa by enoxaparin and nadroparin in the therapy of ACS. METHODS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients with ACS were randomly assigned to enoxaparin (group E, n=18) or nadroparin (group N, n=20) in the recommended dose. Anti-Xa activity was measured 3 h after administering the first dose of LMWH. RESULTS: Baseline demographics (age, sex) and clinical (type of ACS, pain-to-door time, elevation of troponin, percutaneous coronary intervention performed, smoking status, and history of diabetes, hypertension and hyperlipoproteinemia) characteristics were similar in both groups. Anti-Xa activity was significantly higher in group E than in group N (0.65+/-0.05 U/mL versus 0.30+/-0.03 U/mL; P<0.001). Moreover, the therapeutic target (0.5 U/mL to 0.8 U/mL) was achieved in 66.7% of patients in group E; on the other hand, effective therapy was observed in 10.0% of patients in group N (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study demonstrate a highly significant difference in anti-Xa activity of enoxaparin and nadroparin in their recommended dosing regimens, in the therapy of ACS 3 h after subcutaneous administration; the anticoagulant effect of enoxaparin was markedly stronger than that of nadroparin.