Structured benefit-risk assessment for enoxaparin, in the context of its label extension, for the extended treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and prevention of its recurrence in patients with active cancer.

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. However, until recently, only dalteparin and tinzaparin were approved in the European Economic Area (EEA) for these patients. This study compares the benefit-risk profile of enoxaparin with dalteparin and tinzaparin for the extended treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), and prevention of recurrence in adult patients with active cancer. METHODS: A semi-quantitative structured benefit-risk assessment was conducted for the label-extension application of enoxaparin based on the benefit-risk action team descriptive framework: define decision context; determine key benefit and risk outcomes; identify data sources; extract data; interpret results. RESULTS: The key benefits were defined as reduced all-cause mortality and venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence (including symptomatic DVT, fatal PE or non-fatal PE); the key risks were major and non-major bleeding of clinical significance, and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Enoxaparin demonstrated comparable effects for the reduction of VTE recurrence and all-cause mortality versus other EEA-approved LMWHs (dalteparin, tinzaparin). There was no evidence of a significant difference between enoxaparin and the comparator groups with regard to incidence of major and non-major bleeding. The data on HIT were too limited to assess the difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment demonstrated a favourable benefit-risk profile for enoxaparin similar to that of other EEA-approved LMWHs for the treatment of DVT and PE and the prevention of recurrence in patients with active cancer and thus supported the label-extension approval.

Prophylactic anticoagulation after minimally invasive hysterectomy for endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine our institutional rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer and to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of extended prophylactic anticoagulation after minimally invasive staging surgery for endometrial cancer. METHODS: All patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer who underwent minimally invasive staging surgery from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2020 were identified retrospectively, and clinicopathologic and outcome data were obtained through chart review. Event probabilities and utility decrements were obtained through published clinical data and literature review. A decision model was created to compare 28 days of no post-operative pharmacologic prophylaxis, prophylactic enoxaparin, and prophylactic apixaban. Outcomes included no complications, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and major bleeding. We assumed a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: Three of 844 patients (0.36%) had a VTE following minimally invasive staging surgery for endometrial cancer. In this model, no pharmacologic prophylaxis was less costly and more effective than prophylactic apixaban and prophylactic enoxaparin over all parameters examined. When all patients were assigned prophylaxis, prophylactic apixaban was both less costly and more effective than prophylactic enoxaparin. If the risk of DVT was ≥4.8%, prophylactic apixaban was favored over no pharmacologic prophylaxis. On Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis for the base case scenario, no pharmacologic prophylaxis was favored in 41.1% of iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: In this cost-effectiveness model, no extended pharmacologic anticoagulation was superior to extended prophylactic enoxaparin and apixaban in clinically early-stage endometrial cancer patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery. This model supports use of prophylactic apixaban for 7 days post-operatively in select patients when the risk of DVT is 4.8% or higher.

Venous thromboembolism risk assessment and prophylaxis in hospitalised medical patients in the Cape Town metropole, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is regarded as the most preventable cause of inpatient death in hospital settings globally. VTE can be prevented through the provision of non-pharmacological and/or pharmacological thromboprophylaxis following individualised risk screening. The Caprini risk assessment model (RAM) offers a validated and well-established approach for VTE risk assessment in medical inpatients. Literature findings describe a trend towards inappropriate and under-prescribing of thromboprophylaxis in this population. Together with concerns regarding clinicians' perceived importance of VTE risk assessment, the need to clarify these aspects of practice is evident. OBJECTIVES: To describe VTE risk assessment and prophylaxis practices of medical practitioners in public sector hospitals in Western Cape Province, South Africa (SA). METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional study design was employed in the medical wards of two district hospitals and one regional hospital in the Cape Town metropole, Western Cape. Medical folders of adult medical inpatients admitted between January and July 2020 were reviewed to assess VTE risk using the Caprini RAM. Thromboprophylaxis therapy prescribed and contraindications to chemoprophylaxis were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of 380 patients included in the review, 51.6% were female, and the average age was 52.1 years (range 18 - 96); 21.3% had their weight recorded, while none had their height documented. Infectious disease was the predominant diagnosis (49.2%) detected in the sample. Common VTE risk factors identified included bed rest/restricted mobility for <72 hours (76.3%) and serious infection (67.4%). A total of 97.1% of patients (n=369) were found to be at moderate or higher risk of VTE (Caprini score ≥2). Of this at-risk group, 24.1% were eligible to receive chemoprophylaxis, yet no prescription for thromboprophylaxis was identified. Seventy percent of patients (n=266) were prescribed chemoprophylaxis, with enoxaparin accounting for 98.5% of regimens. Contraindications to chemoprophylaxis were recorded in 13.4% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although rates of VTE prophylaxis in medical inpatients may be improving, thromboprophylaxis still remains critically underutilised in this population. This study highlighted a consequence of this trend, with inappropriate chemoprophylaxis prescribing becoming more evident. Mechanical prophylaxis prescribing in medical inpatients is lacking, despite the associated benefits. RAMs should be adapted for the SA setting, where infectious diseases are prevalent. Future research should assess RAM use by clinicians, as this could provide insight into improving RAM uptake and thromboprophylaxis prescribing.

Enoxaparina 60 mg/0, 6 mL injetável para a prevenção de tromboembolismo venoso em gestantes com trombofilia / Enoxaparin 60 mg/0. 6 mL injectable for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in pregnant women with thrombophilia

CONTEXTO: O tromboembolismo venoso (TEV) associado à gravidez, incluindo trombose venosa profunda (TVP) e embolia pulmonar (EP), embora incomum, continua sendo causa importante de morbimortalidade. Por ser uma condição próinflamatória com ativação de células endoteliais, as gestantes apresentam um risco maior de TEV quando comparado com mulheres não grávidas. Mulheres com trombofilia e aquelas que se submetem à cesariana representam a maioria das pacientes com TEV pós-parto. Atualmente, o Brasil possui um Protocolo Clínico e Diretrizes Terapêuticas (PCDT) de Profilaxia do Tromboembolismo Venoso em Gestantes com Trombofilia. O PCDT foi publicado por meio da Portaria Conjunta SAES-SCTIE nº 04, de 12 de fevereiro de 2020 e preconiza o uso do medicamento enoxaparina para prevenção e tratamento do tromboembolismo venoso em gestantes com trombofilia. Entretanto, a apresentação de 60 mg/0,6 mL de enoxaparina, necessária para uma dose precisa em grávidas ou puérperas com trombofilia com massa corporal acima de 90 kg com indicação de anticoagulação profilática ou em grávidas ou puérperas com trombofilia e indicação de esquema de anticoagulação plena, independentemente do peso corporal, atualmente não está disponível no SUS. PERGUNTA: A enoxaparina 60 mg/0,6mL é eficaz, efetiva e segura em grávidas ou puérperas com trombofilia com massa corporal acima de 90 kg que estiverem em tratamento com esquema de anticoagulação profilática ou em gestantes com indicação esquema de anticoagulação plena, independentemente do peso corporal? EVIDÊNCIAS CLÍNICAS: Foram incluídos 4 estudos descritos em 5 referências, sendo 02 ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECR) e dois estudos observacionais do tipo coorte retrospectiva. Os estudos apontam que não há diferenças significativas para os desfechos de eficácia, efetividade e segurança entre a dose mínima e o ajuste de dose de enoxaparina na Prevenção de Tromboembolismo Venoso em Gestantes com Trombofilia. Para o desfecho mais relevante que corresponde ao número de nascidos vivos por gestação, a meta-análise incluiu 165 gestantes recebendo enoxaparina com dose ajustada e 155 gestantes recebendo 40 mg/dia de enoxaparina em dose fixa. O resultado agrupado dos dois ECRs gerou um RR de 0,95 sem diferença estatisticamente significante entre os grupos no modelo de efeitos randômicos, (IC95% = 0,86 ­ 1,04; I 2 = 0%; p = 0,55). Nos efeitos indesejáveis da tecnologia, ambas as doses de enoxaparina indicam ser seguras e bem toleradas. ANÁLISE DE IMPACTO ORÇAMENTÁRIO: Foi adotado um horizonte temporal de cinco anos (2021 a 2025). No cenário mais conservador, a análise de impacto orçamentário evidenciou uma economia de R$ 55.369.020,00 diante da incorporação da enoxaparina 60 mg/0,6 mL no SUS. MONITORAMENTO DO HORIZONTE TECNOLÓGICO: Não foram detectadas tecnologias para compor o esquema terapêutico de prevenção de tromboembolismo venoso em gestantes com trombofilia. No Brasil, a enoxaparina não está sob proteção patentária. CONSIDERAÇÕES FINAIS: Considerou-se que a enoxaparina 60 mg/0,6 mL mostra-se como uma alternativa segura quando comparada à dose mínima de 40 mg/0,4 mL. Ademais, a incorporação da enoxaparina 60 mg/0,6 mL pode levar à economia de R$ 55.369.020,00 ao longo de cinco anos. RECOMENDAÇÃO PRELIMINAR DA CONITEC: O Plenário da Conitec, em sua 96ª Reunião Ordinária, no dia 07 de abril de 2021, deliberou que a matéria fosse disponibilizada em Consulta Pública com recomendação preliminar favorável à incorporação da enoxaparina 60 mg/0,6 mL injetável para a prevenção de tromboembolismo venoso em gestantes com trombofilia no SUS. Os membros da Conitec consideraram que a incorporação desta nova apresentação de enoxaparina é necessária para a prevenção de tromboembolismo venoso em gestantes com sobrepeso ou com indicação de anticoagulação plena. Além disso, considerou-se que essa incorporação potencialmente irá representar economia para o Sistema Único de Saúde. CONSULTA PÚBLICA: Foram recebidas 16 contribuições, sendo 8 técnico-científicas e 8 sobre experiência ou opinião. A grande maioria destas concordou da recomendação inicial da Conitec. Ao final, o Plenário da Conitec entendeu que não foram apresentadas novas evidências que mudassem seu entendimento sobre o tema, fazendo com que sua recomendação preliminar fosse mantida. RECOMENDAÇÃO FINAL DA CONITEC: O Plenário da Conitec, em sua 98ª Reunião Ordinária, no dia 09 de junho de 2021, deliberou por unanimidade recomendar a incorporação da enoxaparina 60 mg/0,6 mL injetável para a prevenção de tromboembolismo venoso em gestantes com trombofilia. Assim, foi assinado o Registro de Deliberação nº 622/2021. DECISÃO: Incorporar a enoxaparina 60 mg/0,6 mL injetável para a prevenção de tromboembolismo venoso em gestantes com trombofilia, no âmbito do Sistema Único de Saúde ­ SUS, conforme a Portaria nº 35, publicada no Diário Oficial da União nº 127, seção 1, página 143, em 08 de julho de 2021.

Comparative Effectiveness and Costs of Enoxaparin Monotherapy Versus Unfractionated Heparin Monotherapy in Treating Acute Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) are guideline-recommended anticoagulants for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), including unstable angina (UA) and myocardial infarction with (STEMI) or without ST-segment elevation (NSTEMI). Prior efficacy and safety evidence are mainly from clinical trials. Economic data are insufficient. This study examined the differences in utilization, effectiveness, safety, and costs in treating ACS between enoxaparin and UFH monotherapy using real-world data. METHODS: Using data from 859 US hospitals, inpatients ≥ 18 years of age with a diagnosis of an initial episode of ACS between 2010 and 2016 were identified. Outcomes included 30-day risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), recurrent angina, in-hospital mortality, composite ischemic complication (having MI/recurrent angina/death), major bleeding, and costs. Multivariable regression was used to compare outcomes between enoxaparin and UFH monotherapy. RESULTS: Among 1,048,053 eligible patients (UA: 219,259; NSTEMI: 582,134; STEMI: 246,660), the prevalence of enoxaparin monotherapy was 12.0%, 13.9%, and 5.1%, and the prevalence of UFH monotherapy was 45.1%, 43.1% and 59.8%, for UA, NSTEMI, and STEMI patients, respectively. Enoxaparin was associated with a lower risk of ischemic complications and death among NSTEMI, but not in UA or STEMI patients, and with a lower risk of major bleeding in all patients. Cost savings per patient during index admission and 30-day follow-up for enoxaparin over UFH was $2972 for UA, $2475 for NSTEMI, and $3050 for STEMI. CONCLUSIONS: Enoxaparin was associated with a lower risk of ischemic complications (including death), lower costs, and better safety than UFH among NSTEMI patients. Improving upstream selection of anticoagulants in appropriate populations may help optimize clinical outcomes and costs.

Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Cost Comparison of Thromboprophylactic Use of Enoxaparin versus Unfractionated Heparin in 376,858 Medically Ill Hospitalized US Patients.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious complication in medically ill inpatients. Enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) thromboprophylaxis has been shown to reduce VTE in clinical trials; however, comparative effectiveness and differences in hospital costs are unknown in US hospital practice. OBJECTIVE: This study compared clinical and economic outcomes between enoxaparin and UFH thromboprophylaxis in medically ill inpatients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Premier Healthcare Database between 1 January 2010 and 30 September 2016. Inpatients aged ≥ 18 years with a ≥ 6-day hospital stay for serious medical conditions were included. Two patient groups receiving thromboprophylaxis were identified during hospitalization: one receiving enoxaparin and other receiving UFH. Regression models were constructed to compare VTE events, in-hospital mortality, pulmonary embolism (PE)-related mortality, major bleeding, and total hospital costs during both the index hospitalization and the 90-day readmission period between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 242,474 and 134,384 inpatients received enoxaparin or UFH for thromboprophylaxis, respectively. Compared with UFH prophylaxis, enoxaparin was significantly associated with 15%, 9%, 33%, and 41% reduced odds of VTE, in-hospital mortality, PE-related mortality, and major bleeding, respectively, during index hospitalization, and 10% and 19% reduced odds of VTE and bleeding, respectively, during the readmission period. Mean total hospital costs were significantly lower in patients receiving enoxaparin prophylaxis than in those given UFH. CONCLUSIONS: Thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin was associated with significantly reduced in-hospital VTE events, death, and major bleeding and lower hospital costs compared with UFH in hospitalized medically ill patients.

Medicine wastage in a thromboprophylaxis protocol for ambulatory trauma patients.

Thromboprophylactic medicine is provided routinely to patients who present to emergency departments (EDs) with lower leg fractures as a preventive measure against forming blood clots in an immobilised limb. A large amount of medicine is provided to these patients at discharge, but once they have recovered their mobility the remaining medicine is unusable and must be destroyed. There is a lack of data to quantify this waste. This article reports a service evaluation that was conducted in an ED to investigate the wastage and the cost implications of this treatment protocol. It shows that over half the medicine dispensed is subsequently wasted and makes recommendations for changing dispensing practice.

The ATLANTIC study: Anti-Xa level assessment in trauma intensive care.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the pharmacodynamic (PD) activity of daily subcutaneous (SC) enoxaparin as venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in high-risk trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: This was a prospective observational PD study conducted in the ICU of a state-wide major trauma referral centre. The study cohort included adult patients admitted to the ICU with a high risk of VTE, as defined by at least one of the following: age > 40 years, prior VTE, spinal cord injury (SCI), traumatic brain injury (TBI), major venous injury, pelvic fractures, spinal fractures requiring treatment, severe lower limb injuries, and major surgery >2 h in duration. Standard prophylactic enoxaparin dosing was 40 mg SC daily, unless amended by the treating clinician. Plasma anti-Xa activity was measured approximately 60 min before dosing (trough activity), and at 3-5 h after dosing (peak activity). Target peak and trough activity were defined as >0.2 IU/mL and >0.1 IU/mL respectively. Clinical data including the development of VTE and haemorrhagic complications were collected. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Median [IQR] age, weight, and plasma creatinine were 59 years [36,70], 85 kg [76.5,93.5] and 70µmol/L [60.5,109] respectively. Median APACHE III and Injury Severity Score were 54 [42.5,66.5] and 27 [17,34] respectively. Thirteen patients suffered a TBI, in 12 cases surgery extended beyond two hours, and five patients had spinal fractures requiring treatment. Twenty-two patients received enoxaparin 40 mg SC daily, two 60 mg, and one 20 mg. Median peak and trough anti-Xa activity was 0.21 IU/mL [0.125,0.25] and 0.01 IU/mL [0,0.05] respectively. Twelve (12/25; 48%) patients had low peak activity ≤0.2 IU/mL. Twenty-one (21/23; 91%) patients had low trough activity (≤0.1 IU/mL) and in six (6/23; 26%) cases, these were undetectable. Eight (8/25; 32%) patients had documented VTE of whom seven had low trough activity. There were no major haemorrhagic complications. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of high risk critically ill trauma patients receiving daily SC enoxaparin as VTE chemoprophylaxis, measured peak and trough plasma anti-Xa activity was inadequate in a significant proportion. On this basis, further systematic investigation concerning dose optimisation in this patient population appears warranted.

The cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of the use of enoxaparin compared with heparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in medical inpatients in Iran.

BACKGROUND: Moderate to high risk medical inpatients are at increased risk of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE). The present study aims to investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of using Enoxaparin compared to Heparin in VTE prophylaxis in medical inpatients, from Iranian payer's perspective. METHODS: Decision tree modeling technique was used to evaluate cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the compared interventions. The main considered outcomes were Life Years Gained (LYG) for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) for Cost-Utility Analysis (CUA). Costs and consequences of the interventions were evaluated for a three-month period and reported as Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs). One-way and Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis (PSA) were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the model due to uncertainty in the input data. RESULTS: In base case scenario (i.e. public tariff), incremental cost was $10.32, and incremental QALY and incremental LYG were 0.0001 and 0.0002 per patients respectively. Base case ICERs were 60,376 USD/QALY and 71,077 USD/LYG per patient. The results of the sensitivity analysis showed the robustness of the model. CONCLUSION: As the estimated ICER per QALY is more than three times the reported Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita by world bank for Iran in 2017 ($5415), the use of Enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis in medical in patients doesn't seem to be a cost-effective intervention compared to the use of Heparin in Iran.

Cost-Effectiveness of Extended Thromboprophylaxis in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery from a Canadian Health Care System Perspective.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence to support extended thromboprophylaxis after colorectal surgery to minimize the incidence of postdischarge venous thromboembolic events. However, the absolute number of events is small, and extended thromboprophylaxis requires significant resources from the health care system. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of extended thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing colorectal surgery for malignancy or IBD. DESIGN: An individualized patient microsimulation model (1,000,000 patients; 1-month cycle length) comparing extended thromboprophylaxis (28-day course of enoxaparin) to standard management (inpatient administration only) after colorectal surgery was constructed. SETTINGS: The sources for this study were The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Participant User File and literature searches. OUTCOMES: Costs (Canadian dollars), quality-adjusted life-years, and venous thromboembolism-related deaths prevented over a 1-year time horizon starting with hospital discharge were determined. The results were stratified by malignancy or IBD. RESULTS: In patients with malignancy, extended prophylaxis was associated with higher costs (+113$; 95% CI, 102-123), but increased quality-adjusted life-years (+0.05; 95% CI, 0.04-0.06), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2473$/quality-adjusted life-year. For IBD, extended prophylaxis also had higher costs (+116$; 95% CI, 109-123), more quality-adjusted life-years (+0.05; 95% CI, 0.04-0.06), and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2475$/quality-adjusted life-year. Extended prophylaxis prevented 16 (95% CI, 4-27) venous thromboembolism-related deaths per 100,000 patients and 22 (95% CI, 6-38) for malignancy and IBD. There was a 99.7% probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 50,000$/quality-adjusted life-year. To account for statistical uncertainty around variables, sensitivity analysis was performed and found that extended prophylaxis is associated with lower overall costs when the incidence of postdischarge venous thromboembolic events reaches 1.8%. LIMITATIONS: Significant differences in health care systems may affect the generalizability of our results. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the rarity of venous thromboembolic events, extended thromboprophylaxis is a cost-effective strategy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A976. COSTO-EFECTIVIDAD DE LA TROMBOPROFILAXIS EXTENDIDA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL DESDE UNA PERSPECTIVA DEL SISTEMA DE SALUD CANADIENSE:: Cada vez hay más pruebas que apoyen la tromboprofilaxis extendida después de la cirugía colorrectal para minimizar la incidencia de eventos tromboembólicos venosos después del alta hospitalaria. Sin embargo, el número absoluto de eventos es pequeño y la tromboprofilaxis extendida requiere recursos significativos del sistema médico.Determinar la rentabilidad (relación costo-efectividad) de la tromboprofilaxis extendida en pacientes sometidos a cirugía colorrectal por neoplasia maligna o enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.Un modelo de microsimulación de paciente individualizado (1,000,000 de pacientes; ciclo de 1 mes) que compara la tromboprofilaxis extendida (curso de enoxaparina de 28 días) con el tratamiento estándar (solo para pacientes hospitalizados) después de la cirugía colorrectal.Archivo de usuario participante del Proyecto de Mejoramiento de la Calidad Quirúrgica del Colegio Nacional de Cirujanos Americanos (ACS-NSQIP) y búsquedas bibliográficas.Costos (en dólares Canadienses), años de vida ajustados por la calidad y muertes relacionadas con el tromboembolismo venoso prevenidas en un horizonte temporal de 1 año a partir del alta hospitalaria. Los resultados fueron estratificados por malignidad o enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.En pacientes con neoplasias malignas, la profilaxis extendida se asoció con costos más altos (+113 $; IC del 95%, 102-123), pero con un aumento de la calidad de vida ajustada por años de vida (+0.05; IC del 95%, 0.04-0.06), lo que resultó en un incremento de relación costo-efectividad de 2473 $/año de vida ajustado por calidad. Para la enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, la profilaxis extendida también tuvo costos más altos (+116 $; 95% IC, 109-123), más años de vida ajustados por calidad (+0.05; 95% IC, 0.04-0.06) y una relación costo-efectividad incremental de 2475 $/año de vida ajustado por calidad. La profilaxis prolongada evitó 16 (95% IC, 4-27) muertes relacionadas con tromboembolismo venoso por cada 100,000 pacientes y 22 (95% IC, 6-38) por malignidad y enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, respectivamente. Hubo un 99.7% de probabilidad de costo-efectividad en un límite de disposición a pagar de 50,000 $/año de vida ajustado por calidad. Para tener en cuenta la incertidumbre estadística en torno a los variables, se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad y se encontró que la profilaxis extendida se asocia con menores costos generales cuando la incidencia de eventos tromboembólicos venosos después del alta hospitalaria alcanza 1.8%.Las diferencias significativas en los sistemas de salud pueden afectar la generalización de nuestros resultados.A pesar de la escasez de eventos tromboembólicos venosos, la tromboprofilaxis extendida es una estrategia rentable. Vea el video del resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A976.

Assessment of Anti-Factor Xa Levels of Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery Given Once-Daily Enoxaparin Prophylaxis: A Clinical Study Examining Enoxaparin Pharmacokinetics.

Importance: Between 4% and 12% of patients undergoing colorectal surgery and receiving enoxaparin, 40 mg per day, have a postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) event. An improved understanding of why "breakthrough" VTE events occur despite guideline-compliant prophylaxis is an important patient safety question. Objective: To determine the proportion of patients undergoing colorectal surgery who received adequate anticoagulation based on peak anti-factor Xa (aFXa) levels while receiving enoxaparin at 40 mg per day. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, nonrandomized clinical trial was conducted between February 2017 and July 2018 with 90-day follow-up at a quaternary academic medical center in the Intermountain West and included patients undergoing colorectal surgery who had surgery after receiving general anesthesia, were admitted for at least 3 days, and received enoxaparin, 40 mg once daily. Interventions: All patients had aFXa levels measured after receiving enoxaparin 40 mg per day. Patients whose aFXa level was out of range entered the trial's interventional arm where real-time enoxaparin dose adjustment and repeated aFXa measurement were performed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome: in-range peak aFXa levels (goal range, 0.3-0.5 IU/mL) with enoxaparin, 40 mg per day. Secondary outcomes: (1) in-range trough aFXa levels (goal range, 0.1-0.2 IU/mL) and (2) the proportion of patients with in-range peak aFXa levels from enoxaparin, 40 mg once daily, vs the real-time enoxaparin dose adjustment protocol. Results: Over 16 months, 116 patients undergoing colorectal surgery (65 women [56.0%]; 99 white individuals [85.3%], 13 Hispanic or Latino individuals [11.2%], and 4 Pacific Islander individuals [3.5%]; mean [range] age, 52.1 [18-85] years) were enrolled. Among 106 patients (91.4%) whose peak aFXa level was appropriately drawn, 72 (67.9%) received inadequate anticoagulation (aFXa < 0.3 IU/mL) with enoxaparin, 40 mg per day. Weight and peak aFXa levels were inversely correlated (r2 = 0.38). Forty-seven patients (77%) had a trough aFXa level that was not detectable (ie, most patients had no detectable level of anticoagulation for at least 12 hours per day). Real-time enoxaparin dose adjustment was effective. Patients were significantly more likely to achieve an in-range peak aFXa with real-time dose adjustment as opposed to fixed dosing alone (85.4% vs 29.2%, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This study supports the finding that most patients undergoing colorectal surgery receive inadequate prophylaxis from enoxaparin, 40 mg once daily. These findings may explain the high rate of "breakthrough" VTE observed in many clinical trials. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02704052.

Capped antithrombin III dosing is cost effective in the management of asparaginase-associated thrombosis.

Asparaginase therapy induces a transient antithrombin III (ATIII) deficiency, which contributes to the risk of asparaginase-induced thrombosis. At Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, management of asparaginase-induced thrombosis includes ATIII supplementation during therapeutic anticoagulation with enoxaparin. Due to the expense associated with ATIII, a capped dosing approach for ATIII was evaluated in this population. Peak ATIII levels were obtained following capped doses to evaluate response. In this pilot evaluation, 11 patients received a total of 138 capped doses for a total cost savings of $803 782. This pilot evaluation represents the first reported analysis of capped ATIII dosing in oncology patients.

Hospital Resource Utilization and Costs Associated With Warfarin Versus Apixaban Treatment Among Patients Hospitalized for Venous Thromboembolism in the United States.

A real-world US database analysis was conducted to evaluate the hospital resource utilization and costs of patients hospitalized for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treated with warfarin versus apixaban. Additionally, 1-month readmissions were evaluated. Of 28 612 patients with VTE identified from the Premier Hospital database (August 2014-May 2016), 91% (N = 26 088) received warfarin and 9% (N = 2524) received apixaban. Outcomes were assessed after controlling for key patient/hospital characteristics. For index hospitalizations, the average length of stay (LOS) was longer (3.8 vs 3.1 days, P < .001; difference: 0.7 days) and mean hospitalization cost higher (US$3224 vs US$2,740, P < .001; difference: US$484) for warfarin versus apixaban-treated patients. During the 1-month follow-up period, warfarin treatment was associated with a greater risk of all-cause readmission (odds ratio [OR]: 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-1.48, P = .003), major bleeding (MB)-related readmission (OR: 2.10; 95% CI: 1.03-4.27, P = .04), and any bleeding-related readmission (OR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.09-2.56, P = .02) versus apixaban. The results of this real-world analysis show that compared to warfarin, apixaban treatment was associated with shorter index hospital stays, lower index hospitalization costs, and reduced risk of MB-related readmissions among hospitalized patients with VTE.

Meta-Analysis Comparing the Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-Benefit of Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulants Versus Enoxaparin Thromboprophylaxis to Prevent Venous Thromboembolism Among Hospitalized Patients.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potentially fatal complication of hospitalization. Thromboprophylaxis using subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) can result in local irritation, pain, and ecchymoses, leading to nonadherence. Direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an alternative, but their efficacy and safety for short-term inpatient-only use versus LMWH, in medically hospitalized patients, has not been rigorously assessed. We performed a systematic review with meta-analyses and exploratory cost effectiveness analysis of Phase III randomized controlled trials comparing DOACs to LMWH for VTE prophylaxis to determine the risk and benefit of each. The primary efficacy end point (composite of total VTE and any-cause mortality) occurred in 1,321 of 10,978 (11.4%) of patients receiving DOAC prophylaxis and 1,084 of 10,600 (10.2%) with LMWH (odds ratio [OR] 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 1.13). The primary safety end point (composite of major bleeding and clinically relevant bleeding) occurred in 519 of 16,131 (3.2%) of patients receiving DOACs and 381 of 14,616 (2.6%) with LMWH (OR 1.12; 95%CI 0.83 to 1.53). Subgroup analyses for efficacy (n = 9,233) and safety (n = 12,584) was conducted on patients randomized to Apixaban or LMWH. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 294 of 4618 (6.4%) patients on Apixaban and 383 of 4615 (8.3%) on Enoxaparin (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.24). Major and clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 157 of 6278 (2.50%) and 185 of 6,306 (2.9%), respectively (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.26). Exploratory cost effectiveness analysis suggested that Apixaban compared with Enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis could result in long-term cost savings. In conclusion, this systematic review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis, stratified by type of patients and drug, indicates noninferiority of DOACs in efficacy, safety, and cost for short-term VTE thromboprophylaxis among patients hospitalized for medical illness.

In vitro assessment of the anti-biofilm activity of ethanol alone and in combination with enoxaparin 60IU.

INTRODUCTION: Catheter-related bloodstream infection (C-RBSI) can sometimes be managed without catheter removal by combining systemic therapy with catheter lock therapy. Most antiseptic lock solutions are made up of ethanol combined with an anticoagulant. However, data regarding the anti-biofilm activity of ethanol combined with enoxaparin are scarce. We aimed to assess the efficacy of ethanol at different concentrations combined with enoxaparin 60IU as a lock solution for eradication of the biofilm of different microorganisms. METHODS: Using a static 96-well plate in vitro model, we tested 30%, 35%, and 40% ethanol alone and combined with 60IU of enoxaparin against 24-h-old biofilm from the following microorganisms: Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, and Candida albicans. Time of exposure was assessed during a 2-h and 24-h regimen. We analysed the percentage reduction in metabolic activity using the XTT assay. We considered therapy to be successful when metabolic activity was reduced by >90%. RESULTS: In the 2-h regimen, the therapy was successful against all microorganisms at 35% and 40% ethanol without enoxaparin (p<0.001). In the 24-h regimen, the therapy was successful against all microorganisms at all ethanol solutions without enoxaparin (p<0.001). When ethanol was combined with enoxaparin, the therapy was only successful in the 24-h regimen in biofilms of S. epidermidis, C. albicans and E. coli at all concentrations of ethanol assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Our in vitro model demonstrated that when ethanol is combined with enoxaparin in a lock solution, it negatively affects ethanol anti-biofilm activity after both short and long exposures.

A RCT study of Rivaroxaban, low-molecular-weight heparin, and sequential medication regimens for the prevention of venous thrombosis after internal fixation of hip fracture.

The guidelines for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in orthopedic surgeries have reached a consensus on the postoperative conventional anticoagulation. However, the choice of anticoagulant drugs is yet controversial. The use of the drug rivaroxaban is expensive. Since the compliance of patients with low-molecular-weight heparin is considerably low, a cost-effective, efficacious and convenient anticoagulant program is essential. The present study investigated the efficacy, safety, patient compliance, and cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin with sequential Rivaroxaban anticoagulant therapy in patients with a hip fracture, following internal fixation. A total of 287 patients with hip fractures were randomized into three groups: Rivaroxaban alone, Enoxaparin alone, and Enoxaparin followed by Rivaroxaban. The primary endpoint was the incidence of postoperative VTE, whereas the secondary endpoints were the compliance and treatment costs. Adverse reactions included bleeding and wound complications. The incidences of VTE were 5.21%, 14.74%, and 10.42% in the Rivaroxaban, low-molecular-weight heparin, and sequential therapy groups, respectively. The VTE-related mortality rates were 0%, 1.05%, and 1.04%. The average hospital stay was 12±8,15±7, and 11±5d, whereas the compliance rates of the three groups were 82.3%, 71.6%, and 88.5%, respectively. The incidences of adverse incisions were 14.6%, 4.2%, and 6.3% for the three groups examined. The effects and the incidence of postoperative bleeding in the treatment of low-molecular-weight heparin followed by Rivaroxaban did not differ significantly from that of Rivaroxaban alone. However, the postoperative drainage, the cost of treatment and the incidence of VTE reduced significantly, whereas the incidences of adverse incisions and the patient compliance were increased. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR-INR-17010495.

Enoxaparin dose reduction for thrombocytopenia in patients with cancer: a quality assessment study.

The development of thrombocytopenia in the setting of therapeutic anticoagulation for venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) is common in cancer patients, but guidelines for management are based on limited past data and have not been validated. In 2011, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) implemented the following guidelines in this setting: administer full dose enoxaparin for a platelet count > 50,000/mcL, half-dose enoxaparin for a platelet count of 25,000-50,000/mcL, and hold anticoagulation for a platelet count < 25,000/mcL. We now report validation of safety and efficacy of these guidelines. As a Quality Assessment Initiative, we evaluated our guidelines for adult cancer patients at MSKCC who were on therapeutic-dose enoxaparin for VTE during the years 2011 through 2013 and experienced at least one 7-day period of thrombocytopenia (platelet count ≤ 50,000/mcL). We assessed adherence to the enoxaparin dose modification guidelines, major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, recurrent VTE, and mortality during the thrombocytopenic episodes. We identified 99 patients with 140 episodes of thrombocytopenia of 7 or more days. The median duration of these thrombocytopenic episodes was 12 days. The enoxaparin dose was modified in 133 of the 140 episodes (95%), reflecting satisfactory adherence to our institutional guidelines. There were no recurrent VTE events or major bleeding episodes when the anticoagulant dose was reduced or held. In this cohort, there was only one major bleeding episode, a trauma-associated retroperitoneal hemorrhage that occurred on the third day of a thrombocytopenic episode, prior to enoxaparin dose modification. There were 13 clinically relevant non-major bleeding episodes. Lastly, 10 patients died of cancer-related causes during an episode of thrombocytopenia. This Quality Assessment Initiative supports the safety and efficacy of our guidelines for therapeutic enoxaparin dose modification.

Heparin and Lovenox: What the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon Needs to Know.

For the oral and maxillofacial surgeon, many patients will be on heparin products during surgery. So far, there is no standardized approach to treating anticoagulated patients during oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures. When a patient is on heparin therapy, heparin may be stopped 4 to 6 hours before surgery and resumed once hemostasis is achieved, usually within 24 hours. If low-molecular-weight heparin is administered, the treatment is generally stopped at least 12 hours before surgery and then resumed in a similar fashion. Local measures are generally enough to provide adequate hemostasis.

Adherence to Anticoagulant Therapy in Pediatric Patients Hospitalized With Pulmonary Embolism or Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: The American College of Chest Physicians recommends anticoagulant therapy for at least 3 months in children hospitalized for venous thromboembolism. The objectives of the study were to evaluate the medication utilization patterns and predictors of adherence to anticoagulant therapy in pediatric population. METHODS: Texas Medicaid medical and prescription claims from September 1, 2007 to December 12, 2012 were extracted for children (<18 years) hospitalized for pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The index date was defined as the date of the first prescription of an anticoagulant given within 14 days of discharge. Proportion of days covered (≥80% vs <80%) was used to assess adherence to anticoagulants while controlling for demographics, cause of hospitalization, history of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, anticoagulant use, malignancy, drug type, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). KEY FINDINGS: The patients (n = 60) had a mean (± standard deviation [SD]) age of 14.2 (±4.8) years, were primarily female (56.7%), African American (55.0%), enoxaparin users (58.3%), and had a mean (±SD) CCI of 18.3 (±37.7). The mean (±SD) adherence rates for warfarin and enoxaparin were 85.5% (±22.7%) and 78.7% (±27.8%), respectively. Overall, 66.7% were adherent (≥80%) to anticoagulant therapy. Logistic regression showed that increasing age was significantly associated with adherence to anticoagulant therapy, after controlling for other covariates (odds ratio = 1.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.13-1.85). CONCLUSION: Nearly one-third of the pediatric patients on anticoagulant therapy after discharge from PE or DVT were still nonadherent. Further research is needed to highlight the factors responsible for nonadherence in pediatric patients.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Fondaparinux vs Enoxaparin in Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) imposes a significant health and economic burden on a society. Anticoagulants are recommended as standard therapy by various clinical practice guidelines. Fondaparinux was introduced and evaluated in a number of large randomised, controlled trials. This study therefore aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in the treatment of NSTE-ACS in Thailand. METHODS: A two-part construct model comprising a one-year decision tree and a Markov model was developed to capture short and long-term costs and outcomes from the perspective of provider and society. Effectiveness data were derived from OASIS-5 trial while bleeding rates were derived from the Thai Acute Coronary Syndrome Registry (TACSR). Costs data were based on a Thai database and presented in the year of 2013. Both costs and outcomes were discounted by 3% annually. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The results showed that compared with enoxaparin, fondaparinux was a cost-saving strategy (lower cost with slightly higher effectiveness). Cost of revascularisation with major bleeding had a greater impact on the amount of cost saved both from societal and provider perspectives. With a threshold of 160,000 THB ((4,857.3 USD) per QALY in Thailand, fondaparinux was about 99% more cost-effective compared with enoxaparin. CONCLUSION: Fondaparinux should be considered as a cost-effective alternative when compared to enoxaparin for NSTE-ACS based on Thailand's context, especially in the era of limited healthcare resources.