ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Intravenous (IV) iron carries risks of mild, self-limiting, tryptase-negative Fishbane and complement activation-related pseudo-allergy reactions, with rare reports of anaphylaxis. Historically, high-molecular-weight iron dextran (HMWID) was associated with a higher incidence of anaphylaxis and empiric premedication with antihistamines/corticosteroids have been used to mitigate this risk. HMWID is no longer available and the risk of hypersensitivity reactions with newer IV iron formulations is low. Therefore, the use of routine prophylactic premedication in all patients is not justified but should be considered in high-risk patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Our primary aim was to reduce inappropriate premedication before IV iron administration by 50% so that our institution's hematology providers only prescribe premedications to patients at high risk of having a severe reaction. Interventions included a multidisciplinary education initiative to highlight current evidence against universal administration of premedications and revision of the IV iron informed consent form and electronic order set. RESULTS: We measured the success of our intervention by comparing data collected during a 6-month pre-intervention period (837 infusions) to a 6-month post-intervention period (947 infusions). Inappropriate administration of premedications decreased from 79% in the pre-intervention period compared to 65% in the post-intervention period. We found no significant difference in the number of Fishbane reactions, severe reactions, and emergency room admissions, despite this reduction in premedication use. DISCUSSION: Although we did not reach our goal of a 50% reduction in inappropriate premedication use, opportunities for process improvements were uncovered and are being explored in the next cycle of this quality improvement project.
Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , Humans , Anaphylaxis/prevention & control , Quality Improvement , Iron/therapeutic use , Iron-Dextran Complex , Administration, IntravenousABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Recombinant porcine factor VIII (rpFVIII, susoctocog alfa) is indicated for the treatment of bleeding episodes in adults with acquired haemophilia A (AHA). AIM: To provide long-term real-world safety and effectiveness data for rpFVIII in the management of AHA bleeding episodes. METHODS: US PASS (NCT02610127) was a multicentre, uncontrolled, open-label, post-marketing safety surveillance study conducted in adults with AHA. Data were collected retrospectively or prospectively for 180 days after rpFVIII treatment. The primary outcome was the incidence of treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes included haemostatic effectiveness of rpFVIII and rpFVIII utilization. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were enrolled from December 2015 to June 2019 (prospective, n = 30; retrospective, n = 23). Six patients experienced seven treatment-related SAEs (incidence 12.0%). The most common treatment-related SAE was FVIII inhibition (inhibiting antibodies to rpFVIII; incidence 8.0%, 95% CI: 2.2-19.2). Five patients reported seven thromboembolic events; one was an SAE and possibly related to rpFVIII. Of bleeding events treated with rpFVIII, 80.3% (57/71) of bleeds resolved with rpFVIII. The median (range) dose of rpFVIII per infusion was 50 (10-300) units/kg, with a median (range) of 6.0 (1-140) infusions and a median (range) time from bleed onset to bleed resolution of 14.0 (2.0-132.7) days. CONCLUSION: In this real-world study of rpFVIII for AHA, no new safety signals were identified compared with previous clinical trial findings. Eighty percent of bleeds resolved with rpFVIII treatment.
Subject(s)
Factor VIII , Hemophilia A , Swine , Animals , Factor VIII/adverse effects , Hemophilia A/complications , Retrospective Studies , Prospective Studies , Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Hemorrhage/etiology , Recombinant Proteins/adverse effects , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hereditary thrombotic thrombocytopenia purpura (hTTP) is an ultra-rare disorder resulting from an inherited deficiency of ADAMTS13, a von Willebrand factor (VWF)-cleaving metalloprotease. The plasma-derived factor VIII/VWF Koate (FVIII/VWFKoate ) has been shown to contain ADAMTS13, allowing for its use to treat hTTP at home by the patient/caregiver. AIM: Based on prior demonstration of safe and effective use of FVIII/VWFKoate in eight patients with hTTP, we conducted a retrospective study to gather additional data regarding the use of FVIII/VWFKoate for hTTP. METHODS: This was a multicentre, retrospective, noninterventional chart review of patients who had received FVIII/VWFKoate for the management of hTTP. Data collected included demographics, medical history, relevant family history, past use and tolerability of fresh frozen plasma, and details regarding FVIII/VWFKoate therapy. RESULTS: The cohort included 11 patients (seven males, four females) with hTTP, ranging in age at study entry from 2 to 28 years. The average duration of FVIII/VWFKoate therapy was 4.8 years (range, 0.5-6.5 years). Among nine patients using FVIII/VWFKoate as prophylaxis, the normalized annual rate of breakthrough TTP episodes ranged from 0.2 to 1.1 episodes/year. All nine patients who received FVIII/VWFKoate prophylaxis had thrombocytopenia recorded at baseline, while eight (88.9%) did not have thrombocytopenia after using FVIII/VWFKoate . There was one AE (unspecified) attributed to FVIII/VWFKoate . CONCLUSION: These data suggest that FVIII/VWFKoate is a safe and well-tolerated source of the missing ADAMTS13 enzyme in patients with hTTP, producing a marked reduction in thrombocytopenia prevalence, low frequency of TTP episodes, and with the added benefit of self- or caregiver-administration.
Subject(s)
Hemostatics , Purpura, Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic , Male , Female , Humans , Child, Preschool , Child , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Factor VIII/therapeutic use , von Willebrand Factor/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Follow-Up Studies , ADAM Proteins , Purpura, Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic/drug therapy , Plasma , ADAMTS13 ProteinABSTRACT
Prophylactic placement of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters prior to performing bariatric surgery is an intervention of unclear safety and efficacy with disagreement between current practice guidelines. To better characterize the risk and benefit of IVC filter insertion prior to bariatric surgery based on the current evidence. A systematic review of the literature of patients with prophylactic IVC filter insertion prior to bariatric surgery was performed and 32 studies were identified for inclusion into the review, of which none were randomized controlled trials. Meta-analysis was performed including the high-quality included studies. Seven high quality studies reported thrombotic events in patients undergoing bariatric surgery who had an IVCF and a control group which allowed for meta-analysis. The pooled odds ratio of venous thrombotic events in the IVC filter population versus the group without IVC filters was 1.57 (95%CI 0.89, 2.76). Among high quality studies 5 reported major bleeding with a rate of 0.76% and 6 reported on IVC filter complications with a rate of 0.67%. Overall no significant reduction in the rate of venous thrombosis was found with prophylactic IVC filter insertion. Use of IVC filters for prophylaxis remains a concern given the lack of clear efficacy in this setting and a small but present complication risk.
Subject(s)
Bariatric Surgery , Preoperative Care , Vena Cava Filters , Venous Thrombosis , Humans , Bariatric Surgery/adverse effects , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/prevention & control , Treatment Outcome , Vena Cava Filters/adverse effects , Vena Cava, Inferior , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Venous Thrombosis/prevention & control , Preoperative Care/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Thromboembolism is a common and deadly consequence of COVID-19 infection for hospitalized patients. Based on clinical evidence pre-dating the COVID-19 pandemic and early observational reports, expert consensus and guidance documents have strongly encouraged the use of prophylactic anticoagulation for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. More recently, multiple clinical trials and larger observational studies have provided evidence for tailoring the approach to thromboprophylaxis for patients with COVID-19. This document provides updated guidance for the use of anticoagulant therapies in patients with COVID-19 from the Anticoagulation Forum, the leading North American organization of anticoagulation providers. We discuss ambulatory, in-hospital, and post-hospital thromboprophylaxis strategies as well as provide guidance for patients with thrombotic conditions who are considering COVID-19 vaccination.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Venous Thromboembolism , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Pandemics , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Because up to 12% of obstetric patients meet criteria for the diagnosis of thrombocytopenia in pregnancy, it is not infrequent that the anesthesiologist must decide whether to proceed with a neuraxial procedure in an affected patient. Given the potential morbidity associated with general anesthesia for cesarean delivery, thoughtful consideration of which patients with thrombocytopenia are likely to have an increased risk of spinal epidural hematoma with neuraxial procedures, and when these risks outweigh the relative benefits is important to consider and to inform shared decision making with patients. Because there are substantial risks associated with withholding a neuraxial analgesic/anesthetic procedure in obstetric patients, every effort should be made to perform a bleeding history assessment and determine the thrombocytopenia etiology before admission for delivery. Whereas multiple other professional societies (obstetric, interventional pain, and hematologic) have published guidelines addressing platelet thresholds for safe neuraxial procedures, the US anesthesia professional societies have been silent on this topic. Despite a paucity of high-quality data, there are now meta-analyses that provide better estimations of risks. An interdisciplinary taskforce was convened to unite the relevant professional societies, synthesize the data, and provide a practical decision algorithm to help inform risk-benefit discussions and shared decision making with patients. Through a systematic review and modified Delphi process, the taskforce concluded that the best available evidence indicates the risk of spinal epidural hematoma associated with a platelet count ≥70,000 × 106/L is likely to be very low in obstetric patients with thrombocytopenia secondary to gestational thrombocytopenia, immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in the absence of other risk factors. Ultimately, the decision of whether to proceed with a neuraxial procedure in an obstetric patient with thrombocytopenia occurs within a clinical context. Potentially relevant factors include, but are not limited to, patient comorbidities, obstetric risk factors, airway examination, available airway equipment, risk of general anesthesia, and patient preference.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Obstetrical/standards , Consensus , Perinatology/standards , Societies, Medical/standards , Thrombocytopenia/therapy , Advisory Committees/standards , Anesthesia, Obstetrical/methods , Female , Humans , Perinatology/methods , Pregnancy , Thrombocytopenia/diagnosisABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in the treatment of patients with or at substantial risk of venous thromboembolic disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary expert panel developed key questions to address in the guideline, and a systematic review of the literature was conducted. Evidence was graded based on a standard methodology, which was used to inform the development of recommendations. RESULTS: The systematic review identified a total of 34 studies that provided the evidence base for the guideline. The expert panel agreed on 18 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Although the evidence on the use of IVC filters in patients with or at risk of venous thromboembolic disease varies in strength and quality, the panel provides recommendations for the use of IVC filters in a variety of clinical scenarios. Additional research is needed to optimize care for this patient population.
Subject(s)
Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Prosthesis Implantation/standards , Radiology, Interventional/standards , Vena Cava Filters/standards , Venous Thromboembolism/therapy , Consensus , Humans , Patient Safety/standards , Prosthesis Design , Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnostic imaging , Venous Thromboembolism/etiologyABSTRACT
Central venous access device (CVAD)-related thrombosis (CRT) is a common complication among patients requiring central venous access as part of their medical care. Complications of CRT include pulmonary embolism, recurrent deep venous thrombosis, loss of central venous access, and postthrombotic syndrome. Patient-, device-, and treatment-related factors can influence the risk of CRT. Despite numerous randomized controlled trials, the clinical benefit of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis for the prevention of CRT remains to be established. Therefore, minimizing patient exposure to known risk factors is the best available approach to prevent CRT. Venous duplex is recommended for the diagnosis of CRT. Anticoagulation for at least 3 months or the duration of the indwelling CVAD is recommended for treatment of CRT. Thrombolysis should be considered for patients at low risk for bleeding who have limb-threatening thrombosis or whose symptoms fail to resolve with adequate anticoagulation. CVAD removal should be consider for patients with bacteremia, persistent symptoms despite anticoagulation, and if the CVAD is no longer needed. Superior vena cava filters should be avoided. Prospective studies are needed to define the optimal management of patients with or at risk for CRT.
Subject(s)
Central Venous Catheters/adverse effects , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/etiology , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/therapy , Adult , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Device Removal , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/physiopathology , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Central venous access devices are a critical instrument in the treatment and supportive care delivery for oncology patients. Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a common complication of central venous access devices in oncology patients. Risk factors for CRT include patient-, device-, and treatment-related risk factors. Treatment of CRT is indicated to reduce symptoms, prevent catheter malfunction, prevent recurrent DVT or thromboembolic pulmonary embolism, and minimize the risk of post-thrombotic syndrome. Minimal prospective data exist on the prevention and treatment of catheter-related thromboses in cancer patients. As such recommendations largely are derived from data in the lower-extremity DVT and PE studies in cancer and non-cancer patients. Based on the available literature, primary pharmacologic prophylaxis against CRT is not recommended in cancer patients. Treatment options for CRT include catheter removal, anticoagulation, catheter-directed thrombolysis, or surgical thrombectomy. Current evidence-based guidelines recommend LMWH as the anticoagulant of choice. However, recent data showing efficacy and safety of DOACs in cancer-related VTE may be extrapolated to treatment of CRT in cancer patients. In patients with CRT, catheter removal should be pursued if continued vascular access is no longer needed, the catheter is dysfunctional, a catheter-associated infection is present, or if CRT symptoms do not resolve with anticoagulation alone. Catheter-directed thrombolysis is reserved for rare severe cases of CRT. Herein we discuss the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and general management of CRT in cancer patients.
Subject(s)
Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Central Venous Catheters/adverse effects , Neoplasms/complications , Thrombosis/therapy , Humans , Thrombosis/diagnosis , Thrombosis/etiologySubject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Blood Coagulation Disorders/drug therapy , Blood Coagulation/drug effects , Gastroenterology/standards , Liver Cirrhosis/drug therapy , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Blood Coagulation Disorders/blood , Blood Coagulation Disorders/diagnosis , Blood Coagulation Tests , Consensus , Evidence-Based Medicine , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Liver Cirrhosis/blood , Liver Cirrhosis/diagnosis , Patient Safety , Predictive Value of Tests , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Treatment OutcomeSubject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Hemophilia A , Coronary Artery Bypass , Hemophilia A/complications , HumansABSTRACT
Choosing Wisely(®) is a medical stewardship initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with professional medical societies in the United States. The American Society of Hematology (ASH) released its first Choosing Wisely(®) list in 2013. Using the same evidence-based methodology as in 2013, ASH has identified 5 additional tests and treatments that should be questioned by clinicians and patients under specific, indicated circumstances. The ASH 2014 Choosing Wisely(®) recommendations include: (1) do not anticoagulate for more than 3 months in patients experiencing a first venous thromboembolic event in the setting of major, transient risk factors for venous thromboembolism; (2) do not routinely transfuse for chronic anemia or uncomplicated pain crises in patients with sickle cell disease; (3) do not perform baseline or surveillance computed tomography scans in patients with asymptomatic, early-stage chronic lymphocytic leukemia; (4) do not test or treat for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia if the clinical pretest probability of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is low; and (5) do not treat patients with immune thrombocytopenia unless they are bleeding or have very low platelet counts.
Subject(s)
Hematologic Tests/instrumentation , Hematologic Tests/methods , Anemia, Sickle Cell/blood , Female , Hematology , Humans , Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell , Male , Societies, Medical , United States , Venous Thromboembolism/bloodABSTRACT
Choosing Wisely (CW) is a medical stewardship initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with professional medical societies in the United States. In an effort to learn from and leverage the work of others, the American Society of Hematology CW Task Force developed a method to identify and prioritize CW recommendations from other medical societies of high relevance and importance to patients with blood disorders and their physicians. All 380 CW recommendations were reviewed and assessed for relevance and importance. Relevance was assessed using the MORE(TM) relevance scale. Importance was assessed with regard to six guiding principles: harm avoidance, evidence, aggregate cost, relevance, frequency and impact. Harm avoidance was considered the most important principle. Ten highly relevant and important recommendations were identified from a variety of professional societies. Recommendations focused on decreasing unnecessary imaging, blood work, treatments and transfusions, as well as on increasing collaboration across disciplines and considering value when recommending treatments. Many CW recommendations have relevance beyond the society of origin. The methods developed by the ASH CW Task Force could be easily adapted by other Societies to identify additional CW recommendations of relevance and importance to their fields. Am. J. Hematol. 91:787-792, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Subject(s)
Hematology/methods , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Health Planning Guidelines , Hematology/standards , Societies, Medical , United StatesABSTRACT
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of inpatient and outpatient morbidity and mortality. While anticoagulant therapy is considered the primary means of prevention and treatment of VTE, inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) are often used as an alternative or adjunct to anticoagulation. With the advent of retrievable filters indications have liberalized, to include placement for primary prophylaxis in high-risk patients. However, this practice is based on limited evidence supporting their efficacy in preventing clinically relevant outcomes. Since indiscriminate use of IVCFs can be associated with net patient harm and increased health care costs, knowledge of the literature surrounding IVCF utilization is critical for providers to adopt best practices. In this review, we will provide an overview of the literature as it relates to specific clinical questions that arise when considering IVCF utilization in the prevention and treatment of VTE. Practice-based recommendations will be reviewed to provide the clinician with guidance on challenging clinical scenarios.
Subject(s)
Vena Cava Filters , Vena Cava, Inferior/surgery , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , HumansABSTRACT
Objectives: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a continuous quality improvement initiative at the University of Florida Health Physicians practice in reducing the time to administer factor replacement therapy (FRT) for hemophilia patients presenting with bleeding in the emergency department (ED). Methods: The study, a quasi-experimental, interventional design, was conducted between January 2020 and January 2023. The intervention, implemented in September 2021, involved training ED physicians, creating a specialized medication order set within the electronic health record (EHR), and a rapid triage system. The effectiveness was measured by comparing the time from ED arrival to factor administration before and after the intervention and benchmarking it against the National Bleeding Disorders Foundation's Medical and Scientific Advisory Council (MASAC)-recommended 1-hour timeline for factor administration. An interrupted time series (ITS) analysis with a generalized least squares model assessed the intervention's impact. Results: A total of 43 ED visits (22 pre-intervention and 21 post-intervention) were recorded. Post-intervention, the average time from ED arrival to factor administration decreased from 5.63 to 3.15 hours. There was no significant increase (27% vs. 29%) in the patients receiving factor within 1-hour of ED arrival. The ITS analysis predicted a 20-hour reduction in the average quarterly time to administer factor by the end of the study, an 84% decrease. Conclusions: The quality improvement program decreased the time to administer FRT for patients with hemophilia in the ED. However, the majority of patients did not achieve the 1-hour MASAC-recommended timeline for factor administration after ED arrival.
ABSTRACT
Inherited dysfibrinogenemias are molecular disorders of fibrinogen that affect fibrin polymerization. The majority of cases are asymptomatic, but a significant proportion suffer from increased bleeding or thrombosis. We present two unrelated cases of dysfibrinogenemia, both of whom showed a characteristic discrepancy between fibrinogen activity and the immunologic fibrinogen. In one patient, the dysfibrinogenemia was confirmed by molecular analysis; in the other case, the diagnosis was presumptive based upon laboratory studies. Both patients underwent elective surgery. Both received a highly purified fibrinogen concentrate preoperatively and demonstrated a suboptimal laboratory response to the infusion. Three methods for determining fibrinogen concentration (Clauss fibrinogen, prothrombin-derived fibrinogen, and the viscoelastic functional fibrinogen) were utilized in the case of one patient, and these techniques showed discrepant results with the classic Clauss method giving the lowest concentration. Neither patient experienced excessive bleeding during surgery. Although these discrepancies have been previously described in untreated patients, their manifestation after infusion of purified fibrinogen is less well appreciated.
Subject(s)
Afibrinogenemia , Hemostatics , Thrombosis , Humans , Fibrinogen/therapeutic use , Fibrinogen/analysis , Afibrinogenemia/diagnosis , Hemorrhage/etiologyABSTRACT
Burnout is prevalent throughout medicine. Few large-scale studies have examined the impact of physician compensation or clinical support staff on burnout among hematologists and oncologists. In 2019, the American Society of Hematology conducted a practice survey of hematologists and oncologists in the AMA (American Medical Association) Masterfile; burnout was measured using a validated, single-item burnout instrument from the Physician Work-Life Study, while satisfaction was assessed in several domains using a 5-point Likert scale. The overall survey response rate was 25.2% (n = 631). Of 411 respondents with complete responses in the final analysis, 36.7% (n = 151) were from academic practices and 63.3% (n = 260) from community practices; 29.0% (n = 119) were female. Over one-third (36.5%; n = 150) reported burnout, while 12.0% (n = 50) had a high level of burnout. In weighted multivariate logistic regression models incorporating numerous variables, compensation plans based entirely on relative value unit (RVU) generation were significantly associated with high burnout among academic and community physicians, while the combination of RVU + salary compensation showed no significant association. Female gender was associated with high burnout among academic physicians. High advanced practice provider utilization was inversely associated with high burnout among community physicians. Distinct patterns of career dissatisfaction were observed between academic and community physicians. We propose that the implementation of compensation models not based entirely on clinical productivity increased support for women in academic medicine, and expansion of advanced practice provider support in community practices may address burnout among hematologists and oncologists.
Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , Oncologists , Physicians , United States/epidemiology , Humans , Female , Male , Job Satisfaction , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) is a heterogeneous disease primarily characterized by thrombocytopenia and microangiopathic hemolytic anemia. Therapeutic plasma exchange has dramatically improved mortality, allowing for emergence of refractory, relapsing, and atypical presentations. In this article, we describe four cases of TTP presenting with minimal schistocytes, mild elevation of lactate dehydrogenase, and symptoms suggestive of macrovascular arterial involvement. With increasing reports of less common presentations of TTP, clinicians should consider this diagnosis in cases of unexplained arterial thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, or hemolytic anemia. Testing for a disintegrin and metalloprotease with thrombospondin Type 1 motif, Member 13 ADAMTS13 activity was extremely useful to help confirm the diagnosis in our series of patients.