Incidence and predictors of post-thrombotic syndrome in patients with proximal DVT in a real-world setting: findings from the GARFIELD-VTE registry.

Although substantial progress has been made in the pathophysiology and management of the post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), several aspects still need clarification. Among them, the incidence and severity of PTS in the real world, the risk factors for its development, the value of patient's self-evaluation, and the ability to identify patients at risk for severe PTS. Eligible participants (n = 1107) with proximal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) from the global GARFIELD-VTE registry underwent conventional physician's evaluation for PTS 36 months after diagnosis of their DVT using the Villalta score. In addition, 856 patients completed a Villalta questionnaire at 24 months. Variable selection was performed using stepwise algorithm, and predictors of severe PTS were incorporated into a multivariable risk model. The optimistic adjusted c-index was calculated using bootstrapping techniques. Over 36-months, 27.8% of patients developed incident PTS (mild in 18.7%, moderate in 5.7%, severe in 3.4%). Patients with incident PTS were older, had a lower prevalence of transient risk factors of DVT and a higher prevalence of persistent risk factors of DVT. Self-assessment of overall PTS at 24 months showed an agreement of 63.4% with respect to physician's evaluations at 36 months. The severe PTS multivariable model provided an optimistic adjusted c-index of 0.68 (95% CI 0.59-0.77). Approximately a quarter of DVT patients experienced PTS over 36 months after VTE diagnosis. Patient's self-assessment after 24 months provided added value for estimating incident PTS over 36 months. Multivariable risk analysis allowed good discrimination for severe PTS.

Profile of Patients with Isolated Distal Deep Vein Thrombosis versus Proximal Deep Vein Thrombosis or Pulmonary Embolism: RE-COVERY DVT/PE Study.

Isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT) is presumed to be more benign than proximal DVT (PDVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), suggesting a need for different management approaches. This subgroup analysis of the RE-COVERY DVT/PE global, observational study investigated patient characteristics, hospitalization details, and anticoagulant therapy in patients with IDDVT in real-world settings in 34 countries enrolled from January 2016 to May 2017. Data were analyzed descriptively according to the type and location of the index venous thromboembolism (VTE): IDDVT, PDVT ± distal DVT (DDVT), and PE ± DVT. Of the 6,095 eligible patients, 323 with DVT located outside the lower limb and no PE were excluded. Of the remaining 5,772 patients, 17.6% had IDDVT, 39.9% had PDVT ± DDVT, and 42.5% had PE ± DVT. IDDVT patients were younger and had fewer risk factors for VTE than the other groups. Other comorbidities were less frequent in the IDDVT group, except for varicose veins, superficial thrombophlebitis, and venous insufficiency. IDDVT patients were less likely to be diagnosed in an emergency department (22.3 vs. 29.7% for PDVT ± DDVT and 45.4% for PE ± DVT) or hospitalized for VTE (29.2 vs. 48.5% for PDVT ± DDVT and 75.0% for PE ± DVT). At hospital discharge or 14 days after diagnosis (whichever was later), non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants were the most commonly used anticoagulants (55.6% for IDDVT, 54.7% for PDVT ± DDVT, and 52.8% for PE ± DVT). Although differences in patient characteristics, risk factors, and clinical management were identified, anticoagulant treatment of IDDVT was almost equal to that of PDVT or PE. Prospective studies should investigate whether, in a global perspective, this is an appropriate use of anticoagulants.

Short term outcome after left atrial appendage occlusion with the AMPLATZER Amulet and WATCHMAN device: results from the ORIGINAL registry (saxOnian RegIstry analyzinG and followINg left atrial Appendage cLosure).

BACKGROUND: Various randomized multicenter studies have shown that percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is not inferior in stroke prevention compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and can be performed safely and effectively. AIMS: The prospective multicenter ORIGINAL registry in the Free State of Saxony (saxOnian RegIstry analyzinG and followINg left atrial Appendage cLosure) investigated the efficiency and safety of LAAC with Watchman or Amulet device in a real word setting. A special focus was put on the influence of LAAC frequency on periprocedural efficiency and safety. METHODS AND RESULTS: The total of 482 consecutive patients (Abbott Amulet N = 93 and Boston Scientific Watchman N = 389) were included in the periinterventional analyses. After 6 weeks, 353 patients completed the first follow-up including transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) (73.2%). Successful LAAC could be performed in more than 94%. The complication rate does not significantly differ between device types (p = 0.92) according to Fischer test and comprised 2.2% in the Amulet and 2.3% in the Watchman group. The kind of device and the frequency of LAAC per study center had no influence on the success and complication rates. Device related thrombus could be revealed more frequently in the Watchman group (4.5%) than in the Amulet group (1.4%) but this difference is still not significant in Fisher test (p = 0.14). Same conclusion can be made about residual leakage 1.1% versus 0% [not significant in Fisher test (p = 0.26)]. Dual antiplatelet therapy followed the intervention in 64% and 22% of patients were discharged under a combination of an anticoagulant (VKA/DOAC/Heparin) and one antiplatelet agent. CONCLUSIONS: The ORIGINAL registry supports the thesis from large, randomized trials that LAAC can be performed with a very high procedural success rate in the everyday clinical routine irrespective of the used LAA device (Watchman or Amulet). The postprocedural antithrombotic strategy differs widely among the participating centers. Trial registration Name of the registry: "saxOnian RegIstry analyzinG and followINg left atrial Appendage cLosure", Trial registration number: DRKS00023803; Date of registration: 15/12/2020 'Retrospectively registered'; URL of trial registry record: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00023803 .

Safety and effectiveness of dabigatran in routine clinical practice: the RE-COVERY DVT/PE study.

RE-COVERY DVT/PE is a two-phase, international, observational study of anticoagulant therapy in patients with deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE). The objective of the second phase was to compare the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran versus a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) over 1 year of follow-up. Primary safety and effectiveness outcomes were major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events (MBE/CRNMBEs) and symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) (including deaths related to recurrent VTE). To minimize bias due to unbalanced patient characteristics, only patients in an overlapping range of estimated propensity scores were included (analytic set), and propensity score weighting was applied to compare outcomes. Outcome analysis used an as-treated approach, censoring patients after they stopped or switched their initial anticoagulant. Overall, 3009 patients enrolled from 2016 to 2018 were eligible: 60% were diagnosed with DVT alone, 21% with PE alone, and 19% with DVT plus PE. The analytic set consisted of 2969 patients. The incidence rate in %/year (95% confidence interval [CI]) of MBE/CRNMBEs was 2.63 (1.79-3.74) with dabigatran versus 4.48 (3.23-6.06) with warfarin; hazard ratio 0.63 (95% CI 0.32-1.25). For symptomatic recurrent nonfatal or fatal VTE the incidence rate was 1.53 (0.91-2.42) with dabigatran versus 2.01 (1.21-3.14) with VKAs; hazard ratio 0.78 (95% CI 0.30-2.02). In conclusion, we found lower annualized rates of MBE/CRNMBEs with dabigatran than VKA, although the difference was not statistically significant. Annualized rates of symptomatic VTE or related mortality were similar with dabigatran and VKA. These observational results with 1 year of follow-up reflect those of the randomized clinical trials. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02596230, first registered November 4, 2015.

Survival and quality of life after early discharge in low-risk pulmonary embolism.

INTRODUCTION: Early discharge of patients with acute low-risk pulmonary embolism requires validation by prospective trials with clinical and quality-of-life outcomes. METHODS: The multinational Home Treatment of Patients with Low-Risk Pulmonary Embolism with the Oral Factor Xa Inhibitor Rivaroxaban (HoT-PE) single-arm management trial investigated early discharge followed by ambulatory treatment with rivaroxaban. The study was stopped for efficacy after the positive results of the predefined interim analysis at 50% of the planned population. The present analysis includes the entire trial population (576 patients). In addition to 3-month recurrence (primary outcome) and 1-year overall mortality, we analysed self-reported disease-specific (Pulmonary Embolism Quality of Life (PEmb-QoL) questionnaire) and generic (five-level five-dimension EuroQoL (EQ-5D-5L) scale) quality of life as well as treatment satisfaction (Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS)) after pulmonary embolism. RESULTS: The primary efficacy outcome occurred in three (0.5%, one-sided upper 95% CI 1.3%) patients. The 1-year mortality was 2.4%. The mean±sd PEmb-QoL decreased from 28.9±20.6% at 3 weeks to 19.9±15.4% at 3 months, a mean change (improvement) of -9.1% (p<0.0001). Improvement was consistent across all PEmb-QoL dimensions. The EQ-5D-5L was 0.89±0.12 at 3 weeks after enrolment and improved to 0.91±0.12 at 3 months (p<0.0001). Female sex and cardiopulmonary disease were associated with poorer disease-specific and generic quality of life; older age was associated with faster worsening of generic quality of life. The ACTS burden score improved from 40.5±6.6 points at 3 weeks to 42.5±5.9 points at 3 months (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results further support early discharge and ambulatory oral anticoagulation for selected patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism. Targeted strategies may be necessary to further improve quality of life in specific patient subgroups.

Profile of patients diagnosed with acute venous thromboembolism in routine practice according to age and renal function: RE-COVERY DVT/PE study.

In randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), ~ 12-13% of patients were elderly and ~ 26% had mild-to-moderate renal impairment. Observational studies are not restricted by the selection and treatment criteria of RCTs. In this ancillary analysis of the RE-COVERY DVT/PE global observational study, we aimed to describe patient characteristics, comorbidities, and anticoagulant therapy for subgroups of age (< or ≥ 75 years) and renal impairment (creatinine clearance [CrCl; estimated with Cockcroft-Gault formula] < 30 [severe], 30 to < 50 [moderate], 50 to < 80 [mild], ≥ 80 [normal] mL/min). Of 6095 eligible patients, 25.3% were aged ≥ 75 years; 38.2% (1605/4203 with CrCl values) had mild-to-moderate renal impairment. Comorbidities were more common in older patients (73.9% aged ≥ 75 vs. 58.1% < 75 years) and in those with mild or moderate versus no renal impairment (75.9%, 80.9%, and 59.3%, respectively). At hospital discharge or 14 days after diagnosis (whichever was later), most patients (53.7% and 55.1%, respectively) in both age groups received NOACs; 20.8% and 23.4%, respectively, received vitamin K antagonists, 19.0% and 21.8% parenteral therapy, 2.3% and 3.8% other anticoagulant treatments. Use of NOACs decreased with worsening renal impairment (none 58.5%, moderate 49.6%, severe 25.7%) and, in younger versus older patients with moderate renal impairment (33.1% vs. 56.1%). In routine practice, there are more elderly and renally impaired patients with VTE than represented in RCTs. Decreasing renal function, but not older age, was associated with less NOAC use. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02596230. Decreasing renal function, particularly in the subgroup with CrCl < 30 mL/min, but not older age, was associated with less use of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Nevertheless, more than half of the older patients with moderate renal impairment received a NOAC as their oral anticoagulant.

COMPARE: prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial of high- vs. low-dose paclitaxel drug-coated balloons for femoropopliteal interventions.

AIMS: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) for femoropopliteal interventions have not been tested against each other. We aimed to directly compare efficacy and safety of a high-dose (In.Pact™) vs. low-dose (Ranger™) DCB with nominal paclitaxel densities of 3.5 vs. 2.0 µg/mm2. METHODS AND RESULTS: Within a prospective, multicentre, non-inferiority, clinical trial 414 patients with symptomatic femoropopliteal lesions (Rutherford classification 2-4) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to endovascular treatment with either high- or low-dose DCB after stratification for lesion length. Primary efficacy and safety endpoints comprised primary patency and freedom from major adverse events (i.e. device and procedure-related deaths through 1 month, major amputations, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization through 12 months). We set a non-inferiority margin of -10% at 12 months. Total occlusions were observed frequently (>40%) and provisional stenting was performed in every fourth intervention. Non-inferiority was determined for both primary efficacy and safety endpoints at 12 months. Primary patency was 81.5% in the high-dose and 83.0% in low-dose DCB group {difference: 1.5% [lower bound of the 90% two-sided confidence interval (CI) -5.2%]; Pnon-inferiority < 0.01}. Freedom from major adverse events was determined in 92.6% in high-dose and in 91.0% in low-dose DCB group [difference -1.6% (lower bound of the 90% two-sided CI -6.5%); Pnon-inferiority < 0.01]. Overall death rate was low (2.0%) and no major amputation occurred. CONCLUSION: Two DCBs with different coating characteristics exhibited comparable results with excellent effectiveness and safety through 12 months for femoropopliteal interventions including a wide range of lesion lengths. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02701543).

Early discharge and home treatment of patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism with the oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban: an international multicentre single-arm clinical trial.

AIMS: To investigate the efficacy and safety of early transition from hospital to ambulatory treatment in low-risk acute PE, using the oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective multicentre single-arm investigator initiated and academically sponsored management trial in patients with acute low-risk PE (EudraCT Identifier 2013-001657-28). Eligibility criteria included absence of (i) haemodynamic instability, (ii) right ventricular dysfunction or intracardiac thrombi, and (iii) serious comorbidities. Up to two nights of hospital stay were permitted. Rivaroxaban was given at the approved dose for PE for ≥3 months. The primary outcome was symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) or PE-related death within 3 months of enrolment. An interim analysis was planned after the first 525 patients, with prespecified early termination of the study if the null hypothesis could be rejected at the level of α = 0.004 (<6 primary outcome events). From May 2014 through June 2018, consecutive patients were enrolled in seven countries. Of the 525 patients included in the interim analysis, three (0.6%; one-sided upper 99.6% confidence interval 2.1%) suffered symptomatic non-fatal VTE recurrence, a number sufficiently low to fulfil the condition for early termination of the trial. Major bleeding occurred in 6 (1.2%) of the 519 patients comprising the safety population. There were two cancer-related deaths (0.4%). CONCLUSION: Early discharge and home treatment with rivaroxaban is effective and safe in carefully selected patients with acute low-risk PE. The results of the present trial support the selection of appropriate patients for ambulatory treatment of PE.

Incidence and severity of postthrombotic syndrome after iliofemoral thrombosis - results of the Iliaca-PTS - Registry.

Background: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and in particular, iliofemoral thrombosis (IFT) can lead to recurrent thrombosis and postthrombotic syndrome (PTS). Data on the prevalence, predictors and outcome of IFT are scarce. Patients and methods: We retrospectively searched our database of outpatients who had presented with DVT and IFT including the iliac veins from 2014 until 2017. In addition, we performed a prospective registry in a subgroup of patients with IFT. These patients received duplex ultrasound, magnetic resonance venography and measurement of symptom-free walking distance using a standardized treadmill ergometry. The severity of PTS was analyzed using the Villalta-Scale (VS) and quality of life was assessed using the VEINES-QOL/Sym Questionnaire. Results: 847 patients were retrospectively identified with DVT and 19.7% (167/847) of these presented with IFT. 50.9% (85/167) of the IFT-patients agreed to participate in the prospective registry. The majority of these patients (76.5%: 65/85) presented with left-sided IFT. In 53.8% (35/65) May-Thurner syndrome was suspected. 27.1% (23/85) underwent invasive therapy. Moderate or severe PTS (VS ≥ 10) occurred in 10.6% (9/85). The severity of PTS is correlated with a reduced quality of life (ρ (CI 95%) = -0.63 (-0.76; -0.46); p < 0.01). None of the patients presented with a venous ulcer at any time. A high body mass index was a significant predictor (OR (CI 95%) = 1.18 (1.05; 1.33), p = 0.007) for the development of clinically relevant PTS (VS ≥ 10) and venous claudication. Conclusions: Every fifth patient with DVT presented with an IFT. The majority developed left sided IFT. Every 10th patient developed moderate or severe PTS (VS ≥ 10). A high body mass index was predictive for the development of PTS and venous claudication.

Cancer associated thrombosis in everyday practice: perspectives from GARFIELD-VTE.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in cancer patients and is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD)-VTE (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02155491) is a prospective, observational study of 10,684 patients with objectively diagnosed VTE from 415 sites in 28 countries. We compared baseline characteristics, VTE treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes (mortality, recurrent VTE and major bleeding) in 1075 patients with active cancer, 674 patients with a history of cancer, and 8935 patients without cancer. Patients with active cancer and history of cancer were older than cancer-free patients, with median ages of 64.8, 68.9, and 58.4 years, respectively. The most common sites of active cancer were lung (14.5%), colorectal (11.0%), breast (10.6%), and gynaecological (10.3%). Active cancer patients had a higher incidence of upper limb and vena cava thrombosis than cancer-free patients (9.0% vs 4.8% and 5.1% vs 1.4%, respectively), and were more likely to receive parenteral anticoagulation as monotherapy than cancer-free patients (57.8% vs 12.1%), and less likely to receive DOACs (14.2% vs 50.6%). Rates of death, recurrent VTE, and major bleeding were higher in active cancer patients than in cancer-free patients, with hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 14.2 (12.1-16.6), 1.6 (1.2-2.0) and 3.8 (2.9-5.0), respectively. VTE was the second most common cause of death in patients with active cancer or history of cancer. In patients with VTE, those with active cancer are at higher risk of death, recurrence, and major bleeding than those without cancer.

Venous thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 infection) - a position paper of the German Society of Angiology (DGA).

As observed in other infections with a systemic inflammatory response, severe COVID-19 is associated with hypercoagulability and a prothrombotic state. Currently, there is growing evidence that pulmonary embolism and thrombosis contribute to adverse outcomes and increased mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The optimal thromboprophylactic regimen for patients with COVID-19 is not known. Whereas pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis is generally recommended for all hospitalized COVID-19 patients, adequate dosing of anticoagulants remains a controversial issue. Therefore, we summarize current evidence from the available literature and, on behalf of the German Society of Angiology (DGA), we aim to provide advice to establish an improved and more uniform strategy for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19.

Demographic and procedural characteristics in the RECording COurses of vasculaR Diseases (RECCORD) registry - the first 1000 patients.

Background: The RECcording COurses of vasculaR Diseases (RECCORD) registry established by the German Society of Angiology - Society for Vascular Medicine aimed to address the lack in contemporary real-world data regarding current practice of medical and interventional care in vascular patients. We herein report the demographic and procedural characteristics of the first 1000 patients undergoing endovascular revascularization (EVR) for symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD). Patients and methods: RECCORD is an observational, prospective, multicenter, all-comers registry. Only patients undergoing EVR for symptomatic PAD are included and followed up for at least 1 year. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, previous peripheral vascular interventions, medication, clinical stage of lower extremity artery disease (Rutherford category), hemodynamic parameters, and procedural data including complications are recorded via an entirely web-based platform. Results: Of the first 1000 patients (mean age 70 ± 10 years, 35% female) with 1096 EVR at 1477 vascular segments of the lower extremities, 25.0% were at the stage of chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) and 75.0% at non-CLTI. The femoropopliteal segment was the dominant target lesion site (61.0%), followed by iliac (26.4%) and below-the-knee EVR (10.3%). Only angioplasty was performed in 130 EVR (11.9%), adjunctive drug coated balloons (DCB) in 498 (45.4%), additional stenting in 633 (57.8%). Debulking devices were used in 106 (9.7%) EVR. Clinical (Rutherford categories) and hemodynamic parameters (ankle-brachial-index) as well as secondary preventive medication were significantly improved post EVR. Periprocedural complications occurred in 63 (5.7%) EVR with pseudoaneurysm as the leading complication type in 26 (2.4%) EVR. Conclusions: The baseline data of the first 1000 patients from the RECCORD registry representing the real-world setting illustrate that the majority of EVR are performed in patients with claudication. Adjunctive use of DCB and stenting are the dominant types of EVR, while periprocedural complications are at an acceptable low rate.

Efficacy of telemedical interventional management in patients with heart failure (TIM-HF2): a randomised, controlled, parallel-group, unmasked trial.

BACKGROUND: Remote patient management in patients with heart failure might help to detect early signs and symptoms of cardiac decompensation, thus enabling a prompt initiation of the appropriate treatment and care before a full manifestation of a heart failure decompensation. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of our remote patient management intervention on mortality and morbidity in a well defined heart failure population. METHODS: The Telemedical Interventional Management in Heart Failure II (TIM-HF2) trial was a prospective, randomised, controlled, parallel-group, unmasked (with randomisation concealment), multicentre trial with pragmatic elements introduced for data collection. The trial was done in Germany, and patients were recruited from hospitals and cardiology practices. Eligible patients had heart failure, were in New York Heart Association class II or III, had been admitted to hospital for heart failure within 12 months before randomisation, and had a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 45% or lower (or if higher than 45%, oral diuretics were being prescribed). Patients with major depression were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a secure web-based system to either remote patient management plus usual care or to usual care only and were followed up for a maximum of 393 days. The primary outcome was percentage of days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions or all-cause death, analysed in the full analysis set. Key secondary outcomes were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01878630, and has now been completed. FINDINGS: Between Aug 13, 2013, and May 12, 2017, 1571 patients were randomly assigned to remote patient management (n=796) or usual care (n=775). Of these 1571 patients, 765 in the remote patient management group and 773 in the usual care group started their assigned care, and were included in the full analysis set. The percentage of days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions and all-cause death was 4·88% (95% CI 4·55-5·23) in the remote patient management group and 6·64% (6·19-7·13) in the usual care group (ratio 0·80, 95% CI 0·65-1·00; p=0·0460). Patients assigned to remote patient management lost a mean of 17·8 days (95% CI 16·6-19·1) per year compared with 24·2 days (22·6-26·0) per year for patients assigned to usual care. The all-cause death rate was 7·86 (95% CI 6·14-10·10) per 100 person-years of follow-up in the remote patient management group compared with 11·34 (9·21-13·95) per 100 person-years of follow-up in the usual care group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·70, 95% CI 0·50-0·96; p=0·0280). Cardiovascular mortality was not significantly different between the two groups (HR 0·671, 95% CI 0·45-1·01; p=0·0560). INTERPRETATION: The TIM-HF2 trial suggests that a structured remote patient management intervention, when used in a well defined heart failure population, could reduce the percentage of days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions and all-cause mortality. FUNDING: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Treatment of the antiphospholipid syndrome with direct oral anticoagulantsPosition statement of German societies.

The antiphospholipid-syndrome (APS) is one of the most severe forms of thrombophilia, which may not only lead to recurrent venous but also to arterial thromboembolic events (TE), and to severe pregnancy complications, respectively. APS is defined by clinical symptoms and specific laboratory findings: 1. Lupus anticoagulant (LA), 2. anticardiolipin-antibodies (ACA), and 3. ß2-Glycoprotein I-antibodies (ß2GPI-Ab). All test results have to be confirmed after at least 12 weeks. The thrombotic risk is highest, if all 3 test groups are positive. It must be pointed out that the presence of UFH, VKA or DOACs may lead to false positive LA-test results; the addition of a specific absorber after blood sampling may provide reliable results in the presence of DOACs. A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing warfarin and rivaroxaban (TRAPS-trial) including only high-risk patients with triple positive APS was terminated early because of an increased rate of TE in patients treated with rivaroxaban [19 %, mostly arterial, compared to 3 % with warfarin (HR 7.4;1.7-32.9)]. Subsequently, a warning letter was issued by the pharmaceutical manufacturers of DOACs, including a warning of DOAC use in APS-patients, particularly in triple-positive high-risk patients. Conclusions: 1. Clinical suspicion of APS requires careful diagnostic testing. Because of inadequate diagnostic workup, many patients may not even have an APS, and these patients could be adequately treated with a DOAC. 2. Patients with single or double positive antiphospholipid antibodies but without positive LA may have a comparably low thrombotic risk and may also be treated with a DOAC in venous TE - sufficient evidence for that conclusion is not yet available but is suggested by the results of meta-analyses. 3. Triple positive patients or those with APS who suffered from arterial thromboembolism have a very high recurrence risk of thrombosis; the TRAPS-Study shows that these patients should be treated with VKA instead of a DOAC.

Indicators of outcome quality in peripheral arterial disease revascularisations - a Delphi expert consensus.

INTRODUCTION: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) affects a continuously increasing number of people worldwide leading to more invasive treatments. Indication to perform invasive revascularisations usually arises from consensus-based recommendations of practice guidelines and from few randomized controlled trials where outcome measures focus mainly on risk factors associated with mortality and morbidity. To date, no broad consensual agreement of experts on valid indicators of outcome quality exists for PAD. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to collect indicators of outcome quality from studies of PAD. The Delphi technique was used to achieve a consensual agreement on a set of core indicators. The expert panel of the two-round Delphi approach was formed by leading vascular specialists joining the IDOMENEO study, physician assistants, wound nurses, and patient representatives. Items were scored via a web-based anonymised electronic questionnaire using a five-point Likert-scale. RESULTS: Out of 40 invited experts 30 joined the panel and completed round one. Twenty-four experts completed the second and final round. Forty-three indicators of outcome quality were initially identified and validated by the panel. After two Delphi rounds, 12 indicators (27.9 %) achieved the limit of agreement for relevance and four (9.3 %) for practicability. Major adverse limb events (MALE), major amputation, and major re-intervention (or re-operation) were consented as both highly relevant and practicable. Additionally, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, all-cause death, all re-intervention (or re-operation), wound infection, vascular access-related major complication, walking distance, and Rutherford-classification were consented as highly relevant. Ankle-brachial-index was consented as highly practicable. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi approach of vascular experts identified three indicators as highly relevant and clinically practicable to be recommended as indicators of outcome quality in invasive PAD treatment. Among others, these consented items may help in harmonising future studies and quality benchmarking increasing their comparability, validity, and efficiency.

Fibrinolysis for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: The role of fibrinolytic therapy in patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism is controversial. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind trial, we compared tenecteplase plus heparin with placebo plus heparin in normotensive patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Eligible patients had right ventricular dysfunction on echocardiography or computed tomography, as well as myocardial injury as indicated by a positive test for cardiac troponin I or troponin T. The primary outcome was death or hemodynamic decompensation (or collapse) within 7 days after randomization. The main safety outcomes were major extracranial bleeding and ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke within 7 days after randomization. RESULTS: Of 1006 patients who underwent randomization, 1005 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Death or hemodynamic decompensation occurred in 13 of 506 patients (2.6%) in the tenecteplase group as compared with 28 of 499 (5.6%) in the placebo group (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.87; P=0.02). Between randomization and day 7, a total of 6 patients (1.2%) in the tenecteplase group and 9 (1.8%) in the placebo group died (P=0.42). Extracranial bleeding occurred in 32 patients (6.3%) in the tenecteplase group and 6 patients (1.2%) in the placebo group (P<0.001). Stroke occurred in 12 patients (2.4%) in the tenecteplase group and was hemorrhagic in 10 patients; 1 patient (0.2%) in the placebo group had a stroke, which was hemorrhagic (P=0.003). By day 30, a total of 12 patients (2.4%) in the tenecteplase group and 16 patients (3.2%) in the placebo group had died (P=0.42). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism, fibrinolytic therapy prevented hemodynamic decompensation but increased the risk of major hemorrhage and stroke. (Funded by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique in France and others; PEITHO EudraCT number, 2006-005328-18; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00639743.).

Net clinical benefit of dabigatran vs. warfarin in venous thromboembolism: analyses from RE-COVER®, RE-COVER™ II, and RE-MEDY™.

The direct oral anticoagulants, e.g., dabigatran etexilate (DE), are effective and well tolerated treatments for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Net clinical benefit (NCB) is a useful concept in weighing potential benefits against potential harm of comparator drugs. The NCB of DE vs. warfarin in VTE treatment was compared. Post-hoc analyses were performed on pooled data from the 6-month RE-COVER® and RE-COVER™ II trials, and data from the RE-MEDY™ trial (up to 36 months), to compare the NCB of DE (150 mg twice daily) and warfarin [target international normalized ratio (INR) 2.0-3.0]. Patients (≥18 years old) had symptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism. NCB was the composite of cardiovascular endpoints (non-fatal events of recurrent VTE, myocardial infarction, stroke or systemic embolism), all-cause death, and bleeding outcomes, all weighted equally. A broad definition of NCB included major bleeding events (MBE) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events as bleeding outcomes, while a narrow definition included just MBE. The pooled dataset totalled 5107 patients from RE-COVER/RE-COVER II and 2856 patients from RE-MEDY. When NCB was narrowly defined, NCB was similar between DE and warfarin. When broadly defined, NCB was superior with DE vs. warfarin [RE-COVER/RE-COVER II, hazard ratio (HR) 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.68-0.95 and RE-MEDY, HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59-0.91]. These findings were unaffected by warfarin time in therapeutic range. The NCB of DE was similar or superior to warfarin, depending on the NCB definition used, regardless of the quality of INR control.

Extended use of dabigatran, warfarin, or placebo in venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Dabigatran, which is administered in a fixed dose and does not require laboratory monitoring, may be suitable for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In two double-blind, randomized trials, we compared dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg twice daily with warfarin (active-control study) or with placebo (placebo-control study) in patients with venous thromboembolism who had completed at least 3 initial months of therapy. RESULTS: In the active-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 26 of 1430 patients in the dabigatran group (1.8%) and 18 of 1426 patients in the warfarin group (1.3%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 2.64; P=0.01 for noninferiority). Major bleeding occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 25 patients in the warfarin group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27 to 1.02). Major or clinically relevant bleeding was less frequent with dabigatran (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 3 patients in the warfarin group (0.2%) (P=0.02). In the placebo-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 3 of 681 patients in the dabigatran group (0.4%) and 37 of 662 patients in the placebo group (5.6%) (hazard ratio, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.25; P<0.001). Major bleeding occurred in 2 patients in the dabigatran group (0.3%) and 0 patients in the placebo group. Major or clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 36 patients in the dabigatran group (5.3%) and 12 patients in the placebo group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.52 to 5.60). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 1 patient each in the dabigatran and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dabigatran was effective in the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism and carried a lower risk of major or clinically relevant bleeding than warfarin but a higher risk than placebo. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00329238 and NCT00558259, respectively.).

Rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients.

BACKGROUND: The clinically appropriate duration of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with acute medical illnesses is unknown. In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of oral rivaroxaban administered for an extended period, as compared with subcutaneous enoxaparin administered for a standard period, followed by placebo. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients 40 years of age or older who were hospitalized for an acute medical illness to receive subcutaneous enoxaparin, 40 mg once daily, for 10±4 days and oral placebo for 35±4 days or to receive subcutaneous placebo for 10±4 days and oral rivaroxaban, 10 mg once daily, for 35±4 days. The primary efficacy outcomes were the composite of asymptomatic proximal or symptomatic venous thromboembolism up to day 10 (noninferiority test) and up to day 35 (superiority test). The principal safety outcome was the composite of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 8101 patients underwent randomization. A primary efficacy outcome event occurred in 78 of 2938 patients (2.7%) receiving rivaroxaban and 82 of 2993 patients (2.7%) receiving enoxaparin at day 10 (relative risk with rivaroxaban, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.31; P=0.003 for noninferiority) and in 131 of 2967 patients (4.4%) who received rivaroxaban and 175 of 3057 patients (5.7%) who received enoxaparin followed by placebo at day 35 (relative risk, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.96; P=0.02). A principal safety outcome event occurred in 111 of 3997 patients (2.8%) in the rivaroxaban group and 49 of 4001 patients (1.2%) in the enoxaparin group at day 10 (P<0.001) and in 164 patients (4.1%) and 67 patients (1.7%) in the respective groups at day 35 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In acutely ill medical patients, rivaroxaban was noninferior to enoxaparin for standard-duration thromboprophylaxis. Extended-duration rivaroxaban reduced the risk of venous thromboembolism. Rivaroxaban was associated with an increased risk of bleeding. (Funded by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Janssen Research and Development; MAGELLAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00571649.).

Edoxaban versus warfarin for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Whether the oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban can be an alternative to warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism is unclear. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study, we randomly assigned patients with acute venous thromboembolism, who had initially received heparin, to receive edoxaban at a dose of 60 mg once daily, or 30 mg once daily (e.g., in the case of patients with creatinine clearance of 30 to 50 ml per minute or a body weight below 60 kg), or to receive warfarin. Patients received the study drug for 3 to 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4921 patients presented with deep-vein thrombosis, and 3319 with a pulmonary embolism. Among patients receiving warfarin, the time in the therapeutic range was 63.5%. Edoxaban was noninferior to warfarin with respect to the primary efficacy outcome, which occurred in 130 patients in the edoxaban group (3.2%) and 146 patients in the warfarin group (3.5%) (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.13; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The safety outcome occurred in 349 patients (8.5%) in the edoxaban group and 423 patients (10.3%) in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P=0.004 for superiority). The rates of other adverse events were similar in the two groups. A total of 938 patients with pulmonary embolism had right ventricular dysfunction, as assessed by measurement of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels; the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in this subgroup was 3.3% in the edoxaban group and 6.2% in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Edoxaban administered once daily after initial treatment with heparin was noninferior to high-quality standard therapy and caused significantly less bleeding in a broad spectrum of patients with venous thromboembolism, including those with severe pulmonary embolism. (Funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; Hokusai-VTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00986154.).