Atorvastatin versus Placebo in ICU Patients with COVID-19: Ninety-day Results of the INSPIRATION-S Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the INSPIRATION-S trial, atorvastatin versus placebo was associated with a nonsignificant 16% reduction in 30-day composite of venous/arterial thrombosis or death in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19. Thrombo-inflammatory response in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may last beyond the first 30 days. METHODS: This article reports the effects of atorvastatin 20 mg daily versus placebo on 90-day clinical and functional outcomes from INSPIRATION-S, a double-blind multicenter randomized trial of adult ICU patients with COVID-19. The main outcome for this prespecified study was a composite of adjudicated venous/arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or all-cause mortality. Functional status was assessed with the Post-COVID-19 Functional Scale. RESULTS: In the primary analysis, 587 patients were included (age: 57 [Q1-Q3: 45-68] years; 44% women). By 90-day follow-up, the main outcome occurred in 96 (33.1%) patients assigned to atorvastatin and 113 (38.0%) assigned to placebo (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-1.05, p = 0.11). Atorvastatin in patients who presented within 7 days of symptom onset was associated with reduced 90-day hazard for the main outcome (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.42-0.86, p interaction = 0.02). Atorvastatin use was associated with improved 90-day functional status, although the upper bound CI crossed 1.0 (ORordinal: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.41-1.01, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Atorvastatin 20 mg compared with placebo did not significantly reduce the 90-day composite of death, treatment with ECMO, or venous/arterial thrombosis. However, the point estimates do not exclude a potential clinically meaningful treatment effect, especially among patients who presented within 7 days of symptom onset (NCT04486508).

Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis vs Anticoagulation in Patients With Acute Intermediate-High-risk Pulmonary Embolism: The CANARY Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The optimal treatment of intermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) remains unknown. Objective: To assess the effect of conventional catheter-directed thrombolysis (cCDT) plus anticoagulation vs anticoagulation monotherapy in improving echocardiographic measures of right ventricle (RV) to left ventricle (LV) ratio in acute intermediate-high-risk PE. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis vs Anticoagulation in Patients with Acute Intermediate-High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism (CANARY) trial was an open-label, randomized clinical trial of patients with intermediate-high-risk PE, conducted in 2 large cardiovascular centers in Tehran, Iran, between December 22, 2018, through February 2, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to cCDT (alteplase, 0.5 mg/catheter/h for 24 hours) plus heparin vs anticoagulation monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of patients with a 3-month echocardiographic RV/LV ratio greater than 0.9, assessed by a core laboratory, was the primary outcome. The proportion of patients with an RV/LV ratio greater than 0.9 at 72 hours after randomization and the 3-month all-cause mortality were among secondary outcomes. Major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5) was the main safety outcome. A clinical events committee, masked to the treatment assignment, adjudicated clinical outcomes. Results: The study was prematurely stopped due to the COVID-19 pandemic after recruiting 94 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.4 [2.5] years; 27 women [29%]), of whom 85 patients completed the 3-month echocardiographic follow-up. Overall, 2 of 46 patients (4.3%) in the cCDT group and 5 of 39 patients (12.8%) in the anticoagulation monotherapy group met the primary outcome (odds ratio [OR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.06-1.69; P = .24). The median (IQR) 3-month RV/LV ratio was significantly lower with cCDT (0.7 [0.6-0.7]) than with anticoagulation (0.8 [0.7-0.9); P = .01). An RV/LV ratio greater than 0.9 at 72 hours after randomization was observed in fewer patients treated with cCDT (13 of 48 [27.0%]) than anticoagulation (24 of 46 [52.1%]; OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.14-0.80; P = .01). Fewer patients assigned to cCDT experienced a 3-month composite of death or RV/LV greater than 0.9 (2 of 48 [4.3%] vs 8 of 46 [17.3%]; OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.04-1.03; P = .048). One case of nonfatal major gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in the cCDT group. Conclusions and Relevance: This prematurely terminated randomized clinical trial of patients with intermediate-high-risk PE was hypothesis-generating for improvement in some efficacy outcomes and acceptable rate of major bleeding for cCDT compared with anticoagulation monotherapy and provided support for a definitive clinical outcomes trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05172115.

Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with COVID-19: Comparison between Different Care Settings.

The clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop pulmonary embolism (PE) in the full spectrum of patient care settings need to be elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment, and 90-day outcomes in patients diagnosed with PE while recovering from COVID-19 in the outpatient setting versus those who were diagnosed with PE while being hospitalized with COVID-19. Data from the international Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) registry were used. The major study outcomes were all-cause death, major bleeding, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrences during the first 90 days after PE. From March 2020 to March 2021, 737 patients with COVID-19 experienced acute PE. Of these, 340 (46%) were recovering from COVID-19 as outpatients (267 patients who had been treated at home for COVID-19 and 73 discharged after being hospitalized with COVID-19). Compared with inpatients with COVID-19, those recovering in the outpatient setting upon PE were less likely to be men (odds ratio [OR]: 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-0.72) and less likely to have hypertension (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41-0.74) or diabetes (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.33-0.76). At 90-day follow-up, eight patients (none recovering from COVID-19 as outpatient vs. 2.4% of inpatients with COVID-19) developed recurrent VTE, 34 (1.9 vs. 7.9%) had major bleeding, and 128 (10 vs. 24%) died. On multivariable analysis, inpatients with COVID-19 were at a higher risk of major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 6.80; 95% CI: 1.52-30.4) or death (adjusted HR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.40-3.58). In conclusion, using a large multinational registry of patients with COVID-19 who experienced PE, thromboembolic episodes occurring in those recovering from COVID-19 as outpatients were associated with less ominous outcomes than inpatients with COVID-19.

Rate of Recurrence After Discontinuing Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With COVID-19-Associated Venous Thromboembolism.

This cohort study assesses the rate of recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with COVID-19­associated VTE who discontinued anticoagulation therapy.

Clinical Presentation and Short- and Long-term Outcomes in Patients With Isolated Distal Deep Vein Thrombosis vs Proximal Deep Vein Thrombosis in the RIETE Registry.

Importance: Insufficient data exist about the clinical presentation, short-term, and long-term outcomes of patients with isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT), that is, thrombosis in infrapopliteal veins without proximal extension or pulmonary embolism (PE). Objective: To determine the clinical characteristics, short-term, and 1-year outcomes in patients with IDDVT and to compare the outcomes in unadjusted and multivariable adjusted analyses with patients who had proximal DVT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a multicenter, international cohort study in participating sites of the Registro Informatizado Enfermedad Tromboembólica (RIETE) registry conducted from March 1, 2001, through February 28, 2021. Patients included in this study had IDDVT. Patients with proximal DVT were identified for comparison. Patients were excluded if they had a history of asymptomatic DVT, upper-extremity DVT, coexisting PE, or COVID-19 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were 90-day and 1-year mortality, 1-year major bleeding, and 1-year venous thromboembolism (VTE) deterioration, which was defined as subsequent development of proximal DVT or PE. Results: A total of 33 897 patients were identified with isolated DVT (without concomitant PE); 5938 (17.5%) had IDDVT (mean [SD] age, 61 [17] years; 2975 male patients [50.1%]), and 27 959 (82.5%) had proximal DVT (mean [SD] age, 65 [18] years; 14 315 male patients [51.2%]). Compared with individuals with proximal DVT, those with IDDVT had a lower comorbidity burden but were more likely to have had recent surgery or to have received hormonal therapy. Patients with IDDVT had lower risk of 90-day mortality compared with those with proximal DVT (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.40-0.55). Findings were similar in 1-year unadjusted analyses (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.46-0.59) and adjusted analyses (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-0.82). Patients with IDDVT had a lower 1-year hazard of VTE deterioration (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-0.99). In 1-year adjusted analyses of patients without an adverse event within the first 3 months, IDDVT was associated with lower risk of VTE deterioration (adjusted HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.97). By 1-year follow-up, symptoms or signs of postthrombotic syndrome were less common in patients with IDDVT (47.6% vs 60.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that patients with IDDVT had a less ominous prognosis compared with patients with proximal DVT. Such differences were likely multifactorial, including the differences in demographics, risk factors, comorbidities, particularly for all-cause mortality, and a potential association of thrombus location with VTE deterioration and postthrombotic syndrome. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess the optimal long-term management of IDDVT.

Venous Thrombosis within 30 Days after Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in a Multinational Venous Thromboembolism Registry.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE)-including deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST)-may occur early after vaccination against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We sought to describe the site, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of VTE after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: In a prospective study using the Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) platform, patients with VTE 4-30 days after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 (1 February 2021 through 30 April 2021) were included. VTE patients recruited from the same centers into RIETE in the same months in 2018-2019 were selected as the reference group. All-cause mortality and major bleeding were the main study outcomes. RESULTS: As of 30 April 2020, 102 patients with post-vaccination VTEs had been identified (28 after adenovirus-based vaccination [ChAdOx1 nCov-19; AstraZeneca] and 74 after mRNA-based vaccination [mRNA-1273; Moderna, and BNT162b2; Pfizer]). Compared with 911 historical controls, patients with VTE after adenovirus-based vaccination more frequently had CVST (10.7% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001) or thrombosis at multiple sites (17.9% vs. 1.3%, p < 0.001), more frequently had thrombocytopenia (40.7% vs. 14.7%, p < 0.001), and had higher 14-day mortality (14.3% vs. 0.7%; odds ratio [OR]: 25.1; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7-94.9) and major bleeding rates (10.3% vs. 1.0%, OR: 12.03, 95% CI: 3.07-47.13). The site of thrombosis, accompanying thrombocytopenia, and 14-day mortality rates were not significantly different for patients with VTE after mRNA-based vaccination, compared with historical controls. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with historical controls, VTE after adenovirus-based vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is accompanied by thrombocytopenia, occurs in unusual sites, and is associated with worse clinical outcomes.

Validation of a Prognostic Score to Identify Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 at Increased Risk for Bleeding.

INTRODUCTION: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE), but also for bleeding. We previously derived a prognostic score including four variables (elevated D-dimer, elevated ferritin, critical illness, and therapeutic-dose anticoagulation) that identified those at increased risk for major bleeding. METHODS: We aimed to validate the score in a subsequent cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 receiving standard-, intermediate- or therapeutic doses of VTE prophylaxis. We evaluated its capacity to predict major bleeding, non-major bleeding, and bleeding-related death. RESULTS: The cohort included 972 patients from 29 hospitals, of whom 280 (29%) received standard-; 412 (42%) intermediate-, 157 (16%) therapeutic doses of VTE prophylaxis and 123 (13%) other drugs. Median duration of prophylaxis was 14.7 ± 10.3 days. Major bleeding occurred in 65 patients (6.7%) and non-major bleeding in 67 (6.9%). Thirty patients with major bleeding (46%) died within the first 30 days after bleeding. The prognostic score identified 203 patients (21%) at very low risk, 285 (29%) at low risk, 263 (27%) intermediate-risk and 221 (23%) at high risk for bleeding. Major bleeding occurred in 1.0%, 2.1%, 8.7% and 15.4% of the patients, respectively. Non-major bleeding occurred in 0.5%, 3.5%, 9.5% and 14.2%, respectively. The c-statistics was: 0.74 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.68-0.79) for major bleeding, 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67-0.78) for non-major bleeding and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.76-0.87) for bleeding-related death. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we validated that a prognostic score including 4 easily available items may identify those at increased risk for bleeding.

PICO Questions and DELPHI Methodology for the Management of Venous Thromboembolism Associated with COVID-19.

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have a higher risk of venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) than patients with other infectious or inflammatory diseases, both as macrothrombosis (pulmonar embolism and deep vein thrombosis) or microthrombosis. However, the use of anticoagulation in this scenario remains controversial. This is a project that used DELPHI methodology to answer PICO questions related to anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19. The objective was to reach a consensus among multidisciplinary VTE experts providing answers to those PICO questions. Seven PICO questions regarding patients with COVID-19 responded with a broad consensus: 1. It is recommended to avoid pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in most COVID-19 patients not requiring hospital admission; 2. In most hospitalized patients for COVID-19 who are receiving oral anticoagulants before admission, it is recommended to replace them by low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) at therapeutic doses; 3. Thromboprophylaxis with LMWH at standard doses is suggested for COVID-19 patients admitted to a conventional hospital ward; 4. Standard-doses thromboprophylaxis with LMWH is recommended for COVID-19 patients requiring admission to Intensive Care Unit; 5. It is recommended not to determine D-Dimer levels routinely in COVID-19 hospitalized patients to select those in whom VTE should be suspected, or as a part of the diagnostic algorithm to rule out or confirm a VTE event; 6. It is recommended to discontinue pharmacological thromboprophylaxis at discharge in most patients hospitalized for COVID-19; 7. It is recommended to withdraw anticoagulant treatment after 3 months in most patients with a VTE event associated with COVID-19. The combination of PICO questions and DELPHI methodology provides a consensus on different recommendations for anticoagulation management in patients with COVID-19.

Investigating Lipid-Modulating Agents for Prevention or Treatment of COVID-19: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is associated with systemic inflammation, endothelial activation, and multiorgan manifestations. Lipid-modulating agents may be useful in treating patients with COVID-19. These agents may inhibit viral entry by lipid raft disruption or ameliorate the inflammatory response and endothelial activation. In addition, dyslipidemia with lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and higher triglyceride levels portend worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Upon a systematic search, 40 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with lipid-modulating agents were identified, including 17 statin trials, 14 omega-3 fatty acids RCTs, 3 fibrate RCTs, 5 niacin RCTs, and 1 dalcetrapib RCT for the management or prevention of COVID-19. From these 40 RCTs, only 2 have reported preliminary results, and most others are ongoing. This paper summarizes the ongoing or completed RCTs of lipid-modulating agents in COVID-19 and the implications of these trials for patient management.

Intermediate-Dose versus Standard-Dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: 90-Day Results from the INSPIRATION Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Thrombotic complications are considered among the main extrapulmonary manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The optimal type and duration of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy in these patients remain unknown. METHODS: This article reports the final (90-day) results of the Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) study. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care were randomized to intermediate-dose versus standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation for 30 days, irrespective of hospital discharge status. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or all-cause death. The main safety outcome was major bleeding. RESULTS: Of 600 randomized patients, 562 entered the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median age [Q1, Q3]: 62 [50, 71] years; 237 [42.2%] women), of whom 336 (59.8%) survived to hospital discharge. The primary outcome occurred in 132 (47.8%) of patients assigned to intermediate dose and 130 (45.4%) patients assigned to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.55, p = 0.11). Findings were similar for other efficacy outcomes, and in the landmark analysis from days 31 to 90 (HR: 1.59, 95% CI: 0.45-5.06). There were 7 (2.5%) major bleeding events in the intermediate-dose group (including 3 fatal events) and 4 (1.4%) major bleeding events in the standard-dose group (none fatal) (HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 0.53-6.24). CONCLUSION: Intermediate-dose compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not reduce a composite of death, treatment with ECMO, or venous or arterial thrombosis at 90-day follow-up.

Effect of Intermediate-Dose vs Standard-Dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation on Thrombotic Events, Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Treatment, or Mortality Among Patients With COVID-19 Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: The INSPIRATION Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Thrombotic events are commonly reported in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Limited data exist to guide the intensity of antithrombotic prophylaxis. Objective: To evaluate the effects of intermediate-dose vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation among patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter randomized trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design performed in 10 academic centers in Iran comparing intermediate-dose vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (first hypothesis) and statin therapy vs matching placebo (second hypothesis; not reported in this article) among adult patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19. Patients were recruited between July 29, 2020, and November 19, 2020. The final follow-up date for the 30-day primary outcome was December 19, 2020. Interventions: Intermediate-dose (enoxaparin, 1 mg/kg daily) (n = 276) vs standard prophylactic anticoagulation (enoxaparin, 40 mg daily) (n = 286), with modification according to body weight and creatinine clearance. The assigned treatments were planned to be continued until completion of 30-day follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or mortality within 30 days, assessed in randomized patients who met the eligibility criteria and received at least 1 dose of the assigned treatment. Prespecified safety outcomes included major bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (type 3 or 5 definition), powered for noninferiority (a noninferiority margin of 1.8 based on odds ratio), and severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <20 ×103/µL). All outcomes were blindly adjudicated. Results: Among 600 randomized patients, 562 (93.7%) were included in the primary analysis (median [interquartile range] age, 62 [50-71] years; 237 [42.2%] women). The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 126 patients (45.7%) in the intermediate-dose group and 126 patients (44.1%) in the standard-dose prophylaxis group (absolute risk difference, 1.5% [95% CI, -6.6% to 9.8%]; odds ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.76-1.48]; P = .70). Major bleeding occurred in 7 patients (2.5%) in the intermediate-dose group and 4 patients (1.4%) in the standard-dose prophylaxis group (risk difference, 1.1% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -∞ to 3.4%]; odds ratio, 1.83 [1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.00-5.93]), not meeting the noninferiority criteria (P for noninferiority >.99). Severe thrombocytopenia occurred only in patients assigned to the intermediate-dose group (6 vs 0 patients; risk difference, 2.2% [95% CI, 0.4%-3.8%]; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19, intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, did not result in a significant difference in the primary outcome of a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or mortality within 30 days. These results do not support the routine empirical use of intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation in unselected patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04486508.

Bleeding risk in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 receiving intermediate- or therapeutic doses of thromboprophylaxis.

INTRODUCTION: Some local protocols suggest using intermediate or therapeutic doses of anticoagulants for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the incidence of bleeding, predictors of major bleeding, or the association between bleeding and mortality remain largely unknown. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 that received intermediate or therapeutic doses of anticoagulants from March 25 to July 22, 2020, to identify those at increased risk for major bleeding. We used bivariate and multivariable logistic regression to explore the risk factors associated with major bleeding. RESULTS: During the study period, 1965 patients were enrolled. Of them, 1347 (69%) received intermediate- and 618 (31%) therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, with a median duration of 12 days in both groups. During the hospital stay, 112 patients (5.7%) developed major bleeding and 132 (6.7%) had non-major bleeding. The 30-day all-cause mortality rate for major bleeding was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 36%-54%) and for non-major bleeding 32% (95% CI: 24%-40%). Multivariable analysis showed increased risk for in-hospital major bleeding associated with D-dimer levels >10 times the upper normal range (hazard ratio [HR], 2.23; 95% CI, 1.38-3.59), ferritin levels >500 ng/ml (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.02-3.95), critical illness (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.14-3.18), and therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation (HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-1.97). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 receiving intermediate- or therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation, a major bleeding event occurred in 5.7%. Use of therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation, critical illness, and elevated D-dimer or ferritin levels at admission were associated with increased risk for major bleeding.

Recent Randomized Trials of Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients With COVID-19: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Endothelial injury and microvascular/macrovascular thrombosis are common pathophysiological features of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, the optimal thromboprophylactic regimens remain unknown across the spectrum of illness severity of COVID-19. A variety of antithrombotic agents, doses, and durations of therapy are being assessed in ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that focus on outpatients, hospitalized patients in medical wards, and patients critically ill with COVID-19. This paper provides a perspective of the ongoing or completed RCTs related to antithrombotic strategies used in COVID-19, the opportunities and challenges for the clinical trial enterprise, and areas of existing knowledge, as well as data gaps that may motivate the design of future RCTs.

Systematic testing for venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and raised D-dimer levels

Background Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and raised D-dimer levels have high rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Methods We used data from hospitalized patients with COVID-19 that were tested for pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) because of raised D-dimer levels. We aimed to identify patients at increased risk for VTE. Results From March 25 to July 5th 2020, 1,306 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and raised D-dimer levels underwent testing for VTE in 12 centers. In all, 171 of 714 (24%) had PE, and 161 of 810 (20%) had DVT. The median time elapsed from admission to VTE testing was 12 days, and the median time from D-dimer measurement to testing 2 days. Most patients with VTE were men (62%), mean age was 62±15 years, 45% were in an intensive care unit. Overall, 681 patients (52%) received VTE prophylaxis with standard doses, 241 (18%) with intermediate doses and 100 (7.7%) with therapeutic doses of anticoagulants. On multivariable analysis, patients with D-dimer levels >20 times the upper normal range (19% of the whole cohort) were at increased risk for VTE (odds ratio [OR]: 3.24;95%CI: 2.18-4.83), as were those with a platelet count <100,000/μL (OR: 4.17;95%CI: 1.72-10.0). Conclusions Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and D-dimer levels >20 times the upper normal range were at an increased risk for VTE. This may help to identify what patients could likely benefit from the use of higher than recommended doses of anticoagulants for VTE prophylaxis.

Incidence of VTE and Bleeding Among Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Individual studies have reported widely variable rates for VTE and bleeding among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the incidence of VTE and bleeding among hospitalized patients with COVID-19? METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, 15 standard sources and COVID-19-specific sources were searched between January 1, 2020, and July 31, 2020, with no restriction according to language. Incidence estimates were pooled by using random effects meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was evaluated by using the I2 statistic, and publication bias was assessed by using the Begg and Egger tests. RESULTS: The pooled incidence was 17.0% (95% CI, 13.4-20.9) for VTE, 12.1% (95% CI, 8.4-16.4) for DVT, 7.1% (95% CI, 5.3-9.1) for pulmonary embolism (PE), 7.8% (95% CI, 2.6-15.3) for bleeding, and 3.9% (95% CI, 1.2-7.9) for major bleeding. In subgroup meta-analyses, the incidence of VTE was higher when assessed according to screening (33.1% vs 9.8% by clinical diagnosis), among patients in the ICU (27.9% vs 7.1% in the ward), in prospective studies (25.5% vs 12.4% in retrospective studies), and with the inclusion of catheter-associated thrombosis/isolated distal DVTs and isolated subsegmental PEs. The highest pooled incidence estimate of bleeding was reported for patients receiving intermediate- or full-dose anticoagulation (21.4%) and the lowest in the only prospective study that assessed bleeding events (2.7%). INTERPRETATION: Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the overall estimated pooled incidence of VTE was 17.0%, with higher rates with routine screening, inclusion of distal DVT, and subsegmental PE, in critically ill patients and in prospective studies. Bleeding events were observed in 7.8% of patients and were sensitive to use of escalated doses of anticoagulants and nature of data collection. Additional studies are required to ascertain the significance of various thrombotic events and to identify strategies to improve patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRY: PROSPERO; No.: CRD42020198864; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Presenting Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes among Patients with Venous Thromboembolism during Hospitalization for COVID-19.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, limited data exist on patient characteristics, treatments, and outcomes. To describe the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and short-term outcomes of patients diagnosed with VTE during hospitalization for COVID-19. This is a prospective multinational study of patients with incident VTE during the course of hospitalization for COVID-19. Data were obtained from the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) registry. All-cause mortality, VTE recurrences, and major bleeding during the first 10 days were separately investigated for patients in hospital wards versus those in intensive care units (ICUs). As of May 03, 2020, a total number of 455 patients were diagnosed with VTE (83% pulmonary embolism, 17% isolated deep vein thrombosis) during their hospital stay; 71% were male, the median age was 65 (interquartile range, 55-74) years. Most patients (68%) were hospitalized in medical wards, and 145 in ICUs. Three hundred and seventeen (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 84-91%) patients were receiving thromboprophylaxis at the time of VTE diagnosis. Most patients (88%) received therapeutic low-molecular-weight heparin, and 15 (3.6%) received reperfusion therapies. Among 420 patients with complete 10-day follow-up, 51 (12%; 95% CI: 9.3-15%) died, no patient recurred, and 12 (2.9%; 95% CI: 1.6-4.8%) experienced major bleeding. The 10-day mortality rate was 9.1% (95% CI: 6.1-13%) among patients in hospital wards and 19% (95% CI: 13-26%) among those in ICUs. This study provides characteristics and early outcomes of patients diagnosed with acute VTE during hospitalization for COVID-19. Additional studies are needed to identify the optimal strategies to prevent VTE and to mitigate adverse outcomes associated.

Intermediate versus standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation and statin therapy versus placebo in critically-ill patients with COVID-19: Rationale and design of the INSPIRATION/INSPIRATION-S studies.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular and macrovascular thrombotic events are among the hallmarks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Furthermore, the exuberant immune response is considered an important driver of pulmonary and extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. The optimal management strategy to prevent thrombosis in critically-ill patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. METHODS: The Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) and INSPIRATION-statin (INSPIRATION-S) studies test two independent hypotheses within a randomized controlled trial with 2 × 2 factorial design. Hospitalized critically-ill patients with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction confirmed COVID-19 will be randomized to intermediate-dose versus standard dose prophylactic anticoagulation. The 600 patients undergoing this randomization will be screened and if meeting the eligibility criteria, will undergo an additional double-blind stratified randomization to atorvastatin 20 mg daily versus matching placebo. The primary endpoint, for both hypotheses will be tested for superiority and includes a composite of adjudicated acute arterial thrombosis, venous thromboembolism (VTE), use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or all-cause death within 30 days from enrollment. Key secondary endpoints include all-cause mortality, adjudicated VTE, and ventilator-free days. Key safety endpoints include major bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium definition and severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <20,000/fL) for the anticoagulation hypothesis. In a prespecified secondary analysis for non-inferiority, the study will test for the non-inferiority of intermediate intensity versus standard dose anticoagulation for major bleeding, considering a non-inferiority margin of 1.8 based on odds ratio. Key safety endpoints for the statin hypothesis include rise in liver enzymes >3 times upper normal limit and clinically-diagnosed myopathy. The primary analyses will be performed in the modified intention-to-treat population. Results will be tested in exploratory analyses across key subgroups and in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: INSPIRATION and INSPIRATON-S studies will help address clinically-relevant questions for antithrombotic therapy and thromboinflammatory therapy in critically-ill patients with COVID-19.