A Review of Antithrombotic Agents in Dermatologic Surgery and Context for a Practical Approach, With Cardiology and Pharmacologic Input.

Dermatologic surgeons are encountering more patients on antithrombotic agents. There are no established consensus guidelines for managing antithrombotic agents in the perioperative period. We provide an updated overview of antithrombotic agents in dermatologic surgery and management of such agents in the perioperative period with additional unique perspectives from cardiology and pharmacy. A literature search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed to review the English-language medical literature. The landscape of antithrombotic therapy is changing with a notable rise in the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs.) While no consensus guidelines exist, most studies recommend continuing antithrombotic therapy in the perioperative period with appropriate lab monitoring, when applicable. However, recent data suggest it is safe to hold DOACs in the perioperative period. As antithrombotic therapy evolves, the dermatologic surgeon needs to remain current with the most recent available data. Where data are limited, a multidisciplinary approach to managing these agents in the perioperative period is essential. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22(5): doi:10.36849/JDD.7456.

Evaluation of Response to High-Dose Intravenous Vitamin K Administration.

BACKGROUND: Essential to the coagulation pathway, vitamin K (phytonadione) is used to correct clotting factor deficiencies and for reversal of warfarin-induced bleeding. In practice, high-dose intravenous (IV) vitamin K is often used, despite limited evidence supporting repeated dosing. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to characterize differences in responders and nonresponders to high-dose vitamin K to guide dosing strategies. METHODS: This was a case-control study of hospitalized adults who received vitamin K 10 mg IV daily for 3 days. Cases were represented by patients who responded to the first dose of IV vitamin K and controls were nonresponders. The primary outcome was change in international normalized ratio (INR) over time with subsequent vitamin K doses. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with response to vitamin K and incidence of safety events. The Cleveland Clinic Institutional Review Board approved this study. RESULTS: There were 497 patients included, and 182 were responders. Most patients had underlying cirrhosis (91.5%). In responders, the INR decreased from 1.89 at baseline (95% CI = [1.74-2.04]) to 1.40 on day 3 (95% CI = [1.30-1.50]). In nonresponders, the INR decreased from 1.97 (95% CI = [1.83-2.13]) to 1.85 ([1.72-1.99]). Factors associated with response included lower body weight, absence of cirrhosis, and lower bilirubin. There was a low incidence of safety events observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of mainly patients with cirrhosis, the overall adjusted decrease in INR over 3 days was 0.3, which may have minimal clinical impact. Additional studies are needed to identify populations who may benefit from repeated daily doses of high-dose IV vitamin K.

Effectiveness and Safety of Twice Daily Versus Thrice Daily Subcutaneous Unfractionated Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis at a Tertiary Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: The direct comparison of twice daily (BID) and thrice daily (TID) dosing of subcutaneous low dose unfractionated heparin (LDUH) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in a mixed inpatient population is not well-studied. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of BID compared to TID dosing of LDUH for prevention of VTE. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center analysis of patients who received LDUH for VTE prophylaxis between July and September 2015. Outcomes were identified by ICD-9 codes. A matched cohort was created using propensity scores and multivariate analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors for VTE. The primary outcome was incidence of symptomatic VTE. RESULTS: In the full cohort, VTE occurred in 0.71% of patients who received LDUH BID compared to 0.77% of patients who received LDUH TID (p = 0.85). There was no difference in major (p = 0.85) and minor (p = 0.52) bleeding between the BID and TID groups. For the matched cohort, VTE occurred in 1.4% of BID patients and 2.1% of TID patients (p = 0.32). Major bleed occurred in 0.36% of BID patients and 0.52% of TID patients (p = 0.7), while a minor bleed was seen in 3.4% of BID patients and 2.1% of TID patients (p = 0.13). Personal history of VTE (p = 0.002) and weight (p = 0.035) were independently associated with increased risk of VTE. CONCLUSION: This study did not demonstrate a difference in effectiveness or safety between BID and TID dosing of LDUH for VTE prevention.

Update to coagulopathy in COVID-19: Manifestations and management.

Severe COVID-19 illness is associated with intense inflammation, leading to high rates of thrombotic complications that increase morbidity and mortality. Markedly elevated levels of D-dimer with normal fibrinogen levels are the hallmark laboratory findings of severe COVID-19-associated coagulopathy. Prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism is paramount for all hospitalized patients with COVID-19, with more aggressive prophylaxis and screening recommended for critically ill patients with D-dimer levels above 3.0 µg/mL. Point-of-care ultrasonography is the imaging method of choice for patients at high risk, as it entails minimal risk of exposing providers to the virus.

Anticoagulation with temporary Impella device in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: A case series.

The Impella device is a percutaneous ventricular assist devices that requires administration of heparin via a continuous purge solution. Patients on Impella device support may experience hemolysis with accompanying thrombocytopenia generating suspicion for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). However, data and recommendations for use of non-heparin anticoagulants with Impella device are lacking. Therefore, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patients requiring bivalirudin during Impella device support to describe the safety and efficacy of bivalirudin as an alternative anticoagulant during Impella device support. Nine patients were included in the evaluation which analyzed Impella device purge flow and purge pressure along with bivalirudin dosing requirements, incidence of thrombosis, and incidence of pump failure. All patients had a positive platelet factor-4 IgG ELISA test, and the serotonin release assay was positive in four patients. After initiation of bivalirudin, the median (15th, 85th percentile) nadir purge flow decreased by 76% (5%, 88%) and the median (15th, 85th percentile) peak purge pressure increased by 86% (21%, 143%). At the time of bivalirudin discontinuation, the median final purge flow and pressure were 2.4 mL/h (74% decrease) and 969 mmHg (89% increase), respectively. Zero patients experienced catastrophic pump failure. Adding low concentration bivalirudin to the purge solution along with systemic bivalirudin may be a reasonable approach.

COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and solutions from the cardiology pharmacist's perspective.

The recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) challenges pharmacists worldwide. Alongside other specialized pharmacists, we re-evaluated daily processes and therapies used to treat COVID-19 patients within our institutions from a cardiovascular perspective and share what we have learned. To develop a collaborative approach for cardiology issues and concerns in the care of confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients by drawing on the experiences of cardiology pharmacists across the country. On March 26, 2020, a conference call was convened composed of 24 cardiology residency-trained pharmacists (23 actively practicing in cardiology and 1 in critical care) from 16 institutions across the United States to discuss cardiology issues each have encountered with COVID-19 patients. Discussion centered around providing optimal pharmaceutical care while limiting staff exposure. The collaborative of pharmacists found for the ST-elevation myocardial infarction patient, many institutions were diverting COVID-19 rule-out patients to their Emergency Department (ED). Thrombolytics are an alternative to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) allowing for timely treatment of patients and decreased staff exposure. An emergency response grab and go kit includes initial drugs and airway equipment so the patient can be treated and the cart can be left outside the room. Cardiology pharmacists have developed policies and procedures to address monitoring of QT prolonging medications, the use of inhaled prostacyclins, and national drug shortages. Technology has allowed us to practice social distancing, while staying in close contact with our teams, patients, and colleagues and continuing to teach. Residents are engaged in unique decision-making processes with their preceptors and assist as pharmacist extenders. Cardiology pharmacists are in a unique position to work with other pharmacists and health care professionals to implement safe and effective practice changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ongoing monitoring and adjustments are necessary in rapidly changing times.

Coagulopathy in COVID-19: Manifestations and management.

Severe COVID-19 illness is associated with intense inflammation, leading to high rates of thrombotic complications that increase morbidity and mortality. Markedly elevated levels of D-dimer with normal fibrinogen levels are the hallmark laboratory findings of severe COVID-19- associated coagulopathy. Prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism is paramount for all hospitalized patients, with more aggressive prophylaxis and screening recommended for patients with D-dimer levels above 3.0 µg/mL. Point-of-care ultrasonography is the imaging method of choice for patients at high risk, as it entails minimal risk of exposing providers to the virus.

Evaluation of Albumin 25% Use in Critically Ill Patients at a Tertiary Care Medical Center.

Background: Albumin 25% has been studied and has demonstrated benefit in a limited number of patient populations. The use of albumin 25% is associated with higher costs compared with crystalloid therapy. The aim of this study was to describe the prescribing practices of albumin 25% at a tertiary-care medical center and identify opportunities for restriction criteria related to its use to help generate cost savings. Methods: This evaluation was a retrospective, noninterventional, descriptive study of albumin 25% use between June 2015 and February 2016. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients ≥18 years old and who received at least one dose of albumin 25% while admitted to a Cleveland Clinic main campus intensive care unit (ICU). Inclusion was restricted to 150 randomly selected patients. Results: A total of 539 albumin 25% orders were placed for the 150 included patients. The cardiovascular ICU more frequently prescribed albumin 25% compared with the medical, surgical, neurosciences, and coronary ICUs (51% vs 23% vs 11% vs 9% vs 6%, respectively). Although the cardiovascular surgery ICU most frequently prescribed albumin 25% compared with other ICUs, the medical ICU prescribed a larger total quantity of albumin 25% compared with the cardiovascular, surgical, neurosciences, and coronary ICUs (8705 g vs 7275 g vs 3205 g vs 2162 g vs 625 g, respectively). The majority of patients (61%) did not have an indication listed for albumin 25% use and only 9% of patients were prescribed for indications supported by primary literature. Of the patients prescribed albumin for other indications not supported by primary literature (30%), the most common reasons for albumin 25% were hypotension, acute kidney injury, and volume resuscitation. The median cost per patient of albumin 25% was $417 with a total cost of $122 164 for the cohort. Only 19% of the total cost aligned with dosing regimens evaluated in primary literature. Conclusion: Prescribing patterns of albumin 25% at a tertiary academic medical center do not align with indications supported by primary literature. These findings identified a major opportunity for prescriber education and implementation of restriction criteria to target cost savings.

Clevidipine as a therapeutic and cost-effective alternative to sodium nitroprusside in patients with acute aortic syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Sodium nitroprusside is the preferred agent for the treatment of high blood pressure during acute aortic syndrome if blood pressure remains elevated after heart rate control with beta-blockers. The increasing cost of sodium nitroprusside in the USA led us to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous clevidipine, a calcium channel blocker with quick onset of action, short half-life and significantly lower costs than sodium nitroprusside, in patients presenting with acute aortic syndrome. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients admitted to the Cleveland Clinic Cardiac Intensive Care Unit from 2013-2016 with a diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome. Patients who received intravenous sodium nitroprusside were compared with those receiving intravenous clevidipine. The primary outcome was a significant difference in blood pressure at one, three and six hours. Secondary outcomes included time to achieving blood pressure target and in hospital mortality with rates of hypotension and bradycardia as safety endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients with suspected acute aortic pathology received clevidipine and 50 received sodium nitroprusside. Clinical and demographic characteristics were similar in both groups, except for a higher incidence of abdominal aortic aneurysm in the clevidipine group and for a trend towards higher use of labetalol in the clevidipine group. There were no significant differences in blood pressure or heart rate at one, three and six hours after starting either infusion. The rates of hypotension, bradycardia and in-hospital mortality did not differ. Time to achieve blood pressure control were also similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Intravenous clevidipine appears to be a safe and effective alternative to sodium nitroprusside for the management of high blood pressure during acute aortic dissection. In the USA, clevidipine could represent a cost effective therapy providing similar outcomes than sodium nitroprusside.

Anti-Xa assays: What is their role today in antithrombotic therapy?

Although some suggest anti-Xa assays should be the preferred method for monitoring intravenous unfractionated heparin therapy, which method is best is unknown owing to the lack of large randomized controlled trials correlating different assays with clinical outcomes. This article provides an overview of heparin monitoring and the pros, cons, and clinical applications of anti-Xa assays.

Effectiveness of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients with liver disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with liver disease are concomitantly at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding events due to changes in the balance of pro- and anti-hemostatic substances. As such, recommendations for the use of pharmacological VTE prophylaxis are lacking. Recent studies have found no difference in rates of VTE in those receiving and not receiving pharmacological VTE prophylaxis, though most studies have been small. Thus, our study sought to establish if pharmacological VTE prophylaxis is effective and safe in patients with liver disease. AIM: To determine if there is net clinical benefit to providing pharmacological VTE prophylaxis to cirrhotic patients. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 1806 patients were propensity matched to assess if pharmacological VTE prophylaxis is effective and safe in patients with cirrhosis. Patients were divided and evaluated based on receipt of pharmacological VTE prophylaxis. RESULTS: The composite primary outcome of VTE or major bleeding was more common in the no prophylaxis group than the prophylaxis group (8.7% vs 5.1%, P = 0.002), though this outcome was driven by higher rates of major bleeding (6.9% vs 2.9%, P < 0.001) rather than VTE (1.9% vs 2.2%, P = 0.62). There was no difference in length of stay or in-hospital mortality between groups. Pharmacological VTE prophylaxis was independently associated with lower rates of major bleeding (OR = 0.42, 95%CI: 0.25-0.68, P = 0.0005), but was not protective against VTE on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Pharmacological VTE prophylaxis was not associated with a significant reduction in the rate of VTE in patients with liver disease, though no increase in major bleeding events was observed.

A pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) approach: initial experience from the Cleveland Clinic.

Management of intermediate and high risk acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is challenging. The role of multidisciplinary teams for the care of these patients is emerging. Herein, we report our experience with a pulmonary embolism response team (PERT). We conducted a retrospective chart review on all patients admitted to the Cleveland Clinic main campus who required activation of the (PERT) from October 1, 2014 to September 1, 2016. We extracted data pertaining to clinical presentation, bleeding complications, and pre- and post-discharge imaging. Patients were classified as low, intermediate or high risk PE. Descriptive and continuous variables were collected and analyzed. There were 134 PERT activations. PE was confirmed by CT-PA in 118 patients. Fifteen (13%) patients were classified as low risk, 80 (68%) intermediate risk PE and 23 (19%) high risk PE. Fourteen (12%) patients were treated with catheter directed rtPA, 6 (5%) received full dose (100 mg rtPA), 16 (13%) received systemic half-dose (50 mg rtPA), 6 (5%) underwent a surgical embolectomy and 4 (3%) underwent mechanical thrombectomy. 65 (55%) patients received anticoagulation only, and 8 (7%) patients were managed conservatively without any anticoagulation or advanced therapy. 11 (9%) patients died while during the hospitalization. Fourteen patients had major bleeding events. There were no bleeding events among patients who received systemic low dose or full dose rtPA. A multidisciplinary approach to cases of intermediate risk and high risk PE can be implemented successfully. We saw a relatively low rate of bleeding events with use of rtPA.

Safety of Oral Dofetilide Reloading for Treatment of Atrial Arrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: Although dofetilide labeling states that the drug must be initiated or reinitiated with continuous electrocardiographic monitoring and in the presence of trained personnel, the risks of dofetilide reloading justifying repeat hospitalization have not been investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients admitted for dofetilide reloading for atrial arrhythmias were retrospectively reviewed. The need for dose adjustment and the incidence of torsades de pointes (TdP) were identified. The incidence of TdP in dofetilide reloading was compared with patients admitted for dofetilide initial loading. Of 138 patients admitted for dofetilide reloading for atrial arrhythmias, 102 were reloaded at a previously tolerated dose, 30 with a higher dose from a previously tolerated dose and 2 at a lower dose; prior dosage was unknown in 4 patients. Dose adjustment or discontinuation was required in 44 patients (31.9%). No TdP occurred in the same dose reloading group, but TdP occurred in 2 patients admitted to increase dofetilide dosage (0% versus 6.7%; P=0.050). Dofetilide dose adjustment or discontinuation was required in 30 of 102 patients (29.4%) reloaded at a previously tolerated dose and in 11 of 30 patients (36.7%) admitted for an increase in dose. CONCLUSIONS: Although no TdP occurred in patients admitted to reload dofetilide at the same dose as previously tolerated, dosage adjustments or discontinuation was frequent and support the need for hospitalization for dofetilide reloading. Patients admitted for reloading with a higher dose tended to be at higher risk for TdP than patients reloaded at a prior tolerated dose.

Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks: Colchicine in Cardiovascular Medicine.

Colchicine is one of the oldest known drugs that remains part of the current pharmacopeia. Recent studies have examined the efficacy of colchicine in cardiology with promising results. We conducted a search of electronic databases for studies on colchicine in cardiovascular medicine published through October 2016. As the utilization of colchicine in the management of cardiac conditions grows, it is paramount that internists and cardiologists are familiarized with its benefits and risks. We present a comprehensive review of the role of colchicine in the management of cardiovascular diseases with a strong emphasis on side effects and potential drug interactions.

Evaluation of an updated insulin infusion protocol at a large academic medical center.

PURPOSE: The performance of an updated insulin infusion protocol was evaluated at a large, academic medical center. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review was performed after a one-month run-in period for all patients at a large, academic, tertiary care medical center in whom the insulin infusion per protocol was administered from January 1 through February 28, 2014. Data were evaluated to determine the median blood glucose (BG) level, time to achieve BG in the target range, number of BG checks per patient per day, time elapsed between each BG check, and the frequency of hypoglycemia (BG concentration of ≤70 mg/dL). RESULTS: A total of 170 patients were included. The median preinfusion BG was 244 mg/dL (interquartile range [IQR], 204-304 mg/dL), which decreased to a median of 168 mg/dL (IQR, 147.5-199.5 mg/dL) when the protocol was utilized. However, 70 patients (41%) had a median BG concentration of ≥180 mg/dL, and 25 patients' (15%) BG value remained above 180 mg/dL. The median time to achieve the goal BG value was 4.2 hours (95% confidence interval, 3.2-5.1 hours). BG checks were performed a median of every 2.1 hours (IQR, 1.4-2.3 hours). Hypoglycemia was rare, occurring in only 2 (1.2%) patients. CONCLUSION: The median BG with an updated insulin infusion protocol approached the upper limit of the target BG range, and 41% of patients had a median BG above the goal range. Protocol specifications for the frequency of BG monitoring were not commonly followed, but the frequency of hypoglycemia was extremely low.

Impact of the Pharmacy Practice Model Initiative on Clinical Pharmacy Specialist Practice.

This paper describes the goals of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists' Pharmacy Practice Model Initiative (PPMI) and its recommendations for health-system pharmacy practice transformation to meet future patient care needs and elevate the role of pharmacists as patient care providers. PPMI envisions a future in which pharmacists have greater responsibility for medication-related outcomes and technicians assume greater responsibility for product-related activities. Although the PPMI recommendations have elevated the level of practice in many settings, they also potentially affect existing clinical pharmacists, in general, and clinical pharmacy specialists, in particular. Moreover, although more consistent patient care can be achieved with an expanded team of pharmacist providers, the role of clinical pharmacy specialists must not be diminished, especially in the care of complex patients and populations. Specialist practitioners with advanced training and credentials must be available to model and train pharmacists in generalist positions, residents, and students. Indeed, specialist practitioners are often the innovators and practice leaders. Negotiation between hospitals and pharmacy schools is needed to ensure a continuing role for academic clinical pharmacists and their contributions as educators and researchers. Lessons can be applied from disciplines such as nursing and medicine, which have developed new models of care involving effective collaboration between generalists and specialists. Several different pharmacy practice models have been described to meet the PPMI goals, based on available personnel and local goals. Studies measuring the impact of these new practice models are needed.