Advances and current research in primary thromboprophylaxis to prevent hospital-associated venous thromboembolism.

Hospital-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is defined as any case of VTE occurring during hospital admission and for up to 90 days post discharge. It accounts for over 50% of all cases of VTE internationally; indeed, there are an estimated 10 million cases of hospital-associated VTE annually. Over the last decade, there has been increasing interest in improving VTE risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis. This review summarises all the recent and ongoing major research studies and future challenges in the different areas, including medical, surgical and obstetric patients, as well as special areas such as lower limb immobilisation. We include sections on both pharmacological and mechanical thromboprophylaxis.

A comparison of computational algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials are increasingly using Bayesian methods for their design and analysis. Inference in Bayesian trials typically uses simulation-based approaches such as Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. Markov Chain Monte Carlo has high computational cost and can be complex to implement. The Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations algorithm provides approximate Bayesian inference without the need for computationally complex simulations, making it more efficient than Markov Chain Monte Carlo. The practical properties of Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations compared to Markov Chain Monte Carlo have not been considered for clinical trials. Using data from a published clinical trial, we aim to investigate whether Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations is a feasible and accurate alternative to Markov Chain Monte Carlo and provide practical guidance for trialists interested in Bayesian trial design. METHODS: Data from an international Bayesian multi-platform adaptive trial that compared therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin to usual care in non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were used to fit Bayesian hierarchical generalized mixed models. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was compared to two Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithms, implemented in the software JAGS and stan, using packages available in the statistical software R. Seven outcomes were analysed: organ-support free days (an ordinal outcome), five binary outcomes related to survival and length of hospital stay, and a time-to-event outcome. The posterior distributions for the treatment and sex effects and the variances for the hierarchical effects of age, site and time period were obtained. We summarized these posteriors by calculating the mean, standard deviations and the 95% equitailed credible intervals and presenting the results graphically. The computation time for each algorithm was recorded. RESULTS: The average overlap of the 95% credible interval for the treatment and sex effects estimated using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was 96% and 97.6% compared with stan, respectively. The graphical posterior densities for these effects overlapped for all three algorithms. The posterior mean for the variance of the hierarchical effects of age, site and time estimated using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations are within the 95% credible interval estimated using Markov Chain Monte Carlo but the average overlap of the credible interval is lower, 77%, 85.6% and 91.3%, respectively, for Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations compared to stan. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations and stan were easily implemented in clear, well-established packages in R, while JAGS required the direct specification of the model. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was between 85 and 269 times faster than stan and 26 and 1852 times faster than JAGS. CONCLUSION: Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations could reduce the computational complexity of Bayesian analysis in clinical trials as it is easy to implement in R, substantially faster than Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods implemented in JAGS and stan, and provides near identical approximations to the posterior distributions for the treatment effect. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was less accurate when estimating the posterior distribution for the variance of hierarchical effects, particularly for the proportional odds model, and future work should determine if the Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations algorithm can be adjusted to improve this estimation.

Temporal changes in markers of coagulation and fibrinolysis in adults during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: Bleeding and thrombotic events (BTE) are frequent during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). They occur at varying timepoints and may be affected by temporal changes in coagulation and fibrinolysis. We aimed to assess various coagulation and fibrinolytic markers over time and their relationship with BTE. METHODS: A single-centre prospective study was performed in 17 patients with severe respiratory failure receiving veno-venous ECMO. Blood samples were collected before and during ECMO, and around circuit decannulation. RESULTS: Prior to ECMO, D-Dimer, Plasmin-Antiplasmin complexes (PAP), Plasminogen-Activator Inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) and fibrinogen were elevated. There was an increase in D-Dimer and Prothrombin Fragments 1+2 (PF1+2) (729 to 1305pmol/L, p = .034) by day 1 and PAP increased by day 2 from baseline levels (median 1022 to 1797 µg/L, p = .023). There was a strong positive correlation in PAP, PF1+2 and thrombin-antithrombin complexes (TAT) to D-Dimer. BTE were frequent - 18% had major extracranial haemorrhage and 24% had intracranial haemorrhage. Over time, there was a progressive elevation PAP in patients developing subsequent extracranial haemorrhage, whereas D-Dimer, PAP and PF1+2 increased after intracranial haemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: There were early changes in coagulation activity during ECMO by PF1+2 followed by subsequent fibrinolysis by PAP. Changes in PAP, PF1+2 and TAT were associated with major haemorrhage.

Reducing the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in people with hemophilia: the importance of primary prevention.

Revolutionary advances in the treatment of hemophilia has led to a significant improvement in life expectancy. Associated with this has been an increase in age-related diseases especially atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). While people with hemophilia (PWH) develop atherosclerosis at rates similar to those of the general population, rates of atherothrombosis and mortality related to CVD have been much lower, due to their hypocoagulable state. Changing treatment paradigms, aimed at reducing the risk of bleeding by improving hemostasis to levels approaching normality, has meant that the protection they are thought to have had may be lost. CVD risk factors are just as common in PWH as in the general population, but appear to be undertreated. In particular, primary prevention of CVD is vital in all individuals, but particularly in PWH as treatment of established CVD can be difficult. Active identification and management of CVD risk factors, such as obesity, physical inactivity, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia, is required. In particular, statins have been shown to significantly reduce cardiovascular and all-cause mortality with few adverse events and no increased risk of bleeding in the general population, and their use needs urgent assessment in PWH. Further longitudinal research into preventing CVD in PWH, including accurate CVD risk assessment, is required to optimize prevention and management.

The role of health policy in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in the UK National Health Service-Learning from the past, looking to the future.

Venous thromboembolism is the third most common cause of cardiovascular death globally and many diagnoses are preventable. The UK NHS has led international efforts to reduce VTE, particularly hospital-associated VTE, through coordinated national policy action and world-leading research. Despite this, VTE remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the UK, as underlined by the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Future reductions in VTE incidence/deaths will require progress on several fronts: a better understanding of case mix; revisiting VTE risk assessment, focussing on thromboprophylaxis failure and improving awareness of VTE amongst clinicians and the public. Changes to healthcare delivery, with care increasingly delivered outside of hospital, alongside changing disease patterns, including the rise in obesity, have huge implications for VTE and will dramatically alter prevention. The UK, with its nationalised healthcare model and long history of policy action on VTE, provides a unique lens through which to study past successes and future priorities for VTE prevention.

Challenging the current hypothesis that thrombosis is responsible for the post-COVID-19 condition.

People with the post-COVID-19 condition suffer symptoms that persist beyond 12 weeks following acute COVID-19 infection. Fatigue, shortness of breath, and cognitive dysfunction ("brain fog") are common. Scientists, clinicians, and patients debate the pathophysiology. One pathophysiological hypothesis is that prothrombotic changes associated with acute COVID-19 persist, causing clots that lead to symptoms. This theory, arising from a research team in South Africa and supported by a paper in Nature Medicine, has been widely disseminated on social media and entered the public narrative as a cause of the post-COVID-19 condition. We describe the development of this theory, examine the findings of a Cochrane review that critically appraises the "microclot" beliefs, and critically appraise the influential study relating clotting biomarkers to cognitive deficits. We conclude the inferences for the hypothesis are not based on evidence, unlicensed use of antithrombotic medication is not justified, and apheresis should not be considered outside of a well-designed clinical trial.

Estimating the value of future research into thromboprophylaxis for women during pregnancy and after delivery: a value of information analysis.

BACKGROUND: Risk assessment models (RAMs) are used to select women at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during pregnancy and the puerperium for thromboprophylaxis. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the value of potential future studies that would reduce the decision uncertainty associated with offering thromboprophylaxis according to available RAMs in the following groups: high-risk antepartum women (eg, prior VTE), unselected postpartum women, and postpartum women with risk factors (obesity or cesarean delivery). METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed to simulate clinical outcomes, lifetime costs, and quality-adjusted life-years for different thromboprophylaxis strategies, including thromboprophylaxis for all, thromboprophylaxis for none, and RAM-based thromboprophylaxis. The expected value of perfect information analysis was used to determine which factors are associated with high decision uncertainty. The value of future research studies was estimated using expected value of sample information analysis. Costs were assessed from a health and social services perspective. RESULTS: The expected value of perfect information analysis identified high decision uncertainty for high-risk antepartum women (£21.8 million) and obese postpartum women (£13.4 million), which was largely attributable to uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis in reducing VTE. A randomized controlled trial of thromboprophylaxis compared with none in obese postpartum women is likely to have substantial value (£2.8 million; 300 participants per arm). A trial in women with previous VTE would have higher value but would be less acceptable. CONCLUSION: Future research should focus on estimating the effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis in obese postpartum women with additional risk factors who have not had a previous VTE.

Challenges of designing and conducting cohort studies and clinical trials in populations of pregnant people.

Rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases often affect individuals of childbearing age. The incidence and prevalence of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases is rising. More pregnancies in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases are anticipated and some rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases are associated with pregnancy complications (eg, miscarriages, fetal deaths, preterm births, and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy). Despite the need to understand the use of drugs to treat rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in pregnancy, clinical trials in pregnancy are rare, therapeutics in pregnancy are understudied, and pregnant individuals are routinely excluded as premarketing trial participants. Data on the effectiveness and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs are most often based on post-marketing observational data. Observational studies assessing the bidirectional relationship between rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases and pregnancy, as well as interventional studies of treatments during pregnancy, are scarce. Historical reluctance to perform studies in what was deemed an at-risk group persists in pharmaceutical companies, regulatory bodies, and ethics boards. Additionally, patients must be engaged partners, which requires trust that the research respects the needs and interests of the patient and complies with the rules intended to protect the pregnant person and the fetus from harm. In this Series paper, we share challenges we have encountered in conducting prospective cohort studies and interventional trials of postmarketing approved medications, assessing pregnancy specific outcomes in pregnant women with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in the EU, the UK, and the USA. We discuss the changing landscape around trials in pregnancy and present possible solutions to our challenges.

Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for medical inpatients: decision analysis modelling study.

Objective: To determine the balance of costs, risks, and benefits for different thromboprophylaxis strategies for medical patients during hospital admission. Design: Decision analysis modelling study. Setting: NHS hospitals in England. Population: Eligible adult medical inpatients, excluding patients in critical care and pregnant women. Interventions: Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (low molecular weight heparin) for all medical inpatients, thromboprophylaxis for none, and thromboprophylaxis given to higher risk inpatients according to risk assessment models (Padua, Caprini, IMPROVE, Intermountain, Kucher, Geneva, and Rothberg) previously validated in medical cohorts. Main outcome measures: Lifetime costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were assessed from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services in England. Other outcomes assessed were incidence and treatment of venous thromboembolism, major bleeds including intracranial haemorrhage, chronic thromboembolic complications, and overall survival. Results: Offering thromboprophylaxis to all medical inpatients had a high probability (>99%) of being the most cost effective strategy (at a threshold of £20 000 (€23 440; $25 270) per QALY) in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, when applying performance data from the Padua risk assessment model, which was typical of that observed across several risk assessment models in a medical inpatient cohort. Thromboprophylaxis for all medical inpatients was estimated to result in 0.0552 additional QALYs (95% credible interval 0.0209 to 0.1111) while generating cost savings of £28.44 (-£47 to £105) compared with thromboprophylaxis for none. No other risk assessment model was more cost effective than thromboprophylaxis for all medical inpatients when assessed in deterministic analysis. Risk based thromboprophylaxis was found to have a high (76.6%) probability of being the most cost effective strategy only when assuming a risk assessment model with very high sensitivity is available (sensitivity 99.9% and specificity 23.7% v base case sensitivity 49.3% and specificity 73.0%). Conclusions: Offering pharmacological thromboprophylaxis to all eligible medical inpatients appears to be the most cost effective strategy. To be cost effective, any risk assessment model would need to have a very high sensitivity resulting in widespread thromboprophylaxis in all patients except those at the very lowest risk, who could potentially avoid prophylactic anticoagulation during their hospital stay.

Thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy and the puerperium: a systematic review and economic evaluation to estimate the value of future research.

Background: Pharmacological prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism is currently recommended for women assessed as being at high risk of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy or in the 6 weeks after delivery (the puerperium). The decision to provide thromboprophylaxis involves weighing the benefits, harms and costs, which vary according to the individual's venous thromboembolism risk. It is unclear whether the United Kingdom's current risk stratification approach could be improved by further research. Objectives: To quantify the current decision uncertainty associated with selecting women who are pregnant or in the puerperium for thromboprophylaxis and to estimate the value of one or more potential future studies that would reduce that uncertainty, while being feasible and acceptable to patients and clinicians. Methods: A decision-analytic model was developed which was informed by a systematic review of risk assessment models to predict venous thromboembolism in women who are pregnant or in the puerperium. Expected value of perfect information analysis was used to determine which factors are associated with high decision uncertainty and should be the target of future research. To find out whether future studies would be acceptable and feasible, we held workshops with women who have experienced a blood clot or have been offered blood-thinning drugs and surveyed healthcare professionals. Expected value of sample information analysis was used to estimate the value of potential future research studies. Results: The systematic review included 17 studies, comprising 19 unique externally validated risk assessment models and 1 internally validated model. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity were highly variable ranging from 0% to 100% and 5% to 100%, respectively. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias and applicability concerns. The decision analysis found that there is substantial decision uncertainty regarding the use of risk assessment models to select high-risk women for antepartum prophylaxis and obese postpartum women for postpartum prophylaxis. The main source of decision uncertainty was uncertainty around the effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis for preventing venous thromboembolism in women who are pregnant or in the puerperium. We found that a randomised controlled trial of thromboprophylaxis in obese postpartum women is likely to have substantial value and is more likely to be acceptable and feasible than a trial recruiting women who have had a previous venous thromboembolism. In unselected postpartum women and women following caesarean section, the poor performance of risk assessment models meant that offering prophylaxis based on these models had less favourable cost effectiveness with lower decision uncertainty. Limitations: The performance of the risk assessment model for obese postpartum women has not been externally validated. Conclusions: Future research should focus on estimating the efficacy of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy and the puerperium, and clinical trials would be more acceptable in women who have not had a previous venous thromboembolism. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020221094. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR131021) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 9. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Women who are pregnant or who have given birth in the previous 6 weeks are at increased risk of developing blood clots that can cause serious illness or death. Small doses of blood thinners given by injection are safe in pregnancy and can reduce the risk of blood clots, but they can slightly increase the risk of bleeding. Healthcare professionals use risk assessment tools to decide if a woman is at high risk of blood clots and should be offered blood thinners. We wanted to find out what research would be useful to help them make better decisions. We reviewed previous research to establish which risk assessment tools are best at predicting who will have a blood clot. We then created a mathematical model to predict what would happen when using different risk assessment tools to decide who should be offered blood thinners, both during pregnancy and after giving birth. We found that there was a lot of uncertainty about which women should be offered blood thinners. This was mainly because there have only been a few small studies comparing blood thinners to no treatment in pregnant women or women who have recently given birth. We estimated the value of future studies comparing blood thinners to no treatment, in groups of women with different risk factors, by predicting what information we would gain and how this would be used to improve decisions about using blood thinners. To find out whether these studies would be acceptable and feasible, we held workshops with women who have experienced a blood clot or have been offered blood thinners and surveyed healthcare professionals. We found that a study in obese women who have recently given birth would have substantial value and may be more acceptable than a study in pregnant women with a previous blood clot.

Diagnostic strategies in postpartum individuals with suspected venous thromboembolism: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increased postpartum and contributes to important morbidity and mortality. While there have been advances in evaluating diagnostic algorithms for suspected VTE during pregnancy, there is limited data for postpartum individuals. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a scoping review to describe and evaluate diagnostic strategies used to investigate suspected VTE in postpartum individuals. METHODS: A comprehensive search strategy was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (January 1, 2000-September 30, 2022) to identify original articles that reported on diagnostic strategies in postpartum individuals with suspected VTE. We extracted demographics, clinical decision rules used, D-dimer and imaging completed, including test performance and VTE outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies conducted across 11 countries with separate postpartum data were included for 759 individuals with suspected PE (n = 634) or DVT (n = 125), including unpublished data (n = 251). Among those with suspected PE, computed tomography pulmonary angiography was conducted more commonly (n = 522) than ventilation-perfusion scans (n = 69), with PE positivity rates that ranged from 4 %-27.6 % and 0-50 % across studies, respectively. Among 131 postpartum individuals with suspected PE who had a D-dimer measured, only 4.6 % (6/131) had a negative D-dimer test. For postpartum individuals with suspected DVT, the most common diagnostic test was compression ultrasonography (positivity rate 12.2 %-18.6 %). There were limited retrospective data evaluating the clinical decision rules. CONCLUSIONS: There are heterogeneous approaches globally in the diagnosis of suspected postpartum VTE. Limited high-quality data available underscores the need for more robust evidence to inform clinical practice.

Evaluating pharmacological THRomboprophylaxis in Individuals undergoing superficial endoVEnous treatment across NHS and private clinics in the UK: a multi-centre, assessor-blind, randomised controlled trial-THRIVE trial.

INTRODUCTION: Endovenous therapy is the first choice management for symptomatic varicose veins in NICE guidelines, with 56-70 000 procedures performed annually in the UK. Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a known complication of endovenous therapy, occurring at a rate of up to 3.4%. Despite 73% of UK practitioners administering pharmacological thromboprophylaxis to reduce VTE, no high-quality evidence supporting this practice exists. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis may have clinical and cost benefit in preventing VTE; however, further evidence is needed. This study aims to establish whether when endovenous therapy is undertaken: a single dose or course of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alters the risk of VTE; pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is associated with an increased rate of bleeding events; pharmacological prophylaxis is cost effective. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multi-centre, assessor-blind, randomised controlled trial (RCT) will recruit 6660 participants from 40 NHS and private sites across the UK. Participants will be randomised to intervention (single dose or extended course of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis plus compression) or control (compression alone). Participants will undergo a lower limb venous duplex ultrasound scan at 21-28 days post-procedure to identify asymptomatic DVT. The duplex scan will be conducted locally by blinded assessors. Participants will be contacted remotely for follow-up at 7 days and 90 days post-procedure. The primary outcome is imaging-confirmed lower limb DVT with or without symptoms or PE with symptoms within 90 days of treatment. The main analysis will be according to the intention-to-treat principle and will compare the rates of VTE at 90 days, using a repeated measures analysis of variance, adjusting for any pre-specified strongly prognostic baseline covariates using a mixed effects logistic regression. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by Brent Research Ethics Committee (22/LO/0261). Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN18501431.

Heparin Dose Intensity and Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19.

Background: Clinical trials suggest that therapeutic-dose heparin may prevent critical illness and vascular complications due to COVID-19, but knowledge gaps exist regarding the efficacy of therapeutic heparin including its comparative effect relative to intermediate-dose anticoagulation. Objectives: The authors performed 2 complementary secondary analyses of a completed randomized clinical trial: 1) a prespecified per-protocol analysis; and 2) an exploratory dose-based analysis to compare the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin with low- and intermediate-dose heparin. Methods: Patients who received initial anticoagulation dosed consistently with randomization were included. The primary outcome was organ support-free days (OSFDs), a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support through day 21. Results: Among 2,860 participants, 1,761 (92.8%) noncritically ill and 857 (89.1%) critically ill patients were treated per-protocol. Among noncritically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic-dose heparin improved OSFDs as compared with usual care was 99.3% (median adjusted OR: 1.36; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.07-1.74). Therapeutic heparin had a high posterior probability of efficacy relative to both low- (94.6%; adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CrI: 0.95-1.64) and intermediate- (99.8%; adjusted OR: 1.80; 95% CrI: 1.22-2.62) dose thromboprophylaxis. Among critically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic heparin improved outcomes was low. Conclusions: Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were randomized to and initially received therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, heparin, compared with usual care, was associated with improved OSFDs, a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support. Therapeutic heparin appeared superior to both low- and intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis.

COVID-19, thrombosis and pregnancy.

Increased thromboembolic events have been seen in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 pneumonia, especially those with acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring intensive care support. The coronavirus pandemic has had varied effects on pregnant women globally. Concerns about the potential for thromboembolic events in the prothrombotic period of pregnancy and puerperium when combined with COVID-19 infection, and the impact this may have on maternal and infant morbidity and mortality has led to the development of expert-led guidance providing increased use of thromboprophylaxis in this group. We discuss the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on national and international guidance to prevent thromboembolic events in pregnant women.