Aspirin or Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Thromboprophylaxis after a Fracture.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis in patients with fractures, but trials of its effectiveness as compared with aspirin are lacking. METHODS: In this pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, we enrolled patients 18 years of age or older who had a fracture of an extremity (anywhere from hip to midfoot or shoulder to wrist) that had been treated operatively or who had any pelvic or acetabular fracture. Patients were randomly assigned to receive low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) at a dose of 30 mg twice daily or aspirin at a dose of 81 mg twice daily while they were in the hospital. After hospital discharge, the patients continued to receive thromboprophylaxis according to the clinical protocols of each hospital. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were nonfatal pulmonary embolism, deep-vein thrombosis, and bleeding complications. RESULTS: A total of 12,211 patients were randomly assigned to receive aspirin (6101 patients) or low-molecular-weight heparin (6110 patients). Patients had a mean (±SD) age of 44.6±17.8 years, 0.7% had a history of venous thromboembolism, and 2.5% had a history of cancer. Patients received a mean of 8.8±10.6 in-hospital thromboprophylaxis doses and were prescribed a median 21-day supply of thromboprophylaxis at discharge. Death occurred in 47 patients (0.78%) in the aspirin group and in 45 patients (0.73%) in the low-molecular-weight-heparin group (difference, 0.05 percentage points; 96.2% confidence interval, -0.27 to 0.38; P<0.001 for a noninferiority margin of 0.75 percentage points). Deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 2.51% of patients in the aspirin group and 1.71% in the low-molecular-weight-heparin group (difference, 0.80 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.31). The incidence of pulmonary embolism (1.49% in each group), bleeding complications, and other serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with extremity fractures that had been treated operatively or with any pelvic or acetabular fracture, thromboprophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to low-molecular-weight heparin in preventing death and was associated with low incidences of deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and low 90-day mortality. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; PREVENT CLOT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02984384.).

How I treat pediatric venous thromboembolism in the DOAC era.

ABSTRACT: The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) rivaroxaban and dabigatran are newly licensed for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in children and mark a renaissance in pediatric anticoagulation management. They provide a convenient option over standard-of-care anticoagulants (heparins, fondaparinux, and vitamin K antagonists) because of their oral route of administration, child-friendly formulations, and significant reduction in monitoring. However, limitations related to therapeutic monitoring when needed and the lack of approved reversal agents for DOACs in children raise some safety concerns. There is accumulating experience of safety and efficacy of DOACs in adults for a broad scope of indications; however, the cumulative experience of using DOACs in pediatrics, specifically for those with coexisting chronic illnesses, is sparse. Consequently, clinicians must often rely on their experience for treating VTE and extrapolate from data in adults while using DOACs in children. In this article, the authors share their experience of managing 4 scenarios that hematologists are likely to encounter in their day-to-day practice. Topics addressed include (1) appropriateness of indication; (2) use for special populations of children; (3) considerations for laboratory monitoring; (4) transition between anticoagulants; (5) major drug interactions; (6) perioperative management; and (7) anticoagulation reversal.

How I treat acute venous thromboembolism in patients with brain tumors.

ABSTRACT: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with brain tumors. The management of acute VTE is particularly challenging due to an elevated risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Risk of developing ICH on anticoagulation is influenced by a number of factors including tumor type, recent surgery, concomitant medications, platelet counts, and radiographic features. In patients with a heightened risk for ICH, the benefits of anticoagulation need to be balanced against a likelihood of developing major hemorrhagic complications. Management decisions include whether to administer anticoagulation, at what dose, placement of an inferior vena cava filter, monitoring for development of hemorrhage or progressive thrombus, and escalation of anticoagulant dose. This article discusses the complexities of treating acute VTE in patients with brain tumors and outlines treatment algorithms based on the presence or absence of ICH at the time of VTE diagnosis. Through case-based scenarios, we illustrate our approach to anticoagulation, emphasizing individualized risk assessments and evidence-based practices to optimize treatment outcomes while minimizing the risks of hemorrhagic events in patients with brain tumors.

How I treat the co-occurrence of venous and arterial thromboembolism: anticoagulation, antiplatelet therapy, or both?

ABSTRACT: Arterial and venous thromboses are classically considered distinct disease states, with arterial thrombosis mediated predominantly by platelets and therefore, treated with antiplatelet therapy, and venous thrombosis mediated by the plasmatic coagulation system and treated with anticoagulation. However, co-occurrence of arterial and venous events is common, and there is increasing evidence of shared risk factors and pathophysiologic overlap. This presents a management challenge: does the patient with venous and arterial thrombosis, require anticoagulation, antiplatelet therapy, or both? Herein, we present a structured approach to the evaluation and management of patients with venous thrombosis who are also at risk for or have a history of an arterial thromboembolic event. We emphasize the importance of defining the indications for antithrombotic therapy, as well as the evaluation of factors that influence both thrombotic and bleeding risk, including disorder-specific and patient-specific factors, as well as the inherent risk balance of antithrombotic therapy regimens. We illustrate this approach in 4 cases, discussing the unique considerations and recent updates in the management of venous thrombosis, acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke, coronary artery disease and acute myocardial infarction, and peripheral artery disease after revascularization.

Targeting Fibrinolytic Inhibition for Venous Thromboembolism Treatment: Overview of an Emerging Therapeutic Approach.

Venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (venous thromboembolism) are important causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. In patients with venous thromboembolism, thrombi obstruct blood vessels and resist physiological dissolution (fibrinolysis), which can be life threatening and cause chronic complications. Plasminogen activator therapy, which was developed >50 years ago, is effective in dissolving thrombi but has unacceptable bleeding risks. Safe dissolution of thrombi in patients with venous thromboembolism has been elusive despite multiple innovations in plasminogen activator design and catheter-based therapy. Evidence now suggests that fibrinolysis is rigidly controlled by endogenous fibrinolysis inhibitors, including α2-antiplasmin, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, and thrombin-activable fibrinolysis inhibitor. Elevated levels of these fibrinolysis inhibitors are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism in humans. New therapeutic paradigms suggest that accelerated and effective fibrinolysis may be achieved safely by therapeutically targeting these fibrinolytic inhibitors in venous thromboembolism. In this article, we discuss the role of fibrinolytic components in venous thromboembolism and the current status of research and development targeting fibrinolysis inhibitors.

Targeted prophylactic anticoagulation based on the TRiP(cast) score in patients with lower limb immobilisation: a multicentre, stepped wedge, randomised implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic anticoagulation in emergency department patients with lower limb trauma requiring immobilisation is controversial. The Thrombosis Risk Prediction for Patients with Cast Immobilisation-TRiP(cast)-score could identify a large subgroup of patients at low risk of venous thromboembolism for whom prophylactic anticoagulation can be safely withheld. We aimed to prospectively assess the safety of withholding anticoagulation for patients with lower limb trauma at low risk of venous thromboembolism, defined by a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7. METHODS: CASTING was a stepped-wedge, multicentre, cluster-randomised trial with blinded outcome assessment. 15 emergency departments in France and Belgium were selected and randomly assigned staggered start dates for switching from the control phase (ie, anticoagulation prescription according to the physician's usual practice) to the intervention phase (ie, targeted anticoagulation according to TRiP(cast) score: no prescription if score <7 and anticoagulation if score was ≥7). Patients were included if they presented to a participating emergency department with lower limb trauma requiring immobilisation for at least 7 days and were aged 18 years or older. The primary outcome was the 3-month cumulative rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism during the intervention phase in patients with a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7. The targeted strategy was considered safe if this rate was less than 1% with an upper 95% CI of less than 2%. The primary analysis was performed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04064489). FINDINGS: Between June 16, 2020, and Sept 15, 2021, 15 clusters and 2120 patients were included. Of the 1505 patients analysed in the intervention phase, 1159 (77·0%) had a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7 and did not receive anticoagulant treatment. The symptomatic venous thromboembolism rate was 0·7% (95% CI 0·3-1·4, n=8/1159). There was no difference between the control and the intervention phases in the cumulative rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism or in bleeding rates. INTERPRETATION: Patients with a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7 who are not receiving anticoagulation have a very low risk of venous thromboembolism. A large proportion of patients with lower limb trauma and immobilisation could safely avoid thromboprophylaxis. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health.

How I approach the prevention and treatment of thrombotic complications in hospitalized patients.

This article uses case-based discussion to review prevention and management of thrombotic problems in hospitalized patients that involve a clinical hematologist. There is variation in the clinical hematologist's role in thrombosis practice throughout the world, and we discuss this where indicated. Hospital-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE), or hospital-associated thrombosis (HAT), is the term to cover VTE occurring during admission and for 90 days postdischarge and is a common patient safety problem. HATs are the most common cause of VTE accounting for 55% to 60% of all VTE, with an estimated 10 million occurring globally. VTE risk assessment alongside evidence-based thromboprophylaxis reduces this risk significantly. Many hospitalized patients, especially older patients, use direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), mainly to prevent stroke in atrial fibrillation. DOACs require perioperative management and may need urgent reversal. Other complex interventions such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation which require anticoagulation are also discussed. Lastly, those with uncommon high-risk thrombophilias, especially those with antithrombin deficiency, produce unique challenges when hospitalized.

Biomarker risk assessment model identified high-risk patients with cancer who benefit from thromboprophylaxis.

SOURCE CITATION: Alexander M, Harris S, Underhill C, et al. Risk-directed ambulatory thromboprophylaxis in lung and gastrointestinal cancers: the TARGET-TP randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2023;9:1536-1545. 37733336.

Venous thromboembolism: diagnostic advances and unaddressed challenges in management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes recent advances in developing targeted diagnostics for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and unaddressed knowledge gaps in patient management. Without addressing these critical data needs, the morbidity in VTE patients will persist. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies investigating plasma protein profiles in VTE patients have identified key diagnostic targets to address the currently unmet need for low-cost, confirmatory, point-of-care VTE diagnostics. These studies and a growing body of evidence from animal model studies have revealed the importance of inflammatory and vascular pathology in driving VTE, which are currently unaddressed targets for VTE therapy. To enhance the translation of preclinical animal studies, clinical quantification of thrombus burden and comparative component analyses between modeled VTE and clinical VTE are necessary. SUMMARY: Lead candidates from protein profiling of VTE patients' plasma offer a promising outlook in developing low cost, confirmatory, point-of-care testing for VTE. Additionally, addressing the critical knowledge gap of quantitatively measuring clinical thrombi will allow for an array of benefits in VTE management and informing the translatability of experimental therapeutics.

Pharmacology and Clinical Development of Factor XI Inhibitors.

Therapeutic anticoagulation is indicated for a variety of circumstances and conditions in several fields of medicine to prevent or treat venous and arterial thromboembolism. According to the different mechanisms of action, the available parenteral and oral anticoagulant drugs share the common principle of hampering or blocking key steps of the coagulation cascade, which unavoidably comes at the price of an increased propensity to bleed. Hemorrhagic complications affect patient prognosis both directly and indirectly (ie, by preventing the adoption of an effective antithrombotic strategy). Inhibition of factor XI (FXI) has emerged as a strategy with the potential to uncouple the pharmacological effect and the adverse events of anticoagulant therapy. This observation is based on the differential contribution of FXI to thrombus amplification, in which it plays a major role, and hemostasis, in which it plays an ancillary role in final clot consolidation. Several agents were developed to inhibit FXI at different stages (ie, suppressing biosynthesis, preventing zymogen activation, or impeding the biological action of the active form), including antisense oligonucleotides, monoclonal antibodies, small synthetic molecules, natural peptides, and aptamers. Phase 2 studies of different classes of FXI inhibitors in orthopedic surgery suggested that dose-dependent reductions in thrombotic complications are not paralleled by dose-dependent increases in bleeding compared with low-molecular-weight heparin. Likewise, the FXI inhibitor asundexian was associated with lower rates of bleeding compared with the activated factor X inhibitor apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation, although no evidence of a therapeutic effect on stroke prevention is available so far. FXI inhibition could also be appealing for patients with other conditions, including end-stage renal disease, noncardioembolic stroke, or acute myocardial infarction, for which other phase 2 studies have been conducted. The balance between thromboprophylaxis and bleeding achieved by FXI inhibitors needs confirmation in large-scale phase 3 clinical trials powered for clinical end points. Several of such trials are ongoing or planned to define the role of FXI inhibitors in clinical practice and to clarify which FXI inhibitor may be most suited for each clinical indication. This article reviews the rationale, pharmacology, results of medium or small phase 2 studies, and future perspectives of drugs inhibiting FXI.

Edoxaban for 12 Months Versus 3 Months in Patients With Cancer With Isolated Distal Deep Vein Thrombosis (ONCO DVT Study): An Open-Label, Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of anticoagulation therapy for isolated distal deep vein thrombosis in patients with cancer is clinically relevant, but the evidence is lacking. The prolonged anticoagulation therapy could have a potential benefit for prevention of thrombotic events; however, it could also increase the risk of bleeding. METHODS: In a multicenter, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, randomized clinical trial at 60 institutions in Japan, we randomly assigned patients with cancer with isolated distal deep vein thrombosis, in a 1-to-1 ratio, to receive either a 12-month or 3-month edoxaban treatment. The primary end point was a composite of a symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) or VTE-related death at 12 months. The major secondary end point was major bleeding at 12 months, according to the criteria of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. The primary hypothesis was that a 12-month edoxaban treatment was superior to a 3-month edoxaban treatment with respect to the primary end point. RESULTS: From April 2019 through June 2022, 604 patients were randomized, and after excluding 3 patients who withdrew consent, 601 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population: 296 patients in the 12-month edoxaban group and 305 patients in the 3-month edoxaban group. The mean age was 70.8 years, 28% of the patients were men, and 20% of the patients had symptoms of deep vein thrombosis at baseline. The primary end point of a symptomatic recurrent VTE event or VTE-related death occurred in 3 of the 296 patients (1.0%) in the 12-month edoxaban group and in 22 of the 305 patients (7.2%) in the 3-month edoxaban group (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03-0.44). The major secondary end point of major bleeding occurred in 28 of the 296 patients (9.5%) in the 12-month edoxaban group and in 22 of the 305 patients (7.2%) in the 3-month edoxaban group (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.75-2.41). The prespecified subgroups did not affect the estimates on the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cancer with isolated distal deep vein thrombosis, 12 months was superior to 3 months for an edoxaban treatment with respect to the composite outcome of a symptomatic recurrent VTE or VTE-related death. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03895502.

Natural supplements in antiphospholipid syndrome: A case for further study.

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by thrombotic events and/or pregnancy complications in the presence of persistently positive antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Although long-term anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists is considered standard of care, there is an unmet need for safe therapeutics as primary thromboprophylaxis or adjuncts to standard of care in APS. APS is driven by oxidative stress, procoagulant, proinflammatory and angiogenic pathways. For these reasons there has been an increased interest into the investigation of antithrombotic, anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant properties of natural supplements in APS. The objective of this review is to summarize the mechanistic, epidemiologic and clinical evidence behind the use of natural supplements in APS, with a specific focus on vitamin D, omega-3 fatty acids, coenzyme Q10, gingerol, and isoquercetin. This review should serve as a compelling argument for the future study of natural supplements in APS.

Venous Thromboembolism in Children: The Rivaroxaban Experience.

The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the pediatric population has increased more than 10-fold in the last 20 years, as a consequence of the advancement of resuscitation and surgical techniques and the global increase in life expectancy of children suffering from chronic pathologies. Monitoring anticoagulant therapy to achieve outcomes within the target range in childhood VTE, parenteral administration of medications, and frequent blood tests in children are often cumbersome. Availability of safe and effective oral agents with pediatric data to support use would be of clear benefit. A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model was developed to estimate the appropriate dosing schedule for rivaroxaban in children. This incorporated growth/maturation and variability in anthropometrics (e.g., body height, weight, and body mass index), anatomy (e.g., organ weight), physiology (e.g., blood flow rates), metabolism and excretion. Rivaroxaban use in pediatric population underwent a complete investigational program, consisting mainly of one phase I pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics trial, three phase II trials, one phase III trial. The phase III trial enrolled 500 patients from birth to <18 years and documented the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban regimens at dose equivalent to the adult 20 mg dose for the prevention of fatal or symptomatic nonfatal recurrent VTE and major bleeding versus heparin or vitamin K antagonists. Results were similar to those in rivaroxaban studies in adults. The efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in children reported in the EINSTEIN JUNIOR trial provide further support to previous trials in adults (EINSTEIN Program), which demonstrate a favorable profile for the use of rivaroxaban for the management of VTE in challenging patient populations. Other clinical evidence contributing to the use of rivaroxaban among different risk groups in pediatric VTE population confirms the consistency with principal trial. Our review aims to describe the rationale for using rivaroxaban oral suspension in clinical practice and to summarize its multiple indications in each vascular bed (e.g., cerebral venous thrombosis, symptomatic or asymptomatic central venous catheter-associated thrombosis), etiology, and patients setting.

Risk of Venous Thromboembolism by Cancer Type: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Patients with cancer have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Comparing tumor-specific VTE risk is complicated by factors such as surgery, disease stage, and chemotherapy. Network meta-analysis (NMA) using cancer types as network nodes enabled us to estimate VTE rates by leveraging comparisons across cancer types while adjusting for baseline VTE risk in individual studies. This study was conducted to estimate the risk of VTE by cancer type and factors influencing VTE risk. The Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library repositories were systematically searched to identify clinical trials and observational studies published from 2005 to 2022 that assessed the risk of primary cancer-related VTE among two or more distinct cancer types. Studies with similar cancer populations and study methods reporting VTE occurring within 1 year of diagnosis were included in the NMA. Relative VTE rates across cancer types were estimated with random-effects Bayesian NMAs. Absolute VTE rates were calculated from these estimates using the average VTE incidence in lung cancer (the most frequently reported type) as the "anchor." From 2,603 records reviewed, 30 studies were included in this NMA. The general network described 3,948,752 patients and 18 cancer types: 3.1% experienced VTE within 1 year of diagnosis, with cancer-specific rates ranging from 0.7 to 7.4%. Consistent with existing VTE risk prediction tools, pancreatic cancer was associated with higher-than-average VTE risk. Other cancer types with high VTE risk were brain and ovarian cancers. The relative rankings of VTE risk for certain cancers changed based on disease stage and/or receipt of chemotherapy or surgery.

Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Medical Patients with Thrombocytopenia or with Platelet Dysfunction: The Last 10 Years.

Current guideline recommendations for primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are based on randomized clinical trials that usually exclude subjects at a potentially high risk of bleeding complications. For this reason, no specific guideline is available for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with thrombocytopenia and/or platelet dysfunction. However, except in patients with absolute contraindications to anticoagulant drugs, antithrombotic prophylaxis should always be considered, for example, in hospitalized cancer patients with thrombocytopenia, especially in those with multiple VTE risk factors. Low platelet number, platelet dysfunction, and clotting abnormalities are also very common in patients with liver cirrhosis, but these patients have a high incidence of portal venous thrombosis, implying that cirrhotic coagulopathy does not fully protect against thrombosis. These patients may benefit from antithrombotic prophylaxis during hospitalization. Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 need prophylaxis, but frequently experience thrombocytopenia or coagulopathy. In patients with antiphospholipid antibodies, a high thrombotic risk is usually present, even in the presence of thrombocytopenia. VTE prophylaxis in high-risk conditions is thus suggested in these patients. At variance with severe thrombocytopenia (< 50,000/mm3), mild/moderate thrombocytopenia (≥ 50,000/mm3) should not interfere with VTE prevention decisions. In patients with severe thrombocytopenia, pharmacological prophylaxis should be considered on an individual basis. Aspirin is not as effective as heparins in lowering the risk of VTE. Studies in patients with ischemic stroke demonstrated that thromboprophylaxis with heparins is safe in these patients also during antiplatelet treatment. The use of direct oral anticoagulants in the prophylaxis of VTE in internal medicine patients has been recently evaluated, but no specific recommendation exists for patients with thrombocytopenia. The need for VTE prophylaxis in patients on chronic treatment with antiplatelet agents should be evaluated after assessing the individual risk of bleeding complications. Finally, the selection of patients who require post-discharge pharmacological prophylaxis remains debated. New molecules currently under development (such as the inhibitors of factor XI) may contribute to improve the risk/benefit ratio of VTE primary prevention in this setting of patients.

Viewpoint: Provoked thrombosis in antiphospholipid syndrome.

Unprovoked thrombosis (thrombosis occurring without an established environmental factor favouring the episode) is a classic feature of APS. In the general population, provoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) is clearly defined and has clinical and therapeutic differences compared with unprovoked VTE. Whether provoked VTE in the context of APS may lead to a limited treatment duration is not well established. Therefore, careful clinical and laboratory evaluation is needed to identify patients eligible for a limited duration of anticoagulation treatment after provoked VTE. Given the uncertainties of available data, the risks and benefits of treatment decisions should be clearly explained. Decisions should be shared by both the patient and physician. Cardiovascular risk factors are common in patients with APS with arterial thrombosis. There are insufficient data suggesting that cardiovascular risk factor control would allow the cessation of anticoagulation. In most instances, arterial thrombosis will require prolonged anticoagulants. A careful analysis of clinical characteristics and laboratory evaluation, particularly the aPL antibody profile, is needed to make decisions on a case-by-case basis.

Hemostatic and thrombotic disorders in the pediatric patient.

This review focuses on significant advances in the field of pediatric hemostasis and thrombosis, with a focus on published studies within the past decade. The evaluation and management of patients with excessive bleeding remain cornerstones of consultative hematology. We will describe the development of validated bleeding assessment tools relevant to pediatric practice, laboratory advances in the evaluation of von Willebrand disease, and a shift in clinical practice regarding the interpretation of normal coagulation studies in patients with significant bleeding phenotypes. There have also been critical advances in the management of hemostatic disorders. This review highlights new treatment paradigms in hemophilia and the rise of multidisciplinary medical homes for women living with bleeding disorders. Given the continued increase in the incidence of thrombosis, particularly in the hospital setting, a full call to arms against pediatric venous thromboembolism is now essential. We will describe recently completed clinical trials of direct oral anticoagulants in children and adolescents and ongoing work to elucidate the appropriate duration of therapy for children with provoked thrombosis. Recent work regarding the prevention of pediatric venous thromboembolism is highlighted, including studies of thromboprophylaxis and the development of risk prediction models for hospital-acquired thrombosis. Finally, we review advances in our understanding of thrombotic sequelae and the need for continued refinement of our evaluation tools. Despite the significant advances in pediatric hemostasis and thrombosis over the past decade, many unanswered questions remain for the next generation of investigators.

Anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) includes a thromboinflammatory syndrome that may manifest with microvascular and macrovascular thrombosis. Patients with COVID-19 have a higher incidence of venous thromboembolism than other hospitalized patients. Three randomized control trials suggesting benefit of therapeutic heparin in hospitalized noncritically ill patients with COVID-19 have led to conditional guideline recommendations for this treatment. By contrast, prophylactic-dose heparin is recommended for critically ill patients. Unprecedented collaboration and rapidly funded research have improved care of hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Rivaroxaban vs placebo for extended antithrombotic prophylaxis after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

The clinical benefit of extended prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) after laparoscopic surgery for cancer is unclear. The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants for this indication are unexplored. PROphylaxis of venous thromboembolism after LAParoscopic Surgery for colorectal cancer Study II (PROLAPS II) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated, superiority study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of extended prophylaxis with rivaroxaban after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Consecutive patients who had laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were randomized to receive rivaroxaban (10 mg once daily) or a placebo to be started at 7 ± 2 days after surgery and given for the subsequent 3 weeks. All patients received antithrombotic prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin from surgery to randomization. The primary study outcome was the composite of symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE, asymptomatic ultrasonography-detected deep vein thrombosis (DVT), or VTE-related death at 28 ± 2 days after surgery. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Patient recruitment was prematurely closed due to study drug expiry after the inclusion of 582 of the 646 planned patients. A primary study outcome event occurred in 11 of 282 patients in the placebo group compared with 3 of 287 in the rivaroxaban group (3.9 vs 1.0%; odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.94; log-rank P = .032). Major bleeding occurred in none of the patients in the placebo group and 2 patients in the rivaroxaban group (incidence rate 0.7%; 95% CI, 0-1.0). Oral rivaroxaban was more effective than placebo for extended prevention of VTE after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer without an increase in major bleeding. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03055026.

Incidence and impact of anticoagulation-associated abnormal menstrual bleeding in women after venous thromboembolism.

Preliminary data and clinical experience have suggested an increased risk of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) in women of reproductive age treated with anticoagulants, but solid data are lacking. The TEAM-VTE study was an international multicenter prospective cohort study in women aged 18 to 50 years diagnosed with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). Menstrual blood loss was measured by pictorial blood loss assessment charts at baseline for the last menstrual cycle before VTE diagnosis and prospectively for each cycle during 3 to 6 months of follow-up. AUB was defined as an increased score on the pictorial blood loss assessment chart (>100 or >150) or self-reported AUB. AUB-related quality of life (QoL) was assessed at baseline and the end of follow-up using the Menstrual Bleeding Questionnaire. The study was terminated early because of slow recruitment attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the 98 women, 65 (66%) met at least one of the 3 definitions of AUB during follow-up (95% confidence interval [CI], 57%-75%). AUB occurred in 60% of women (36 of 60) without AUB before VTE diagnosis (new-onset AUB; 95% CI, 47%-71%). Overall, QoL decreased over time, with a mean Menstrual Bleeding Questionnaire score increase of 5.1 points (95% CI, 2.2-7.9), but this decrease in QoL was observed only among women with new-onset AUB. To conclude, 2 of every 3 women who start anticoagulation for acute VTE experience AUB, with a considerable negative impact on QoL. These findings should be a call to action to increase awareness and provide evidence-based strategies to prevent and treat AUB in this setting. This was an academic study registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04748393; no funding was received.