ABSTRACT
Even today thromboangiitis obliterans has disease features that remain misunderstood or underappreciated. The epidemiology, etiology and pathophysiology of the disease are still unclear. Biomarkers and disease activity markers are lacking, thus clinical assessment is difficult. We are still struggling to establish unique diagnostic, staging and treatment criteria. This is an academic-collaborative effort to describe the pathophysiology, the clinical manifestations, the diagnostic approach, and the challenges of management of patients with TAO. A systematic search for relevant studies dating from 1900 to the end of 2020 was performed on the PubMed, SCOPUS, and Science Direct databases. Given the intriguing nature of presentation of TAO, its management, to some extent is not only different in different regions of the world but also varies within the same region. Following this project, we discovered ambiguity, overlap and lack of clear-cut criteria for management of TAO. An international group of experts however came to one conclusion. They all agree that management of TAO needs a call for action for a renewed global look with multi-center studies, to update the geographical distribution of the disease and to establish a unique set of diagnostic criteria and a consensus-based guideline for best treatment based on current evidence.
Subject(s)
Cardiology , Thromboangiitis Obliterans , Humans , Thromboangiitis Obliterans/diagnosis , Thromboangiitis Obliterans/epidemiology , Thromboangiitis Obliterans/therapyABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), a viral respiratory illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), may predispose patients to thrombotic disease, both in the venous and arterial circulations, because of excessive inflammation, platelet activation, endothelial dysfunction, and stasis. In addition, many patients receiving antithrombotic therapy for thrombotic disease may develop COVID-19, which can have implications for choice, dosing, and laboratory monitoring of antithrombotic therapy. Moreover, during a time with much focus on COVID-19, it is critical to consider how to optimize the available technology to care for patients without COVID-19 who have thrombotic disease. Herein, the authors review the current understanding of the pathogenesis, epidemiology, management, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who develop venous or arterial thrombosis, of those with pre-existing thrombotic disease who develop COVID-19, or those who need prevention or care for their thrombotic disease during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/pharmacology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections , Fibrinolytic Agents/pharmacology , Pandemics , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/pharmacology , Pneumonia, Viral , Thromboembolism , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Thromboembolism/etiology , Thromboembolism/physiopathology , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), currently a worldwide pandemic, is a viral illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The suspected contribution of thrombotic events to morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients has prompted a search for novel potential options for preventing COVID-19-associated thrombotic disease. In this article by the Global COVID-19 Thrombosis Collaborative Group, we describe novel dosing approaches for commonly used antithrombotic agents (especially heparin-based regimens) and the potential use of less widely used antithrombotic drugs in the absence of confirmed thrombosis. Although these therapies may have direct antithrombotic effects, other mechanisms of action, including anti-inflammatory or antiviral effects, have been postulated. Based on survey results from this group of authors, we suggest research priorities for specific agents and subgroups of patients with COVID-19. Further, we review other agents, including immunomodulators, that may have antithrombotic properties. It is our hope that the present document will encourage and stimulate future prospective studies and randomized trials to study the safety, efficacy, and optimal use of these agents for prevention or management of thrombosis in COVID-19.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Inflammation/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Thrombosis/drug therapy , Animals , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Glycosaminoglycans/therapeutic use , Hemostasis , Humans , Inflammation/complications , Inflammation/immunology , Pandemics , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombosis/complications , Thrombosis/immunology , COVID-19 Drug TreatmentABSTRACT
The aim of this work was to study the safety and effectiveness of silver foam dressing (Contreet® Ag, Coloplast, Humlebaek, Denmark) in promoting the healing of infected venous ulcers over 9 weeks of treatment. Forty-two patients with infected venous ulcers were included and randomized into two groups. Group A had 21 patients (12 women and 9 men, mean age 61.2 years) who were treated with the silver foam for 9 weeks. Group B also had 21 patients (14 women and 7 men, mean age 58.7 years) who were treated with a nonadhesive foam (Biatain®, Coloplast, Humlebaek, Denmark) for 9 weeks. In both groups, ulcer size and depth, intensity of pain, wound exudation, bacterial load, side effects of both materials, and ulcer healing were documented and compared. There was no significant difference at the initial assessment in both groups regarding ulcer size, ulcer depth, grade of exudation, pain intensity, or bacterial load. However, group A ulcers had a significantly greater healing (P = 0.02) compared to group B. Pain intensity was significantly less in group A patients at several time points. After 9 weeks of treatment, the silver foam dressing was found to be a safe material that promotes rapid healing of venous ulcers and relieves pain. .
ABSTRACT
Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin treatment in patients with cancer with established venous thromboembolism (VTE). The aim of this article was to study the pharmacological properties and effectiveness of tinzaparin in patients with cancer as well as its potential anticancer properties. A search of PubMed and ScienceDirect databases up to March 2016 was carried out to identify published studies that detect the properties and use of tinzaparin in oncology. Protamine sulfate partially (60% to 65%) neutralized tinzaparin's anti-Xa activity. No dose adjustment of tinzaparin is needed even in patients with severe renal impairment and Creatinine Clearance ≥20 mL/min. Tinzaparin demonstrated a statistically significant decline in VTE recurrence at 1 year post the index thromboembolic event. A statistically significant reduction in minor bleeding rates was also described, whereas major bleeding events did not decrease in patients with cancer treated with tinzaparin versus those who received vitamin K antagonists. Tinzaparin treatment in patients suffering from deep vein thrombosis reduced the incidence of postthrombotic syndrome and venous ulcers. Tinzaparin's ability to prevent both metastatic dissemination of cancer cells and tumor angiogenesis has been delineated in preclinical research. Current data show that tinzaparin is safe and efficacious either for short-term or for long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Clinical trials are needed in order to examine the utility of tinzaparin in primary prevention of VTE and validate its potential anticancer advantages exhibited in preclinical research.
Subject(s)
Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Neoplasms/complications , Tinzaparin , Treatment Outcome , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a typical complication in patients with lung cancer. Khorana score is an established tool for thromboembolic risk stratification of ambulatory patients with cancer undergoing outpatient chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of the Khorana score for VTE and death in patients with lung adenocarcinoma during first-line or adjuvant chemotherapy. Medical records of 130 patients with lung adenocarcinoma receiving first-line or adjuvant chemotherapy were retrospectively studied during the time period June 2013 to May 2015. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 13 (10.0%) patients. Thromboembolic events were significantly correlated with reduced survival during treatment period (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11-9.49; P = .032). The VTE rates did not present statistically significant difference between different Khorana score groups ( P = .96). In univariate analysis, the risk of death during treatment period (median: 16 weeks) was 3.75 times higher in high-risk versus intermediate-risk patients (HR: 3.75, 95% CI: 1.36-10.36; P = .001) and had 2.25 times higher per point increase in the Khorana score (HR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.36-3.73; P = .002); the above results were also reproduced in multivariate analysis. Khorana score represents a valuable tool for identifying patients with cancer in low thromboembolic risk but does not preserve its predictive value for higher risk individuals. Khorana score is an independent risk factor for death in patients with lung adenocarcinoma receiving first-line or adjuvant chemotherapy.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma of Lung , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Venous Thromboembolism , Adenocarcinoma of Lung/drug therapy , Adenocarcinoma of Lung/mortality , Aged , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/mortality , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/adverse effects , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/methods , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/mortality , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Survival Rate , Venous Thromboembolism/chemically induced , Venous Thromboembolism/mortalityABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Considering the high prevalence of lung cancer, our purpose was to summarize the existing literature to identify the several factors that contribute to the increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with lung cancer and to analyze the current recommendations for thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE in those patients. METHODS: We searched the Medline and EMBASE databases from February 1985 to February 2014 to identify retrospective and prospective randomized controlled studies that investigate one or more risk factors for VTEs in patients with lung cancer. RESULTS: A VTE is a major complication for patients diagnosed with lung cancer. The risk factors for VTE events in patients with lung cancer consist of cancer-related (histological type and stage of cancer), treatment-related (surgery, chemotherapy, angiogenic agents, and supportive care agents), and patient-related factors (comorbidities, immobility, performance status, and prior thrombosis). Low-molecular-weight heparins are recommended for long-term treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis. Duration of anticoagulant therapy beyond 6 months should be based on individual clinical evaluation. Thromboprophylaxis for patients with lung cancer during hospitalization and immediate postoperative period is well established. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to assess thrombotic risk in patients with lung cancer may improve therapeutic and preventive strategies in the future, with final goal to minimize the burden and consequences of thrombotic events in patients with lung cancer.
Subject(s)
Blood Coagulation , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Adult , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Blood Coagulation/drug effects , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/blood , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Prognosis , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Venous Thromboembolism/blood , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & controlABSTRACT
The term lymphology includes both the physiology and the pathology of the lymphatic system. Many disciplines are involved in the study of the lymphatic system, to correctly diagnose lymphatic diseases and to ultimate provide the best available treatment for the patient. Lymphedema is one of the most common lymphatic diseases, potentially causing significant problems for the patient and for the health system in general. The aim of this article is to discuss the best placement and role for each discipline within an interdisciplinary team in order to provide an effective management of lymphedema and related lymphatic diseases.