Postprocedural Anticoagulation After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postprocedural anticoagulation (PPA) is frequently administered after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, although no conclusive data support this practice. METHODS: The RIGHT trial (Comparison of Anticoagulation Prolongation vs no Anticoagulation in STEMI Patients After Primary PCI) was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority trial conducted at 53 centers in China. Patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly assigned by center to receive low-dose PPA or matching placebo for at least 48 hours. Before trial initiation, each center selected 1 of 3 PPA regimens (40 mg of enoxaparin once daily subcutaneously; 10 U·kg·h of unfractionated heparin intravenously, adjusted to maintain activated clotting time between 150 and 220 seconds; or 0.2 mg·kg·h of bivalirudin intravenously). The primary efficacy objective was to demonstrate superiority of PPA to reduce the primary efficacy end point of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, stent thrombosis (definite), or urgent revascularization (any vessel) within 30 days. The key secondary objective was to evaluate the effect of each specific anticoagulation regimen (enoxaparin, unfractionated heparin, or bivalirudin) on the primary efficacy end point. The primary safety end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 to 5 bleeding at 30 days. RESULTS: Between January 10, 2019, and September 18, 2021, a total of 2989 patients were randomized. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 37 patients (2.5%) in both the PPA and placebo groups (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.63 to 1.57]). The incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 to 5 bleeding did not differ between the PPA and placebo groups (8 [0.5%] vs 11 [0.7%] patients; hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.30 to 1.83]). CONCLUSIONS: Routine PPA after primary percutaneous coronary intervention was safe but did not reduce 30-day ischemic events. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03664180.

Milvexian for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Factor XIa inhibitors for the prevention and treatment of venous and arterial thromboembolism may be more effective and result in less bleeding than conventional anticoagulants. Additional data are needed regarding the efficacy and safety of milvexian, an oral factor XIa inhibitor. METHODS: In this parallel-group, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned 1242 patients undergoing knee arthroplasty to receive one of seven postoperative regimens of milvexian (25 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg, or 200 mg twice daily or 25 mg, 50 mg, or 200 mg once daily) or enoxaparin (40 mg once daily). The primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism (which was a composite of asymptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, confirmed symptomatic venous thromboembolism, or death from any cause). The principal safety outcome was bleeding. RESULTS: Among the patients receiving milvexian twice daily, venous thromboembolism developed in 27 of 129 (21%) taking 25 mg, in 14 of 124 (11%) taking 50 mg, in 12 of 134 (9%) taking 100 mg, and in 10 of 131 (8%) taking 200 mg. Among those receiving milvexian once daily, venous thromboembolism developed in 7 of 28 (25%) taking 25 mg, in 30 of 127 (24%) taking 50 mg, and in 8 of 123 (7%) taking 200 mg, as compared with 54 of 252 patients (21%) taking enoxaparin. The dose-response relationship with twice-daily milvexian was significant (one-sided P<0.001), and the 12% incidence of venous thromboembolism with twice-daily milvexian was significantly lower than the prespecified benchmark of 30% (one-sided P<0.001). Bleeding of any severity occurred in 38 of 923 patients (4%) taking milvexian and in 12 of 296 patients (4%) taking enoxaparin; major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 1% and 2%, respectively; and serious adverse events were reported in 2% and 4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative factor XIa inhibition with oral milvexian in patients undergoing knee arthroplasty was effective for the prevention of venous thromboembolism and was associated with a low risk of bleeding. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Janssen Research and Development; AXIOMATIC-TKR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03891524.).

Abelacimab for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: The role of factor XI in the pathogenesis of postoperative venous thromboembolism is uncertain. Abelacimab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to factor XI and locks it in the zymogen (inactive precursor) conformation. METHODS: In this open-label, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned 412 patients who were undergoing total knee arthroplasty to receive one of three regimens of abelacimab (30 mg, 75 mg, or 150 mg) administered postoperatively in a single intravenous dose or to receive 40 mg of enoxaparin administered subcutaneously once daily. The primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism, detected by mandatory venography of the leg involved in the operation or objective confirmation of symptomatic events. The principal safety outcome was a composite of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding up to 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: Venous thromboembolism occurred in 13 of 102 patients (13%) in the 30-mg abelacimab group, 5 of 99 patients (5%) in the 75-mg abelacimab group, and 4 of 98 patients (4%) in the 150-mg abelacimab group, as compared with 22 of 101 patients (22%) in the enoxaparin group. The 30-mg abelacimab regimen was noninferior to enoxaparin, and the 75-mg and 150-mg abelacimab regimens were superior to enoxaparin (P<0.001). Bleeding occurred in 2%, 2%, and none of the patients in the 30-mg, 75-mg, and 150-mg abelacimab groups, respectively, and in none of the patients in the enoxaparin group. CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed that factor XI is important for the development of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Factor XI inhibition with a single intravenous dose of abelacimab after total knee arthroplasty was effective for the prevention of venous thromboembolism and was associated with a low risk of bleeding. (Funded by Anthos Therapeutics; ANT-005 TKA EudraCT number, 2019-003756-37.).

Efficacy, safety, and feasibility of Apixaban for postoperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis following open gynecologic cancer surgery at a comprehensive cancer center.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety, efficacy, and feasibility of apixaban for postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following open gynecologic cancer surgery at a comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: This retrospective, cohort study included patients with gynecologic cancer who underwent open surgery between 3/2021 and 3/2023 and received 28-day postoperative VTE prophylaxis. Patients on therapeutic anticoagulation preoperatively were excluded. Predictors of 90- and 30-day VTE and 30-day bleeding events were determined using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for known confounders. RESULTS: 452 patients were included in the cohort: 348 received apixaban and 104 received enoxaparin. Those who received enoxaparin were more likely to be American Society of Anesthesiologists class III/IV (compared to I/II) (p = 0.033), current or former smokers (p = 0.012) and have a higher BMI (p < 0.001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.005), and age (p = 0.046). 30-day VTE rate was significantly lower in the apixaban group (0.6%) compared to the enoxaparin group (6.2%) (adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03-0.56; p = 0.006). 90-day VTE rate was 2.7% and 6.2% in the apixaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively (adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.38-1.92; p = 0.704). Major bleeding complications (2.4% vs. 2.0%) and minor bleeding complications (0.9% vs. 3.0%) were similar in the apixaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively, on multivariate analyses. The median patient out of pocket cost was $10 (IQR 0.0-40.0) for apixaban and $20 (IQR 3.7-67.7) for enoxaparin (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings along with previously published data suggest that apixaban should be considered the standard of care for VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing open surgery for gynecologic malignancies.

Clinical and molecular determinants of bleeding-related adverse outcomes in high-grade glioma.

PURPOSE: Cancer is an independent risk factor for the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) including glioblastoma (GBM) are at a particularly high risk of VTE with an incidence up to 20-30% per year. Patients are often placed on anticoagulation if they are found to have VTE. However, patients with primary brain tumors such as HGG are at increased risk for intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) even without the administration of anticoagulation. The combination of risk factors for ICH with anticoagulation and HGG complicates decision-making. Currently it is not known which of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are safest for patients with HGG in terms of adverse bleeding-related outcomes such as ICH. Furthermore, a deeper understanding of the clinical and molecular determinants of bleeding-related adverse outcomes in HGG is not fully characterized. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we identified and gathered data on 75 consecutive patients with pathology-confirmed HGG with hospital encounters at two academic medical center hospitals in Austin between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2022. We compared clinical and treatment-related factors among cohorts who had received various forms of anticoagulation or no anticoagulation. RESULTS: Patients who were on rivaroxaban (3/7 (43%)) had a statistically significant association with more bleeding-related adverse events compared to those on apixaban (0/12 (0%)) or enoxaparin (0/5 (0%), p = 0.022) even though the groups were similar in characteristics including total time on the respective anticoagulation. Patients on anticoagulation vs those never on anticoagulation did not differ in terms of their studied demographic and clinical characteristics. Intriguingly, logistic regression analysis revealed that patients Astrocytoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutant, grade 4 had a significant association with more adverse bleeding-related events even when controlling for other relevant factors (Odds Ratio compared to reference GBM: 49.4, 95% CI: 2.8, 2084.7; p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: In this study we found that the use of rivaroxaban was associated with more bleeding-related events compared to apixaban and enoxaparin in patients with high-grade glioma. In this study we also found that the diagnosis of astrocytoma, IDH mutant, grade 4 was associated with more bleeding events. However, this is based on a small study and there is a need for larger studies to further evaluate these results.

Risk Stratification for Supratherapeutic Peak Anti-Xa Levels in Adult Patients on Therapeutic Enoxaparin.

BACKGROUND: The American Society of Hematology Guidelines for the management of venous thromboembolism recommend against the use of anti-Xa monitoring for assessing enoxaparin dosing based on a low level of evidence associating supratherapeutic levels with an increased risk of bleeding. However, institutions still utilize anti-Xa levels in select patient populations with altered volume of distribution and/or excretion to monitor and adjust therapy. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to identify risk factors associated with supratherapeutic peak anti-Xa levels (≥1.10 IU/mL) for patients receiving therapeutic enoxaparin. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-center study performed at an academic tertiary care hospital. Patients who received enoxaparin at 1 mg/kg twice daily and peak anti-Xa monitoring were separated into supratherapeutic and therapeutic/subtherapeutic cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 436 patients were screened, and 215 were included, with a mean age of 62 years. There were 108 in the therapeutic/subtherapeutic cohort and 107 in the supratherapeutic cohort. Acute kidney injury (AKI), body mass index (BMI), weight, female sex, intensive care unit (ICU) service, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score ≥4, and creatinine clearance at the time of peak anti-Xa level collection were associated with supratherapeutic anti-Xa levels in univariate models. Adjusted logistic regression models were created and identified BMI in the 30 to 34.9 kg/m2 (odds ratio [OR] 4.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.70-11.13, P < 0.005) and ≥35 kg/m2 (OR 6.75; 95% CI 3.05-14.94, P < 0.005) and AKI (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.04-6.62, P = 0.042) as significant risk factors for supratherapeutic anti-Xa levels. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Our study identified BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, AKI, female sex, ICU service, SOFA score ≥4, and creatinine clearance as risk factors for supratherapeutic anti-Xa levels in patients receiving 1 mg/kg twice daily dosing of enoxaparin. Further research should be done to provide evidence for the association between anti-Xa levels and bleeding risk.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Low Body Weight Critically Ill Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare bleeding and thromboembolic events in low body weight patients receiving reduced-dose venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis versus standard-dose VTE prophylaxis. DESIGN: Multicenter, retrospective, cohort study. SETTING: Five Ascension Health Hospitals. PATIENTS: Adult, critically ill, low body weight (≤50 kg) patients who received either reduced-dose VTE prophylaxis (n = 140) or standard-dose VTE prophylaxis (n = 279) for at least 48 h. INTERVENTION: Reduced-dose prophylaxis (enoxaparin 30 mg daily or heparin 5000 units every 12 h subcutaneously) or standard-dose prophylaxis (enoxaparin 40 mg daily, enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 h, or heparin 5000 units every 8 h subcutaneously). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 419 patients were included with a mean weight of 45.1 ± 4.2 kg in the standard-dose group and 44.0 ± 5.1 kg in the reduced-dose prophylaxis group (P = .02). The primary endpoint, composite bleeding, was significantly lower in patients receiving reduced-dose prophylaxis (5% vs 12.5%, P = .02). After adjusting for confounding factors, results remained consistent demonstrating reduced composite bleeding with reduced-dose prophylaxis (odds ratio: 0.36, 95% confidence interval: 0.14-0.96). Major bleeding events occurred in 3.6% of reduced-dose patients compared with 8.6% in standard-dose patients (P = .056). Clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (5.4% vs 2.9%, P = .24) and VTE (2.2% vs 0%, P = .08) events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: A reduced-dose VTE prophylaxis strategy in low body weight, critically ill patients was associated with a lower risk of composite bleeding and similar rate of thromboembolism.

Structured benefit-risk assessment for enoxaparin, in the context of its label extension, for the extended treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and prevention of its recurrence in patients with active cancer.

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. However, until recently, only dalteparin and tinzaparin were approved in the European Economic Area (EEA) for these patients. This study compares the benefit-risk profile of enoxaparin with dalteparin and tinzaparin for the extended treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), and prevention of recurrence in adult patients with active cancer. METHODS: A semi-quantitative structured benefit-risk assessment was conducted for the label-extension application of enoxaparin based on the benefit-risk action team descriptive framework: define decision context; determine key benefit and risk outcomes; identify data sources; extract data; interpret results. RESULTS: The key benefits were defined as reduced all-cause mortality and venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence (including symptomatic DVT, fatal PE or non-fatal PE); the key risks were major and non-major bleeding of clinical significance, and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Enoxaparin demonstrated comparable effects for the reduction of VTE recurrence and all-cause mortality versus other EEA-approved LMWHs (dalteparin, tinzaparin). There was no evidence of a significant difference between enoxaparin and the comparator groups with regard to incidence of major and non-major bleeding. The data on HIT were too limited to assess the difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment demonstrated a favourable benefit-risk profile for enoxaparin similar to that of other EEA-approved LMWHs for the treatment of DVT and PE and the prevention of recurrence in patients with active cancer and thus supported the label-extension approval.

Effect of Enoxaparin and Daikenchuto Coadministration on Hepatic Disorder Markers in Gynecological Cancer Patients after Abdominal Surgery.

Enoxaparin and daikenchuto are commonly administered to prevent venous thromboembolism and intestinal obstruction after gynecological malignancy surgery. However, the effects of their combined use on hepatic function are not well studied. This study aimed to clarify the effects of the coadministration of enoxaparin and daikenchuto on hepatic function. First, Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) data were analyzed to identify signals of hepatic disorders. Second, a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent surgery for gynecological malignancies was conducted. This study defined hepatic disorders as an increase in aspartate aminotransferase (AST) or alanine aminotransaminase (ALT) levels above the reference values, using 1-h postoperative values as the baseline. The analysis of JADER data revealed an increased risk for hepatic disorders with the coadministration of enoxaparin and daikenchuto. An observational study also showed higher odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the occurrence of hepatic disorders in the coadministration group (4.27; 2.11-8.64) and enoxaparin alone group (2.48; 1.31-4.69) than in the daikenchuto alone group. The median increase in the ALT level was also higher in the coadministration group (34; 15-59) than in the enoxaparin alone (19; 6-38) and daikenchuto alone groups (8; 3-33). In conclusion, our study suggests that compared with the use of enoxaparin or daikenchuto alone, enoxaparin and daikenchuto coadministration increases the risk of hepatic disorders, with more significant increases in AST and ALT levels. Healthcare workers need to be aware of these potential side effects when combining these drugs after surgery for gynecological malignancies.

Evaluation of enoxaparin for bridging of warfarin in outpatients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs).

BACKGROUND: Patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) require systemic anticoagulation. The use of enoxaparin for bridging to warfarin remains understudied in this population. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study was performed to characterize enoxaparin use and associated thrombotic and bleeding outcomes in adult outpatients with LVADs from January 2018 to July 2021. RESULTS: Fifty-four enoxaparin bridging events were evaluated in 49 patients. Most patients with HeartMate II (HM2) and HeartWare (HVAD) devices received enoxaparin dosed 1 mg/kg every 12 h. In patients with HeartMate 3 (HM3) devices, an equal number of patients received 0.5 mg/kg every 12 h and 1 mg/kg every 12 h, with a smaller subset receiving intermediate doses. The median duration of bridging was 6 days (4-8 [IQR]). One major bleeding event required discontinuation of enoxaparin and hospitalization in a patient with an HM3 device. Thrombotic events occurred in four patients with two incidents of pump thrombosis requiring pump exchange and two ischemic strokes. All thrombotic events occurred in patients with HVAD or HM2 devices. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that enoxaparin bridging in LVAD patients was well-tolerated with low bleeding and thrombotic rates, particularly with the HM3 device.

In limb or pelvic fracture, aspirin was noninferior to enoxaparin for reducing all-cause death.

SOURCE CITATION: Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium (METRC); O'Toole RV, Stein DM, O'Hara NN, et al. Aspirin or low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis after a fracture. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:203-213. 36652352.

Association of Bleeding Severity With Mortality in Extended Thromboprophylaxis of Medically Ill Patients in the MAGELLAN and MARINER Trials.

BACKGROUND: Extended thromboprophylaxis has not been widely implemented in acutely ill medical patients because of bleeding concerns. The MAGELLAN (Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel Group Efficacy and Safety Study for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Medically Ill Patients Comparing Rivaroxaban With Enoxaparin) and MARINER (Medically Ill Patient Assessment of Rivaroxaban Versus Placebo in Reducing Post-Discharge Venous Thrombo-Embolism Risk) trials evaluated whether rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin or placebo could prevent venous thromboembolism without increased bleeding. We hypothesized that patients with major bleeding but not those with nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding would be at an increased risk of all-cause mortality (ACM). METHODS: We evaluated all bleeding events in patients taking at least 1 dose of study drug and their association with ACM in 4 mutually exclusive groups: (1) no bleeding, or first event was (2) nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding, (3) major bleeding, or (4) trivial bleeding. Using a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics associated with ACM, we assessed the risk of ACM after such events. RESULTS: Compared with patients with no bleeding, the risk of ACM for patients with nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was not increased in MARINER (hazard ratio, 0.43; P=0.235) but was increased in MAGELLAN (hazard ratio, 1.74; P=0.021). Major bleeding was associated with a higher incidence of ACM in both studies, whereas trivial bleeding was not associated with ACM in either study. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with major bleeding had an increased risk of ACM, whereas nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding was not consistently associated with an increased risk of death. These results inform the risk-benefit calculus of extended thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: MAGELLAN, NCT00571649. URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: MARINER, NCT02111564.

Rivaroxaban or Enoxaparin in Nonmajor Orthopedic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Nonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs that results in transient reduced mobility places patients at risk for venous thromboembolism. Rivaroxaban may be noninferior to enoxaparin with regard to the prevention of major venous thromboembolism in these patients. METHODS: In this international, parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned adult patients undergoing lower-limb nonmajor orthopedic surgery who were considered to be at risk for venous thromboembolism on the basis of the investigator's judgment to receive either rivaroxaban or enoxaparin. The primary efficacy outcome of major venous thromboembolism was a composite of symptomatic distal or proximal deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or venous thromboembolism-related death during the treatment period or asymptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis at the end of treatment. A test for superiority was planned if rivaroxaban proved to be noninferior to enoxaparin. For all outcomes, multiple imputation was used to account for missing data. Prespecified safety outcomes included major bleeding (fatal, critical, or clinically overt bleeding or bleeding at the surgical site leading to intervention) and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 3604 patients underwent randomization; 1809 patients were assigned to receive rivaroxaban, and 1795 to receive enoxaparin. Major venous thromboembolism occurred in 4 of 1661 patients (0.2%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 18 of 1640 patients (1.1%) in the enoxaparin group (risk ratio with multiple imputation, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0.75; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P = 0.01 for superiority). The incidence of bleeding did not differ significantly between the rivaroxaban group and the enoxaparin group (1.1% and 1.0%, respectively, for major bleeding or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding; 0.6% and 0.7%, respectively, for major bleeding). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban was more effective than enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolic events during a period of immobilization after nonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs. (Funded by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne and Bayer; PRONOMOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02401594.).

Apixaban for extended postoperative thromboprophylaxis in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy.

INTRODUCTION: Venous thromboembolic events represent the second most frequent cause of mortality in cancer patients. Recent literature shows that direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are at least as effective and safe as low molecular weight heparin for postoperative thromboprophylaxis. However, this practice has not been broadly adopted in gynecologic oncology. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical effectiveness and safety of apixaban for extended thromboprophylaxis in comparison to enoxaparin after laparotomies for gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: The Gynecologic Oncology Division at a large tertiary center transitioned from enoxaparin 40 mg daily to apixaban 2.5 mg BID for 28 days after laparotomies for gynecologic malignancies in November 2020. This real-world study compared patients post-transition (November 2020 to July 2021 (n = 112)) to a historical cohort (January to November 2020 (n = 144)), using the institutional National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. All Canadian gynecologic oncology centers were surveyed to assess postoperative DOAC utilization. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were similar between groups. No difference was found between total venous thromboembolism rates (4% vs. 3%, p = 0.49). No difference was found in postoperative readmission (5% vs. 6%, p = 0.50). Of the 7 readmissions in the enoxaparin group, one was due to bleeding requiring transfusion; there were no readmissions for bleeding in the apixaban group. No patient required a reoperation for bleeding. Thirteen percent of the 20 Canadian centers have transitioned to extended apixaban thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Apixaban for 28-day postoperative thromboprophylaxis was found to be an effective and safe alternative to enoxaparin after laparotomies in a real-world cohort of gynecologic oncology patients.

Outcomes from a prospectively implemented protocol using apixaban after robot-assisted radical cystectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of oral apixaban with that of injectable enoxaparin after robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) thromboprophylaxis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data for all RARC patients treated at our tertiary care centre between 2018 and 2022. The study included two groups: patients who were subject to a prospectively implemented protocol from October 2021 to the present, comprising a 21-day postoperative course of apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily after discharge, and patients treated prior to October 2021 who received enoxaparin 40 mg daily. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, such as VTE (defined as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism), were analysed. The primary outcome was incidence of symptomatic VTE confirmed with definitive imaging within 90 days of RARC. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding, complications, readmission, and mortality within 30 days postoperatively. Descriptive statistics included baseline patient characteristics, operative information and complications. Differences in baseline characteristics and postoperative data were compared between groups. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine associations between variables and the primary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients received apixaban and 250 patients received enoxaparin prophylaxis. Ten patients (2.7%) experienced a VTE within 90 days postoperatively (two [1.6%] apixaban group vs eight [3.2%] enoxaparin group; P = 0.5). After patient stratification into European Association of Urology risk groups, no statistically significant difference in VTE rates was seen between groups in the apixaban (2.7% high- + intermediate-risk group vs 1.1% low-risk group; P = 0.5) and enoxaparin cohorts (4.3% high- + intermediate-risk group vs 2.5% low-risk group; P = 0.5). On multivariate logistic regression, no variables were associated with the development of the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Prophylaxis with apixaban and enoxaparin showed no statistically significant differences in VTE rates among RARC patients. Apixaban appears to be safe and effective for VTE prophylaxis after RARC.

Inadequate Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis Is Associated With Higher Venous Thromboembolism Rates Among Trauma Patients With Epidurals.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines encourage higher doses of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for prophylaxis in trauma patients. The risks of LMWH must be considered for patients who require an epidural catheter. We compared adequate and inadequate prophylaxis to determine if venous thromboembolism (VTE) and complication rates differed among patients with epidural catheters. METHODS: Trauma patients who required an epidural catheter between 2012 and 2019 were reviewed for VTE and epidural-related complications. Adequate dosing was defined as enoxaparin 30 mg or 40 mg twice daily. Inadequate dosing was defined as unfractionated heparin subcutaneously or enoxaparin once daily. RESULTS: Over the 8-y study period, 113 trauma patients required an epidural catheter of which 64.6% were males with a mean age of 55.8 y and injury severity score of 14. Epidural catheters were associated with 11 (9.7%) patients developing an acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and 2 (1.8%) patients with an acute pulmonary embolism. Those patients who received adequate doses of enoxaparin were less likely to have any VTE or DVT. Complications associated with epidural catheters were not dependent on the type of pharmacological prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high VTE rate observed in trauma patients who required an epidural catheter, along with the low complication rate that was observed independent of the type of pharmacological prophylaxis given, the data indicate that current efforts for higher doses of LMWH appear to be safe and associated with a lower VTE rate.

Intermediate dose enoxaparin in hospitalized patients with moderate-severe COVID-19: a pilot phase II single-arm study, INHIXACOVID19.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials in non-critically ill COVID-19 patients showed that therapeutic-dose heparin increased survival with reduced organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis, albeit with increased bleeding risk. The purpose of the study is to assess the safety of intermediate dose enoxaparin in hospitalized patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. METHODS: A phase II single-arm interventional prospective study including patients receiving intermediate dose enoxaparin once daily according to body weight: 60 mg for 45-60 kg, 80 mg for 61-100 kg or 100 mg for > 100 kg for 14 days, with dose adjustment according to anti-factor Xa activity (target range: 0.4-0.6 UI/ml); an observational cohort (OC) included patients receiving enoxaparin 40 mg day for comparison. Follow-up was 90 days. Primary outcome was major bleeding within 30 and 90 days after treatment onset. Secondary outcome was the composite of all-cause 30 and 90-day mortality rates, disease severity at the end of treatment, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and length of ICU stay, length of hospitalization. All outcomes were adjudicated by an independent committee and analyzed before and after propensity score matching (PSm). RESULTS: Major bleeding was similar in IC (1/98 1.02%) and in the OC (none), with only one event observed in a patient receiving concomitantly anti-platelet therapy. The composite outcome was observed in 53/98 patients (54%) in the IC and 132/203 (65%) patients in the OC (p = 0.07) before PSm, while it was observed in 50/90 patients (55.6%) in the IC and in 56/90 patients (62.2%) in the OC after PSm (p = 0.45). Length of hospitalization was lower in the IC than in OC [median 13 (IQR 8-16) vs 14 (11-21) days, p = 0.001], however it lost statistical significance after PSm (p = 0.08). At 30 days, two patients had venous thrombosis and two pulmonary embolism in the OC. Time to first negative RT-PCR were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Weight adjusted intermediate dose heparin with anti-FXa monitoring is safe with potential positive impact on clinical course in COVID-19 non-critically ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study INHIXACOVID19 was registred on ClinicalTrials.gov with the trial registration number (TRN) NCT04427098 on 11/06/2020.

Effectiveness and Safety of Enoxaparin Versus Unfractionated Heparin as Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: Real-World Evidence.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients are at risk of thrombosis. Literature that compares the effectiveness of enoxaparin to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in COVID-19 patients is scarce. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of enoxaparin compared with UFH when used at their standard/intermediate dosing in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study conducted at a large COVID-19 center located in Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. Confirmed COVID-19 cases (≥18 years old) admitted between January and December 2020 were randomly screened for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation, on chronic anticoagulation, had active bleeding, a platelet count <25 × 109/L, or an incomplete electronic file. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of any thrombotic event (pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, stroke, or myocardial infarction) or mortality. Secondary endpoints were major or minor bleeding. We applied inverse propensity score weighting (IPTW) with survival analysis to analyze the primary endpoint. Logistic regression was used for the secondary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 980 patients were included (enoxaparin, n = 470 and UFH, n = 510) with a mean age (±SD) of 47.7 (± 12.3) for the enoxaparin arm and 52 (±13.9) for the UFH arm. There was a statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint with an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 0.46 (95%CI: 0.22 to 0.96, P = 0.039) in favor of the enoxaparin arm. There was no statistically significant difference in major or minor bleeding rates between the two arms. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: When compared with UFH, enoxaparin was associated with a significant reduction in thrombotic events or mortality among COVID-19 patients. The results need confirmation from randomized controlled trials.

Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Pediatric Oncology Patients.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Children with cancer have an increased risk for developing a venous thromboembolism (VTE) during their treatment course. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent a relatively new class of oral medications to treat VTE; however, data are limited to support use in this patient group. Given the safety and efficacy data from numerous perspective adult studies, providers now consider off-label use in select children. METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective review of children 0 to 20 years of age from 2012 to 2020 with malignancy and confirmed VTE, with the objective to evaluate the hypothesis that the safety and the efficacy of DOACs are noninferior to enoxaparin in this population. The primary composite efficacy outcome comprises symptomatic recurrent VTE, death due to VTE, and thrombus progression. The principal safety outcome is a combination of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: The safety and efficacy outcomes collected revealed that DOAC use was equivalent when compared with the enoxaparin group for treatment of VTE. One patient in the DOAC group had clinically relevant, nonmajor bleeding compared with 2 patients in the enoxaparin group. No treatment failures were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This single-center study suggests that DOACs are both safe and efficacious for the treatment of VTE in children with cancer. It also highlights the need for larger studies to address this clinical question.

Unfractionated heparin versus enoxaparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in intensive care units: a propensity score adjusted analysis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in hospitalized patients. Pharmacologic prophylaxis is used in order to reduce the risk of VTE events. The main purpose of this study is to compare the prevalence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) who received unfractionated heparin (UFH) versus enoxaparin as VTE prophylaxis. Mortality was evaluated as a secondary outcome. This was a Propensity Score Adjusted Analysis. Patients admitted to neurology, surgical, or medical ICUs and screened with venous doppler ultrasonography or computed tomography angiography for detection of VTE were included in the analysis. We identified 2228 patients in the cohort, 1836 (82.4%) patients received UFH and 392 (17.6%) patients received enoxaparin. Propensity score matching yielded a well-balanced cohort of 950 (74% UFH, 26% enoxaparin) patients. After matching, there was no difference in prevalence of DVT (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.67-1.64, p = 0.85) and PE (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.44-1.30, p = 0.31). No significant differences in location and severity of DVT and PE between the two groups were detected. Hospital and intensive care unit stay was similar between the two groups. Unfractionated heparin was associated with a higher rate of mortality, (HR 2.04; 95% CI, 1.13-3.70; p = 0.019). The use of UFH as VTE prophylaxis in ICU patients was associated with a similar prevalence of DVT and PE compared with enoxaparin, and the site and degree of occlusion were similar. However, a higher mortality rate was seen in the UFH group.