Early unfractionated heparin treatment in patients with STEMI - trial design and rationale.

The early unfractionated heparin (UFH) treatment in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial. The study population are patients with STEMI that undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). The trial was designed to investigate whether early administration of unfractionated heparin immediately after diagnosis of STEMI is beneficial in terms of patency of infarct-related coronary artery (IRA) when compared to established UFH administration at the time of coronary intervention. The patients will be randomized in 1:1 fashion in one of the two groups. The primary efficacy endpoint of the study is Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grades 2 and 3 on diagnostic coronary angiography. Secondary outcome measures are: TIMI flow after PPCI, progression to cardiogenic shock, 30-day mortality, ST-segment resolution, highest Troponin I and Troponin I values at 24 hours. The safety outcome is bleeding complications. The study of early heparin administration in patients with STEMI will address whether pretreatment with UFH can increase the rate of spontaneous reperfusion of infarct-related coronary artery.

Differential Use of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors with Bivalirudin in Patients with STEMI Undergoing PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIM: The efficacy and safety of bivalirudin when used concurrently with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) is uncertain. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to explore the impact of differential use (greater and balanced) of GPI. METHODS: Online databases were queried from inception to March 2023 to identify eight randomized controlled trials (n = 22,483) for inclusion. The primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and net adverse clinical events (NACE). Secondary efficacy endpoints included cardiac death, reinfarction, stent thrombosis (ST), and stroke. Data were pooled using a random-effects model to derive risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: When compared to heparin, bivalirudin was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.72-0.97; P = 0.02), major bleeding (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.93; P = 0.01), cardiac death (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.66-0.94; P = 0.01), and NACE (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.72-0.89; P < 0.0001). However, while the bivalirudin arm showed an increased likelihood of ST in the greater GPI subgroup (RR 1.70; 95% CI 1.13-2.56; P = 0.01), it was associated with a decreased likelihood of ST in the balanced GPI subgroup (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.24-0.65; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings suggest that bivalirudin may be a more efficacious intervention than heparin for reducing certain adverse events in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI.

Agreement between the thromboelastography reaction time parameter using fresh and citrated whole blood during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with Teg®5000 and Teg®6s.

PURPOSE: We aimed at assessing the correlation between TEG reaction time (TEG-R) in citrated and fresh blood samples with TEG5000 and TEG 6S during heparin administration in patients with and without ECMO support. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Paired TEG5000 (fresh and citrated whole blood, kaolin and kaolin-heparinase) and TEG6S (citrated whole blood) samples were obtained, together with standard coagulation laboratory tests. Bland-Altman analysis and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient were used to assess agreement. RESULTS: Thirteen consecutive ECMO patients and eight consecutive non-ECMO patients were enrolled and TEG was performed for a total of 84 paired samples. ECMO patients received 19.2 (12.6-25.8) U/kg/h of heparin. Five of the non-ECMO patients did not receive heparin, two of them received a very low prophylactic dose (1.6 and 2.9 IU/kg/h, respectively), and one of them 13.1 U/kg/h of heparin. Using TEG®5000, TEG-R was 21.0 (-23.4; 65.5) min longer on fresh compared to citrated blood in patients receiving heparin while only 1.58 (-5.5; 8.7) min longer in patients not-receiving heparin. These differences were reverted by heparinase. CONCLUSIONS: Using citrated-recalcified blood to perform TEG might lead to underestimation of the effect of heparin.

Comparison of Outcomes in Patients Requiring Mechanical Circulatory Support Who Received Cangrelor in Addition to Anticoagulation Versus Anticoagulation Alone.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety of cangrelor administered concurrently with heparin or bivalirudin in patients on mechanical circulatory support. DESIGN: A single-center, retrospective cohort study of adult patients consecutively admitted between January 2016 and October 2020. SETTING: A tertiary medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients admitted to the cardiovascular intensive care unit put on mechanical circulatory support for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or non-AMI indications. Patients who received cangrelor underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting during the index event or within the last year. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the incidence of major bleeding, defined by the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization criteria, in patients with mechanical circulatory support receiving cangrelor plus anticoagulation with heparin or bivalirudin with or without aspirin versus patients who did not receive cangrelor. Sixty-eight patients were included in the study. Twenty-nine patients received cangrelor, and 39 did not. Cangrelor was not associated with an increase in major bleeding; however, the CI was wide (adjusted hazard ratio 1.93, 95% CI 0.61-6.11; p = 0.262). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving cangrelor did not appear to be at higher risk of major bleeding compared to patients not receiving cangrelor. Larger trials should be conducted to better evaluate the safety of cangrelor in patients with mechanical circulatory support.

Impact of anticoagulation intensity on blood transfusion for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during lung transplantation.

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is increasingly used for mechanical circulatory support during lung transplant. Optimal intensity of intraoperative anticoagulation would be expected to mitigate thromboembolism without increasing bleeding and blood product transfusions. Yet, the optimal intensity of intraoperative anticoagulation is unknown. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 163 patients who received a bilateral lung transplant at a single center. We categorized the intensity of anticoagulation into 4 groups (very low to high) based on the bolus dose of unfractionated heparin given during lung transplant and compared the rates of intraoperative blood transfusions and the occurrence of thromboembolism between groups. When compared to the very low-intensity group, each higher intensity group was associated with higher red blood cell, fresh frozen plasma, and platelet transfusions. The occurrence of thromboembolism was similar across groups. These preliminary data suggest that lower intensity anticoagulation may reduce the rate of intraoperative blood transfusions, although further study is needed.

Strategy to optimize PeriproCeduraL AnticOagulation in structural transseptal interventions: Design and rationale of the STOP CLOT trial.

BACKGROUND: Both transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) of mitral regurgitation or left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) require periprocedural anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin (UFH) that is administered either before or immediately after transseptal puncture (TSP). The optimal timing of UFH administration (before or after TSP) is unknown. The Strategy To Optimize PeriproCeduraL AnticOagulation in Structural Transseptal Interventions trial (STOP CLOT Trial) was designed to determine if early anticoagulation is effective in reducing ischemic complications without increasing the risk of periprocedural bleeding. METHODS: The STOP CLOT trial is a multicenter, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. A total of 410 patients scheduled for TEER or LAAC will be randomized 1:1 either early UFH administration (iv. bolus of 100 units/kg UFH or placebo, given after obtaining femoral vein access and at least 5 minutes prior to the start of the TSP) or late UFH administration (iv. bolus of 100 units/kg UFH or placebo given immediately after TSP). Prespecified preliminary statistical analysis will be performed after complete follow-up of the first 196 randomized subjects. To ensure blinding, a study nurse responsible for randomization and UFH/placebo preparation is not involved in the care of the patients enrolled into the study. The primary study endpoint is a composite of (1) major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (death, stroke, TIA, myocardial infarction, or peripheral embolization) within 30 days post-procedure, (2) intraprocedural fresh thrombus formation in the right or left atrium as assessed with periprocedural transesophageal echocardiography, or (3) occurrence of new ischemic lesions (diameter ≥4 mm) on brain magnetic resonance imaging performed 2 to 5 days after the procedure. The safety endpoint is the occurrence of moderate or severe bleeding complications during the index hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Protocols of periprocedural anticoagulation administration during structural interventions have never been tested in a randomized clinical trial. The Stop Clot trial may help reach consensus on the optimal timing of initiation of periprocedural anticoagulation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study protocol is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05305612.

Antithrombin Levels and Heparin Responsiveness during Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Prospective Single-center Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Unfractionated heparin, administered during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to prevent thromboembolic events, largely depends on plasma antithrombin for its antithrombotic effects. Decreased heparin responsiveness seems frequent on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; however, its association with acquired antithrombin deficiency is poorly understood. The objective of this study was to describe longitudinal changes in plasma antithrombin levels during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support and evaluate the association between antithrombin levels and heparin responsiveness. The hypothesis was that extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support would be associated with acquired antithrombin deficiency and related decreased heparin responsiveness. METHODS: Adults receiving venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were prospectively included. All patients received continuous intravenous unfractionated heparin using a standardized protocol (target anti-Xa 0.3 to 0.5 IU/ml). For each patient, arterial blood was withdrawn into citrate-containing tubes at 11 time points (from hour 0 up to day 7). Anti-Xa (without dextran or antithrombin added) and antithrombin levels were measured. The primary outcome was the antithrombin plasma level. In the absence of consensus, antithrombin deficiency was defined as a time-weighted average of antithrombin less than or equal to 70%. Data regarding clinical management and heparin dosage were collected. RESULTS: Fifty patients, including 42% postcardiotomy, were included between April 2020 and May 2021, with a total of 447 samples. Median extracorporeal membrane oxygenation duration was 7 (interquartile range, 4 to 12) days. Median antithrombin level was 48% (37 to 60%) at baseline. Antithrombin levels significantly increased throughout the follow-up. Time-weighted average of antithrombin levels was 63% (57 to 73%) and was less than or equal to 70% in 32 (64%) of patients. Overall, 45 (90%) patients had at least one antithrombin value less than 70%, and 35 (70%) had at least one antithrombin value less than 50%. Antithrombin levels were not significantly associated with heparin responsiveness evaluated by anti-Xa assay or heparin dosage. CONCLUSIONS: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was associated with a moderate acquired antithrombin deficiency, mainly during the first 72 h, that did not correlate with heparin responsiveness.

Comparison of the safety and efficacy for different regimens of pharmaco-prophylaxis among severely burned patients: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in critically ill patients, including severe burn cases. Burn patients respond differently to medications due to pharmacokinetic changes. This study aims to assess the feasibility and safety of different VTE pharmaco-prophylaxis in patients admitted to the ICU with severe burns. METHODS: A pilot, open-label randomized controlled trial was conducted on ICU patients with severe burns (BSA ≥ 20%). By using block randomization, patients were allocated to receive high-dose enoxaparin 30 mg q12hours (E30q12), standard-dose enoxaparin 40 mg q24hours (E40q24), or unfractionated heparin (UFH) 5000 Units q8hours. In this study, the primary outcomes assessed were the recruitment and consent rates, as well as bleeding or hematoma at both the donor and graft site. Additionally, secondary measures were evaluated to provide further insights. RESULTS: Twenty adult patients out of 114 screened were enrolled and received E30q12 (40%), E40q24 (30%), and UFH (30%). The recruitment rate was one patient per month with a 100% consent rate. Donor site bleeding occurred in one patient (16.7%) in the UFH group. On the other hand, graft site bleeding was only reported in one patient (12.5%) who received E30q12. Major bleeding happened in two patients, one in E30q12 and one in the UFH group. Five patients (25.0%) had minor bleeding; two patients (25.0%) received E30q12, two patients E40q24, and one patient UFH. RBC transfusion was needed in four patients, two on E30q12 and two on UFH. Only one patient had VTE, while four patients died in the hospital. CONCLUSION: The study observed a low recruitment rate but a high consent rate. Furthermore, there were no major safety concerns identified with any of the three pharmacologic prophylaxis regimens that were evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05237726.

Effect of cold application and compression on pain and bruising in subcutaneous heparin injection.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Subcutaneous administration may result in complications such as bruising and pain at the injection site. This study was performed as in order to determine the effect of cold application and compression on pain and bruising in subcutaneous heparin injection. METHODS: The study was a randomized controlled trial. 72 patients were included in the study. Each patient in the sample was both experimental (cold and compression) and control groups and 3 different parts of abdomen were used for injection of each patient. The data of the research were collected by using Patient Identification Form, Subcutaneous Heparin Observation Form and Visual Analog Scale (VAS). RESULTS: In the study, it was observed that after heparin injection, ecchymosis developed in 16.4%, 28.8%, and 54.8% of the patients, respectively, and pain was experienced during injection in 12.3%, 43.5%, and 44.2% of the patients, respectively, on the pressure, cold application, and control site groups, and this difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: In the study, it was found that bruising size of the compression group was smaller in contrast with the other groups. When the VAS mean was examined for the groups, it was found that the patients in the compression group had lower pain than the other groups. In order to prevent complications that may arise in nurses' subcutaneous heparin injections and to increase the quality of patient care, it may be recommended to transfer the 60-second compression application after subcutaneous heparin applications to clinical applications and to conduct studies comparing compression and cold application with other applications for future studies.

Effects of Standard-Dose Prophylactic, High-Dose Prophylactic, and Therapeutic Anticoagulation in Patients With Hypoxemic COVID-19 Pneumonia: The ANTICOVID Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Given the high risk of thrombosis and anticoagulation-related bleeding in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia, identifying the lowest effective dose of anticoagulation therapy for these patients is imperative. Objectives: To determine whether therapeutic anticoagulation (TA) or high-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (HD-PA) decreases mortality and/or disease duration compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (SD-PA), and whether TA outperforms HD-PA; and to compare the net clinical outcomes among the 3 strategies. Design, Settings, and Participants: The ANTICOVID randomized clinical open-label trial included patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen and having no initial thrombosis on chest computer tomography with pulmonary angiogram at 23 health centers in France from April 14 to December 13, 2021. Of 339 patients randomized, 334 were included in the primary analysis-114 patients in the SD-PA group, 110 in the HD-PA, and 110 in the TA. At randomization, 90% of the patients were in the intensive care unit. Data analyses were performed from April 13, 2022, to January 3, 2023. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive either SD-PA, HD-PA, or TA with low-molecular-weight or unfractionated heparin for 14 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: A hierarchical criterion of all-cause mortality followed by time to clinical improvement at day 28. Main secondary outcome was net clinical outcome at day 28 (composite of thrombosis, major bleeding, and all-cause death). Results: Among the study population of 334 individuals (mean [SD] age, 58.3 [13.0] years; 226 [67.7%] men and 108 [32.3%] women), use of HD-PA and SD-PA had similar probabilities of favorable outcome (47.3% [95% CI, 39.9% to 54.8%] vs 52.7% [95% CI, 45.2% to 60.1%]; P = .48), as did TA compared with SD-PA (50.9% [95% CI, 43.4% to 58.3%] vs 49.1% [95% CI, 41.7% to 56.6%]; P = .82) and TA compared with HD-PA (53.5% [95% CI 45.8% to 60.9%] vs 46.5% [95% CI, 39.1% to 54.2%]; P = .37). Net clinical outcome was met in 29.8% of patients receiving SD-PA (20.2% thrombosis, 2.6% bleeding, 14.0% death), 16.4% receiving HD-PA (5.5% thrombosis, 3.6% bleeding, 11.8% death), and 20.0% receiving TA (5.5% thrombosis, 3.6% bleeding, 12.7% death). Moreover, HD-PA and TA use significantly reduced thrombosis compared with SD-PA (absolute difference, -14.7 [95% CI -6.2 to -23.2] and -14.7 [95% CI -6.2 to -23.2], respectively). Use of HD-PA significantly reduced net clinical outcome compared with SD-PA (absolute difference, -13.5; 95% CI -2.6 to -24.3). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that compared with SD-PA, neither HD-PA nor TA use improved the primary hierarchical outcome of all-cause mortality or time to clinical improvement in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia; however, HD-PA resulted in significantly better net clinical outcome by decreasing the risk of de novo thrombosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04808882.

Consenso Internacional sobre Tromboembolismo Venoso (ICM-VTE) en COT, cambiará en algo nuestra práctica clínica? / International Consensus Meeting on Venous Thromboembolism (ICM-VTE) after orthopedic procedures, any change in our clinical practice?

Las aportaciones del Consenso Internacional sobre Tromboembolismo Venoso (ICM-VTE) modificarán nuestra práctica diaria, recogiendo la evidencia actual que no aparece en la mayoría de las guías de práctica clínica hasta la fecha. Muchos de nuestros procedimientos de cirugía ortopédica y traumatología no requieren de una profilaxis tromboembólica que solo se administra cuando existen factores de riesgos individuales o cirugías mayores (artroplastia total de miembros inferiores, cirugía de columna o fracturas que requieran inmovilización y limitación en la carga precoz). Dentro de las opciones de profilaxis debemos tener en cuenta la potencia del fármaco para prevenir el tromboembolismo venoso, pero también el efecto de hemorragia y sangrado que pueda producir. El uso de aspirina y medidas mecánicas se establece como la combinación más segura y eficaz en muchos de los casos.(AU)

The International Consensus Meeting on Venous Thromboembolism (ICM-VTE), will change our current practice as most recent evidence is included. This fact is not usual in most clinical practice guidelines to date. Many orthopedic and trauma procedures do not require thromboembolic prophylaxis, but it should be considered depending on individual risk factors or major surgeries (total hip or knee arthroplasty, spine surgery or fractures that require immobilization and weight bearing restriction). Within the prophylaxis options, we must notice the strengh of the drug preventing venous thromboembolism, but also the effect of hemorrhage and bleeding that it may produce. The use of aspirin and mechanical prophylaxis has been described as the safest and most effective combination in most cases.(AU)

[Translated article] International Consensus Meeting on Venous Thromboembolism (ICM-VTE) after orthopedic procedures, any change in our clinical practice? / Consenso Internacional sobre Tromboembolismo Venoso (ICM-VTE) en COT, cambiará en algo nuestra práctica clínica?

Las aportaciones del Consenso Internacional sobre Tromboembolismo Venoso (ICM-VTE) modificarán nuestra práctica diaria, recogiendo la evidencia actual que no aparece en la mayoría de las guías de práctica clínica hasta la fecha. Muchos de nuestros procedimientos de cirugía ortopédica y traumatología no requieren de una profilaxis tromboembólica que solo se administra cuando existen factores de riesgos individuales o cirugías mayores (artroplastia total de miembros inferiores, cirugía de columna o fracturas que requieran inmovilización y limitación en la carga precoz). Dentro de las opciones de profilaxis debemos tener en cuenta la potencia del fármaco para prevenir el tromboembolismo venoso, pero también el efecto de hemorragia y sangrado que pueda producir. El uso de aspirina y medidas mecánicas se establece como la combinación más segura y eficaz en muchos de los casos.(AU)

The International Consensus Meeting on Venous Thromboembolism (ICM-VTE), will change our current practice as most recent evidence is included. This fact is not usual in most clinical practice guidelines to date. Many orthopedic and trauma procedures do not require thromboembolic prophylaxis, but it should be considered depending on individual risk factors or major surgeries (total hip or knee arthroplasty, spine surgery or fractures that require immobilization and weight bearing restriction). Within the prophylaxis options, we must notice the strengh of the drug preventing venous thromboembolism, but also the effect of hemorrhage and bleeding that it may produce. The use of aspirin and mechanical prophylaxis has been described as the safest and most effective combination in most cases.(AU)