Cannulation of the popliteal vein as an intraoperative emergency access in prone position: A case report.

Many surgeries have to be performed in the prone position. Access to central vessels is very limited in this position. This requires forward planning with regard to the placement of a central venous catheter. Emergency situations or unexpected intraoperative events in prone position are challenging, as a conventional central venous access is not possible. We describe the cannulation of the popliteal vein in such a case. We report the case of a patient with severe intracerebral hemorrhage who was transferred to our emergency department where his clinical condition rapidly deteriorated. Due to the surgical approach, a prone position was necessary and preoperative central venous cannulation was not possible. We therefore performed an alternative vascular access in prone position using a ultrasound-guided cannulation of the popliteal vein. The cannulation of the popliteal vein described here can be carried out as a quick and easy feasible alternative in emergency situations in prone position. The ultrasound-guided catheter insertion succeeded without any problems and there was no evidence of a deep vein thrombosis after the intervention.

Monitoring of argatroban and lepirudin anticoagulation in critically ill patients by conventional laboratory parameters and rotational thromboelastometry - a prospectively controlled randomized double-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Argatroban or lepirudin anticoagulation therapy in patients with heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) or HIT suspect is typically monitored using the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). Although aPTT correlates well with plasma levels of argatroban and lepirudin in healthy volunteers, it might not be the method of choice in critically ill patients. However, in-vivo data is lacking for this patient population. Therefore, we studied in vivo whether ROTEM or global clotting times would provide an alternative for monitoring the anticoagulant intensity effects in critically ill patients. METHODS: This study was part of the double-blind randomized trial "Argatroban versus Lepirudin in critically ill patients (ALicia)", which compared critically ill patients treated with argatroban or lepirudin. Following institutional review board approval and written informed consent, for this sub-study blood of 35 critically ill patients was analysed. Before as well as 12, 24, 48 and 72 h after initiation of argatroban or lepirudin infusion, blood was analysed for aPTT, aPTT ratios, thrombin time (TT), INTEM CT,INTEM CT ratios, EXTEM CT, EXTEM CT ratios and maximum clot firmness (MCF) and correlated with the corresponding plasma concentrations of the direct thrombin inhibitor. RESULTS: To reach a target aPTT of 1.5 to 2 times baseline, median [IQR] plasma concentrations of 0.35 [0.01-1.2] µg/ml argatroban and 0.17 [0.1-0.32] µg/ml lepirudin were required. For both drugs, there was no significant correlation between aPTT and aPTT ratios and plasma concentrations. INTEM CT, INTEM CT ratios, EXTEM CT, EXTEM CT ratios, TT and TT ratios correlated significantly with plasma concentrations of both drugs. Additionally, agreement between argatroban plasma levels and EXTEM CT and EXTEM CT ratios were superior to agreement between argatroban plasma levels and aPTT in the Bland Altman analysis. MCF remained unchanged during therapy with both drugs. CONCLUSION: In critically ill patients, TT and ROTEM parameters may provide better correlation to argatroban and lepirudin plasma concentrations than aPTT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00798525 , registered on 25 Nov 2008.

Argatroban versus Lepirudin in critically ill patients (ALicia): a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Critically ill patients often require renal replacement therapy accompanied by thrombocytopenia. Thrombocytopenia during heparin anticoagulation may be due to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with need for alternative anticoagulation. Therefore, we compared argatroban and lepirudin in critically ill surgical patients. METHODS: Following institutional review board approval and written informed consent, critically ill surgical patients more than or equal to 18 years with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, were randomly assigned to receive double-blind argatroban or lepirudin anticoagulation targeting an activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) of 1.5 to 2 times baseline. In patients requiring continuous renal replacement therapy we compared the life-time of hemodialysis filters. We evaluated in all patients the incidence of bleeding and thrombembolic events. RESULTS: We identified 66 patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, including 28 requiring renal replacement therapy. Mean filter lifetimes did not differ between groups (argatroban 32 ± 25 hours (n = 12) versus lepirudin 27 ± 21 hours (n = 16), mean difference 5 hours, 95% CI -13 to 23, P = 0.227). Among all 66 patients, relevant bleeding occurred in four argatroban- versus eleven lepirudin-patients (OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 14.0, P = 0.040). In the argatroban-group, three thromboembolic events occurred compared to two in the lepirudin group (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.1 to 4.4, P = 0.639). The incidence of confirmed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was 23% (n = 15) in our study population. CONCLUSIONS: This first randomized controlled double-blind trial comparing two direct thrombin inhibitors showed comparable effectiveness for renal replacement therapy, but suggests fewer bleeds in surgical patients with argatroban anticoagulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT00798525. Registered 25 November 2008.