Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation.

Importance: Anticoagulation management services (AMSs; ie, warfarin clinics) have evolved to include patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but it is unknown whether DOAC therapy management services improve outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Objective: To compare outcomes associated with 3 DOAC care models for preventing adverse anticoagulation-related outcomes among patients with AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included 44 746 adult patients with a diagnosis of AF who initiated oral anticoagulation (DOAC or warfarin) between August 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, in 3 Kaiser Permanente (KP) regions. Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2021 through May 2023. Exposures: Each KP region used an AMS to manage warfarin but used distinct approaches to DOAC care: (1) usual care (UC) by the prescribing clinician, (2) UC plus an automated population management tool (PMT), or (3) pharmacist-managed AMS care. Propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) were estimated. Direct oral anticoagulant care models were first indirectly compared using warfarin as a common comparator within each region and then directly compared across regions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patients were followed up until the first occurrence of an outcome (composite of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, other major bleeding, or death), discontinuation of KP membership, or December 31, 2020. Results: Overall, 44 746 patients were included: 6182 in the UC care model (3297 DOAC; 2885 warfarin), 33 625 in the UC plus PMT care model (21 891 DOAC; 11 734 warfarin), and 4939 in the AMS care model (2089 DOAC; 2850 warfarin). Baseline characteristics (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [10.6] years, 56.1% male, 67.2% non-Hispanic White, median CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, female sex] score of 3 [IQR, 2-5]) were well balanced after IPTW. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, patients who received the UC plus PMT or AMS care model did not have significantly better outcomes than those who received UC. The incidence rate of the composite outcome was 5.4% per year for DOAC and 9.1% per year for warfarin for those in the UC group, 6.1% per year for DOAC and 10.5% per year for those in the UC plus PMT group, and 5.1% per year for DOAC and 8.0% per year for those in the AMS group. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the composite outcome comparing DOAC vs warfarin were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.05) in the UC group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.90) in the UC plus PMT group, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99) in the AMS group (P = .62 for heterogeneity across care models). When directly comparing patients receiving DOAC, the IPTW-adjusted HR was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.85-1.34) for the UC plus PMT group vs the UC group and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71-1.02) for the AMS group vs the UC group. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study did not find appreciably better outcomes for patients receiving DOAC who were managed by either a UC plus PMT or AMS care model compared with UC.

The Impact of Clinical Pharmacy Services on Direct Oral Anticoagulant Medication Selection and Dosing in the Ambulatory Care Setting.

Background: Off-label dosing of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is both common and associated with adverse patient outcomes. Evidence describing best practices to support optimal direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing is limited. Objective: To describe the impact of clinical pharmacist intervention on DOAC prescribing. Methods: This retrospective study was a descriptive analysis conducted within an integrated healthcare system with a centralized, pharmacist-led Anticoagulation Management Service (AMS). Patients prescribed a DOAC between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 were included. Pharmacy dispensing reports were generated for pharmacist review and anticoagulant drug therapy changes were recommended to physicians where appropriate. The primary objective was to describe the number and type of recommendations made. Secondary objectives were to determine the provider acceptance rate based on the intervention type and on clinical vs formulary recommendations. Results: Clinical pharmacists made 147 recommendations for 2331 unique patients included in the analysis. Twenty-three recommendations (16%) were to decrease the dose, 46 (31%) were to increase the dose, 14 (10%) were to change the medication due to clinical scenario, 62 (42%) were to change the medication due to cost, and 2 (1%) were another issue. One hundred twenty-three (84%) recommendations were accepted. The provider acceptance rate was similar for clinical and formulary recommendations (85% and 82% respectively). Conclusion: Implementation of report-driven clinical pharmacist intervention led to an improvement in appropriate DOAC medication selection and dosing.

Effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with venous thromboembolism and creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min.

The few studies that compared direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) vs. warfarin in the setting of advanced renal insufficiency have focused on patients with atrial fibrillation. The purpose of this observational, matched, cohort study of patients was to assess the effectiveness and safety of DOAC vs. warfarin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients with a creatinine clearance (CrCl) < 30 mL/min. This observational, cohort study included patients with VTE and CrCl < 30 mL/min who were newly initiated on a DOAC or warfarin between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. DOAC patients were matched up to 1:2 to warfarin patients. Primary outcome was a composite of recurrent VTE, clinically-relevant bleeding, ischemic stroke, and all-cause mortality. Adjusted conditional, multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to assess outcomes. 626 DOAC patients were matched to 1071 warfarin patients. DOAC patients had a higher mean age, higher mean baseline CrCl, and were less likely to have been receiving dialysis. There was no statistically significant difference in the composite outcome between groups (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.47) or in the individual components of the composite (all HR 95% CI crossed 1.00). Identification of statistically non-significant rates of bleeding and thromboembolic outcomes suggest that the use of DOAC or warfarin is reasonable in patients with VTE and CrCl < 30 mL/min.

Thromboembolic prevention and anticoagulant therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: updated clinical guidance from the anticoagulation forum.

Thromboembolism is a common and deadly consequence of COVID-19 infection for hospitalized patients. Based on clinical evidence pre-dating the COVID-19 pandemic and early observational reports, expert consensus and guidance documents have strongly encouraged the use of prophylactic anticoagulation for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. More recently, multiple clinical trials and larger observational studies have provided evidence for tailoring the approach to thromboprophylaxis for patients with COVID-19. This document provides updated guidance for the use of anticoagulant therapies in patients with COVID-19 from the Anticoagulation Forum, the leading North American organization of anticoagulation providers. We discuss ambulatory, in-hospital, and post-hospital thromboprophylaxis strategies as well as provide guidance for patients with thrombotic conditions who are considering COVID-19 vaccination.

Clinical outcomes of dabigatran use in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and weight >120 kg.

BACKGROUND: Patients with obesity were underrepresented in studies evaluating the safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study compared clinical outcomes in patients with NVAF and weighing >120 kg and ≤120 kg who were receiving dabigatran. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, matched, longitudinal cohort study included patients from three integrated healthcare delivery systems. Patients ≥18 years of age with NVAF were included if between September 1, 2016 and June 30, 2019 they received dabigatran. Patients >120 kg and ≤120 kg were matched up to 1:6 on age, sex, and CHA2DS2-VASc score. Data were extracted from administrative databases. The primary outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, clinically-relevant bleeding, systemic embolism, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: 777 and 3522 patients >120 kg and ≤120 kg, respectively, were matched. The >120 kg group tended to be younger with a higher burden of chronic disease. There was no difference between groups in the composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.89-1.37) or individual components of the composite. A subanalysis of clinically-relevant bleeding identified that patients >120 kg were at a greater risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (AHR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01-2.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NVAF and >120 kg, dabigatran use was associated with a small increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding but no differences in stroke, mortality or clinically-relevant bleeding. These findings suggest that dabigatran use is reasonable in patients with NVAF and weight >120 kg.

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), occurs in ∼1 to 2 individuals per 1000 each year, corresponding to ∼300 000 to 600 000 events in the United States annually. OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about treatment of VTE. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and adult patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 28 recommendations for the initial management of VTE, primary treatment, secondary prevention, and treatment of recurrent VTE events. CONCLUSIONS: Strong recommendations include the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE and hemodynamic compromise, use of an international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 over a lower INR range for patients with VTE who use a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for secondary prevention, and use of indefinite anticoagulation for patients with recurrent unprovoked VTE. Conditional recommendations include the preference for home treatment over hospital-based treatment for uncomplicated DVT and PE at low risk for complications and a preference for direct oral anticoagulants over VKA for primary treatment of VTE.

Effect of Direct Oral Anticoagulant, Patient, and Surgery Characteristics on Clinical Outcomes in the Perioperative Anticoagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation Study.

Introduction The Perioperative Anticoagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation (PAUSE) Study assessed a standardized perioperative management strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation who were taking a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and required an elective surgery or procedure. The aim of this substudy is to analyze the safety of this management strategy across different patient subgroups, according to four presurgical variables: (1) DOAC type and dose, (2) surgery/procedure bleed risk, (3) patient renal function, and (4) age. Methods Clinical outcomes analyzed included major bleeding (MB), arterial thromboembolism, any bleeding, and any thromboembolism. We used descriptive statistics to summarize clinical outcomes, where the frequency, proportion, and 95% confidence interval were reported. Fisher's exact tests were used for testing the null hypothesis of independence between the clinical outcome and patient characteristic, where the test p -values were reported. Results There were 3,007 patients with atrial fibrillation requiring perioperative DOAC management. There was no significant difference in bleeding or thromboembolic outcomes according to DOAC type/dose regimen, renal function, or patient age. The rate of MB was significantly higher with high bleed risk procedures than low bleed risk procedures in apixaban-treated patients (2.9 vs. 0.59%; p < 0.01), but not in dabigatran-treated patients (0.88 vs. 0.91%; p = 1.0) or rivaroxaban-treated patients (2.9 vs. 1.3%; p = 0.06). The risk for thromboembolism did not differ according to surgery/procedure-related bleed risk. Conclusion Our results suggest that in DOAC-treated patients who received standardized perioperative management, surgical bleed risk is an important determinant of bleeding but not thromboembolic outcomes, although this finding was not consistent across all DOACs. There were no differences in bleeding and thromboembolism according to DOAC type and dose, renal function, or age.

Temporal trends in first-line outpatient anticoagulation treatment for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer consisted, historically, of unfractionated heparin or low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH). With recent clinical trials of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) showing similar efficacy as LMWH, little is known about anticoagulant prescribing patterns in patients with cancer and a VTE. This study characterized the temporal trends in first-line outpatient anticoagulation therapy for cancer-associated VTE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of patients who were hospitalized for a cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) between 01/01/2000 and 10/31/2017 identified patients from the cancer registries at two regions of an integrated healthcare delivery system. The primary outcome was the trend in age- and sex-adjusted rates of first-line anticoagulant therapy during the 30 days post-hospital discharge. Therapies were categorized as 1) injectable LMWH monotherapy, 2) warfarin ± injectable, 3) injectable fondaparinux monotherapy, or 4) DOAC ± injectable. RESULTS: Overall, 9816 patients were included with a mean age of 66 ± 13 years and 54% were female. From 2000 to 2003, warfarin ± injectable was used in ≈90% of cases. After 2003, there was a steady decline in warfarin use (25% in 2017) corresponding with increased LMWH use: 11% in 2003 to 55% in 2017. The DOAC ± injectable use has rapidly increased from <1% in 2014 to 20% in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: From 2000 to 2017, first-line anticoagulant therapy for cancer-associated VTE has experienced a substantial increase in LMWH and DOAC use with a resultant decline in warfarin use.

Predictors of Bleeding in the Perioperative Anticoagulant Use for Surgery Evaluation Study.

Background In the PAUSE (Perioperative Anticoagulant Use for Surgery Evaluation) Study, a simple, standardized, perioperative interruption strategy was provided for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Our objective was to define the factors associated with perioperative bleeding. Methods and Results We analyzed bleeding as the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Putative predictors of bleeding, and preoperative DOAC level were prospectively collected during recruitment. We used stratified logistic regression models for analysis. All statistical analyses were performed in R version 3.6.0. There were 3007 patients requiring perioperative DOAC interruption. More than one third of the included patients underwent a high bleeding risk procedure. The 30-day rates of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were 3.02% in apixaban (n=1257), 2.84% in dabigatran (n=668), and 4.16% for rivaroxaban (n=1082). Multivariate analysis stratified by region found more bleeding for hypertension (odds ratio [OR], 1.79; 95% CI 1.07-2.99; P=0.027), and prior bleeding (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.08-2.71; P=0.021). Surgical bleed risk classification (high- versus low-risk) as a predictor of bleeding was only significant in the univariate analysis. The prediction model for major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding had an area under the curve of 0.71, and the preoperative DOAC level did not improve the area under the curve of the model. Conclusions In patients treated with DOACs who required an elective surgery/procedure and were managed with standardized DOAC interruption and resumption, there we did not find reversible risk factors for bleeding, suggesting that adjustment of the PAUSE management protocol to mitigate against bleeding is not needed.

Adherence to and persistence with direct oral anticoagulant therapy among patients with new onset venous thromboembolism receiving extended anticoagulant therapy and followed by a centralized anticoagulation service.

BACKGROUND: Extended direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy may be required for patients with a venous thromboembolism (VTE); thus, DOAC adherence may impact the risk of recurrent VTE or bleeding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. Adult patients with a VTE who were initiated on a DOAC between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2017 for a cumulative >90 days of therapy were included. Adherence, measured with the proportion of days covered (PDC), was assessed during the six, 12, and 18 months after initiation. Patients were assigned to PDC ≥ 80% (adherent) or PDC < 80% (non-adherent) groups during the 1- to 6-month follow-up period. Rates of recurrent VTE and hemorrhagic events were compared between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 305 patients were included. The mean PDC were 96.0% (±8.0%), 94.7% (±8.2%), and 94.4% (±7.7%) during the 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-ups, respectively, with 17 (5.6%) and 288 (94.4%) patients classified as non-adherent and adherent, respectively. Patients in the non-adherent group were more likely to have had a recurrent VTE during the 1- to 6-month (11.8% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.007) and 1- to 12-month follow-ups (16.6% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.030). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in the rates of bleeding during any follow-up periods (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who had >90 days of initial DOAC therapy, adherence to DOAC therapy was high throughout the 18-month follow-up while DOAC non-adherence (i.e., PDC < 80%) increased the risk of recurrent VTE.

Thromboembolism and anticoagulant therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: interim clinical guidance from the anticoagulation forum.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral infection that can, in severe cases, result in cytokine storm, systemic inflammatory response and coagulopathy that is prognostic of poor outcomes. While some, but not all, laboratory findings appear similar to sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC), COVID-19- induced coagulopathy (CIC) appears to be more prothrombotic than hemorrhagic. It has been postulated that CIC may be an uncontrolled immunothrombotic response to COVID-19, and there is growing evidence of venous and arterial thromboembolic events in these critically ill patients. Clinicians around the globe are challenged with rapidly identifying reasonable diagnostic, monitoring and anticoagulant strategies to safely and effectively manage these patients. Thoughtful use of proven, evidence-based approaches must be carefully balanced with integration of rapidly emerging evidence and growing experience. The goal of this document is to provide guidance from the Anticoagulation Forum, a North American organization of anticoagulation providers, regarding use of anticoagulant therapies in patients with COVID-19. We discuss in-hospital and post-discharge venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, treatment of suspected but unconfirmed VTE, laboratory monitoring of COVID-19, associated anticoagulant therapies, and essential elements for optimized transitions of care specific to patients with COVID-19.

Vitamin K versus warfarin interruption alone in patients without bleeding and an international normalized ratio > 10.

BACKGROUND: Reversal of an international normalized ratio (INR) > 10 with vitamin K is recommended in patients experiencing bleeding; however, information on outcomes with reversal using vitamin K in non-bleeding patients is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical and safety outcomes between non-bleeding patients receiving warfarin with an INR > 10 who did and did not receive a prescription for vitamin K. PATIENTS/METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in an integrated health-care delivery system. Adult patients receiving warfarin therapy who experienced an INR > 10 without bleeding between 01/01/2006 and 06/30/2018 were included. Patients were assessed for an outpatient dispensing or in-office administration of vitamin K on the day of or the day after an INR > 10 and then clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and time to INR < 4 within the next 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 809 patients was included with 332 and 477 who were and were not dispensed vitamin K, respectively. Overall, mean patient age was 71.7 years, 60.1% were female and the mean INR was 10.4 at presentation. There were no differences between groups in 30-day rates of bleeding or thromboembolism (both P > .05). Patients dispensed vitamin K had a higher likelihood of mortality (15.1% versus 10.1%, P = .032, adjusted odds ratio = 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 2.57). Overall, time to an INR < 4 was similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Vitamin K administration was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in asymptomatic patients with an INR > 10.

Home vs hospital treatment of low-risk venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Increasing evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of managing low-risk deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) in outpatient settings. We performed a systematic review to assess safety and effectiveness of managing patients with DVT or PE at home compared with the hospital. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched up to July 2019 for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and prospective cohort studies. Two investigators independently screened titles and abstracts of identified citations and extracted data from relevant full-text papers. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated, and certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Seven RCTs (1922 patients) were included in meta-analyses on managing patients with DVT. Pooled estimates indicated decreased risk of PE (RR = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.93) and recurrent DVT (RR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.90) for home management, both with moderate certainty of the evidence. Reductions in mortality and major bleeding were not significant, both with low certainty of the evidence. Two RCTs (445 patients) were included in meta-analyses on home management of low-risk patients with PE. Pooled estimates indicated no significant difference in all-cause mortality, recurrent PE, and major bleeding, all with low certainty of the evidence. Results of pooled estimates from 3 prospective cohort studies (234 patients) on home management of PE showed similar results. Our findings indicate that low-risk DVT patients had similar or lower risk of patient-important outcomes with home treatment compared with hospital treatment. In patients with low-risk PE, there was important uncertainty about a difference between home and hospital treatment.

Perioperative Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Receiving a Direct Oral Anticoagulant.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who use a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and request elective surgery or procedure present a common clinical situation yet perioperative management is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety of a standardized perioperative DOAC management strategy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Perioperative Anticoagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation (PAUSE) cohort study conducted at 23 clinical centers in Canada, the United States, and Europe enrolled and screened patients from August 1, 2014, through July 31, 2018. Participants (n = 3007) had AF; were 18 years of age or older; were long-term users of apixaban, dabigatran etexilate, or rivaroxaban; were scheduled for an elective surgery or procedure; and could adhere to the DOAC therapy interruption protocol. INTERVENTIONS: A simple standardized perioperative DOAC therapy interruption and resumption strategy based on DOAC pharmacokinetic properties, procedure-associated bleeding risk, and creatinine clearance levels. The DOAC regimens were omitted for 1 day before a low-bleeding-risk procedure and 2 days before a high-bleeding-risk procedure. The DOAC regimens were resumed 1 day after a low-bleeding-risk procedure and 2 to 3 days after a high-bleeding-risk procedure. Follow-up of patients occurred for 30 days after the operation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Major bleeding and arterial thromboembolism (ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and transient ischemic attack) and the proportion of patients with an undetectable or minimal residual anticoagulant level (<50 ng/mL) at the time of the procedure. RESULTS: The 3007 patients with AF (mean [SD] age of 72.5 [9.39] years; 1988 men [66.1%]) comprised 1257 (41.8%) in the apixaban cohort, 668 (22.2%) in the dabigatran cohort, and 1082 (36.0%) in the rivaroxaban cohort; 1007 patients (33.5%) had a high-bleeding-risk procedure. The 30-day postoperative rate of major bleeding was 1.35% (95% CI, 0%-2.00%) in the apixaban cohort, 0.90% (95% CI, 0%-1.73%) in the dabigatran cohort, and 1.85% (95% CI, 0%-2.65%) in the rivaroxaban cohort. The rate of arterial thromboembolism was 0.16% (95% CI, 0%-0.48%) in the apixaban cohort, 0.60% (95% CI, 0%-1.33%) in the dabigatran cohort, and 0.37% (95% CI, 0%-0.82%) in the rivaroxaban cohort. In patients with a high-bleeding-risk procedure, the rates of major bleeding were 2.96% (95% CI, 0%-4.68%) in the apixaban cohort and 2.95% (95% CI, 0%-4.76%) in the rivaroxaban cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, patients with AF who had DOAC therapy interruption for elective surgery or procedure, a perioperative management strategy without heparin bridging or coagulation function testing was associated with low rates of major bleeding and arterial thromboembolism.

Vitamin K for reversal of excessive vitamin K antagonist anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Patients receiving vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) with an international normalized ratio (INR) between 4.5 and 10 are at increased risk of bleeding. We systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of administering vitamin K in patients receiving VKA therapy with INR between 4.5 and 10 and without bleeding. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials in April 2018. Search strategy included terms vitamin K administration and VKA-related terms. Reference lists of relevant studies were reviewed, and experts in the field were contacted for relevant papers. Two investigators independently screened and collected data. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated, and certainty of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Six studies (1074 participants) were included in the review and meta-analyses. Pooled estimates indicate a nonsignificant increased risk of mortality (RR = 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-2.47), bleeding (RR = 2.24; 95% CI, 0.81-7.27), and thromboembolism (RR = 1.29; 95% CI, 0.35-4.78) for vitamin K administration, with moderate certainty of the evidence resulting from serious imprecision as CIs included potential for benefit and harm. Patients receiving vitamin K had a nonsignificant increase in the likelihood of reaching goal INR (1.95; 95% CI, 0.88-4.33), with very low certainty of the evidence resulting from serious risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. Our findings indicate that patients on VKA therapy who have an INR between 4.5 and 10.0 without bleeding are not likely to benefit from vitamin K administration in addition to temporary VKA cessation.

Role of the anticoagulant monitoring service in 2018: beyond warfarin.

The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have a wide therapeutic index, few drug interaction, no dietary interactions and do not require dose adjustment according to the results of routine coagulation testing. Despite these advantages over warfarin, the DOACs remain high risk medications. There is evidence that non-adherence, off-label dosing and inadequate care transitions during DOAC therapy increase the risk of bleeding and thromboembolic complications. Although DOACs are approved for a growing number of indications, there remain patient populations who are not good candidates. Existing expertise within an Anticoagulation Management Service (AMS) should be leveraged to optimize all anticoagulant therapies including the DOACs. The AMS can facilitate initial drug therapy selection and dose management, reinforce patient education and adherence as well as managing drug interactions and invasive procedures. In the event that a transition to warfarin is warranted, the AMS is already engaged which limits the risk of fragmented patient care and ensures that therapeutic anticoagulation is re-established in a timely manner. The AMS of the future will provide comprehensive management for all patients receiving anticoagulant medications and continue to provide anticoagulation expertise to the healthcare team.

American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: optimal management of anticoagulation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians confront numerous practical issues in optimizing the use of anticoagulants to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians and other health care professionals in their decisions about the use of anticoagulants in the management of VTE. These guidelines assume the choice of anticoagulant has already been made. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 25 recommendations and 2 good practice statements to optimize management of patients receiving anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS: Strong recommendations included using patient self-management of international normalized ratio (INR) with home point-of-care INR monitoring for vitamin K antagonist therapy and against using periprocedural low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging therapy. Conditional recommendations included basing treatment dosing of LMWH on actual body weight, not using anti-factor Xa monitoring to guide LMWH dosing, using specialized anticoagulation management services, and resuming anticoagulation after episodes of life-threatening bleeding.

Pharmacy Technician Management of Stable, In-Range INRs Within a Clinical Pharmacy Anticoagulation Service.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing demand on pharmacist time within clinical pharmacy services, and pharmacy technicians are a crucial resource for expanding pharmacy practice. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of pharmacy technician management of stable, in-range international normalized ratio (INR) results compared with usual care. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal, noninferiority cohort study was conducted at an integrated health care delivery system with a centralized anticoagulation service. Adult patients receiving chronic warfarin therapy with therapeutic INR results over a 3-month period (i.e., 100% time in therapeutic range [TTR] during the 3 months before the index date) were eligible for referral to technician warfarin management between March 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015. Patients with similar INR control during the same period but not referred to technician management were included as comparators in the usual care group. A one-sided noninferiority margin for the technician management group was set to -2.5% for mean TTR. Propensity scoring was used in regression modeling via inverse probability of treatment weights to compare between-group differences to account for covariates that may have influenced assignment to the technician group. Finally, bleeding, thromboembolic, and mortality outcomes were compared. RESULTS: 1,840 and 1,116 patients were included in the technician and usual care groups, respectively. The mean age of included patients was 73.1 years, and the majority (77.9%) had received warfarin for > 3 years. TTR during follow-up was 83.3% and 77.7% in the technician and usual care groups, respectively (mean difference = 5.7%; 95% CI = 4.1%-7.2%). The risk of thromboembolism was similar between the technician and usual care groups (HR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.17-4.22; P = 0.832); however, bleeding (HR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.39-0.94; P = 0.026) and all-cause mortality (HR = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.25-0.77; P = 0.004) were lower in the technician group during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Technician management of stable patients receiving chronic warfarin therapy within an integrated health care delivery system's centralized anticoagulation service was associated with noninferior TTR results compared with usual care pharmacist management. DISCLOSURES: This study was internally funded by the Kaiser Permanente Pharmacy Department. The study sponsor had no role in the study design, analysis, or interpretation. The authors have no relevant financial conflicts of interest to disclose.