Total intracranial hemorrhage volume measurement summating all compartments best in traumatic and nontraumatic intracranial bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The ANNEXA-4 trial measured hemostatic efficacy of andexanet alfa in patients with major bleeding taking factor Xa inhibitors. A proportion of this was traumatic and nontraumatic intracranial bleeding. Different measurements were applied in the trial including volumetrics to assess for intracranial bleeding depending on the compartment involved. We aimed to determine the most reliable way to measure intracranial hemorrhage (ICrH) volume by comparing individual brain compartment and total ICrH volume. METHODS: Thirty patients were randomly selected from the ANNEXA-4 database to assess measurement of ICrH volume by compartment and in total. Total and compartmental hemorrhage volumes were measured by five readers using Quantomo software. Each reader measured baseline hemorrhage volumes twice separated by 1 week. Twenty-eight different ANNEXA-4 subjects were also randomly selected to assess intra-rater reliability of total ICrH volume measurement change at baseline and 12-h follow up, performed by three readers twice to assess hemostatic efficacy categories used in ANNEXA-4. RESULTS: Compartmental minimal detectable change percentages (MDC%) ranged between 9.72 and 224.13, with the greatest measurement error occurring in patients with a subdural hemorrhage. Total ICrH volume measurements had the lowest MDC%, which ranged between 6.57 and 33.52 depending on the reader. CONCLUSION: Measurement of total ICrH volumes is more accurate than volume by compartment with less measurement error. Determination of hemostatic efficacy was consistent across readers, and within the same reader, as well as when compared to consensus read. Volumetric analysis of intracranial hemostatic efficacy is feasible and reliable when using total ICrH volumes.

Low recurrent thrombosis rates in single positive antiphospholipid syndrome regardless of type of anticoagulation.

Thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (TAPS) is characterized by thrombosis and persistently positive tests for antiphospholipid antibodies or lupus anticoagulant (LAC). Triple-positive APS has the highest risk of recurrent thrombosis, but no studies have focused on recurrent thrombosis in patients with single-positive TAPS. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with single-positive TAPS diagnosed at Lifespan Health System, Rhode Island, to determine the rates and risk factors for recurrent thrombosis. Between January 2001 and April 2022, 128 patients were assessed who had single-positive APS (LAC = 98, aCL = 21, aß2GPI = 9) and who had been followed for a total of 1453.8 patient-years (median follow-up 3.04 years). The initial antithrombotic regimen was warfarin in 44 %, a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) in 34 %, enoxaparin in 2 %, and no antithrombotic therapy or antiplatelet therapy only in 20 %. Recurrent thrombosis occurred in 16 (12.5 %) with a recurrent thrombosis rate of 3.08 per 100 patient-years. Systemic lupus erythematosus was the only variable significantly associated with recurrent thrombosis in a model adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, and type of positive APS test. All 16 patients with recurrent thrombosis were initially treated with warfarin, and, at the time of recurrent thrombosis, 13 patients remained on warfarin and three were off anticoagulation. In conclusion, the recurrent thrombosis rate in single-positive APS is low, and not all patients with a single-positive test may need indefinite anticoagulation with warfarin. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm this finding and establish optimal anticoagulation regimens for low-risk TAPS.

Primary prevention of venous thromboembolism for cancer patients in randomized controlled trials: a bibliographical analysis of funding and trial characteristics.

Background: The majority of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients with cancer involve commercial sponsorship. Commercial sponsorship overcomes feasibility limitations inherent in RCTs, such as recruitment and funding, but has attracted scrutiny for its potential for bias. Objectives: In RCTs of VTE prophylaxis in patients with cancer, how do trial characteristics compare between commercially sponsored RCTs and noncommercially sponsored RCTs? Methods: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for RCTs that investigated at least 1 pharmacologic intervention for VTE prophylaxis in adult patients with cancer. Screening and data extraction were conducted by independent reviewers. Outcomes included trial characteristics, reporting of favorable outcomes, protocol-manuscript discrepancies, and appraisal of spin. Outcomes were compared using the independent t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test, Pearson chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with possible bias. Results: Of the 54 trials analyzed, 34 (63%) reported commercial sponsorship. Commercial sponsorship was not associated with the reporting of favorable outcomes, presence of spin, retrospective registration, or protocol-manuscript discrepancy. Spin was most prevalent in the abstract conclusions (9 out of 17 [53.3%]) and manuscript conclusions (8 out of 17 [46.7%]).Commercially sponsored trials had a higher rate of intention-to-treat analysis. Noncommercially sponsored trials were more likely to report retrospective registration of trial protocol and the use of composite primary outcomes. Conclusion: There were few significant differences between trial characteristics, suggesting that the evidence from commercially sponsored trials investigating VTE prophylaxis in patients with cancer is unlikely to be subject to bias attributable to commercial sponsorship.

Small-Volume Blood Collection Tubes to Reduce Transfusions in Intensive Care: The STRATUS Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Blood collection for laboratory testing in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is a modifiable contributor to anemia and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. Most blood withdrawn is not required for analysis and is discarded. Objective: To determine whether transitioning from standard-volume to small-volume vacuum tubes for blood collection in ICUs reduces RBC transfusion without compromising laboratory testing procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants: Stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in 25 adult medical-surgical ICUs in Canada (February 5, 2019 to January 21, 2021). Interventions: ICUs were randomized to transition from standard-volume (n = 10 940) to small-volume tubes (n = 10 261) for laboratory testing. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was RBC transfusion (units per patient per ICU stay). Secondary outcomes were patients receiving at least 1 RBC transfusion, hemoglobin decrease during ICU stay (adjusted for RBC transfusion), specimens with insufficient volume for testing, length of stay in the ICU and hospital, and mortality in the ICU and hospital. The primary analysis included patients admitted for 48 hours or more, excluding those admitted during a 5.5-month COVID-19-related trial hiatus. Results: In the primary analysis of 21 201 patients (mean age, 63.5 years; 39.9% female), which excluded 6210 patients admitted during the early COVID-19 pandemic, there was no significant difference in RBC units per patient per ICU stay (relative risk [RR], 0.91 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.05]; P = .19; absolute reduction of 7.24 RBC units/100 patients per ICU stay [95% CI, -3.28 to 19.44]). In a prespecified secondary analysis (n = 27 411 patients), RBC units per patient per ICU stay decreased after transition from standard-volume to small-volume tubes (RR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.00]; P = .04; absolute reduction of 9.84 RBC units/100 patients per ICU stay [95% CI, 0.24 to 20.76]). Median decrease in transfusion-adjusted hemoglobin was not statistically different in the primary population (mean difference, 0.10 g/dL [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.23]) and lower in the secondary population (mean difference, 0.17 g/dL [95% CI, 0.05 to 0.29]). Specimens with insufficient quantity for analysis were rare (≤0.03%) before and after transition. Conclusions and Relevance: Use of small-volume blood collection tubes in the ICU may decrease RBC transfusions without affecting laboratory analysis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03578419.

Serial D-dimers after anticoagulant cessation in unprovoked venous thromboembolism: Data from the REVERSE cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: While several risk stratification tools have been developed to predict the risk of recurrence in patients with an unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE), only 1 in 4 patients are categorized as low-risk. Rather than a one-time measure, serial D-dimer assessment holds promise to enhance the prediction of VTE recurrence after oral anticoagulant (OAC) cessation. METHODS: Using the REVERSE cohort, we compared VTE recurrence among patients with normal D-dimer levels (<490 ng/mL among males under age 70, <500 ng/mL in others) at OAC cessation and 1-month follow-up, to those with an elevated D-dimer level at either timepoint. We also evaluated VTE recurrence based on absolute increase in D-dimer levels between the two timepoints (e.g., ∆D-dimer) according to quartiles. RESULTS: Among 214 patients with serial D-dimer levels measured at OAC cessation and 1-month follow-up, an elevated D-dimer level at either timepoint was associated with a numerically higher risk of recurrent VTE than patients with normal D-dimer levels at both timepoints (6.9 % vs. 4.2 % per year, hazard ratio 1.6; 95 % CI 0.9-2.7). Among women with <2 HERDOO2 criteria, a normal D-dimer level at both timepoints predicted a very low risk of recurrent VTE during follow-up (0.8 % per year, 95 % CI 0.1-2.8). Irrespective of baseline value, recurrent VTE risk was only 3 % per year (95 % CI 1.4-5.6) among patients in the lowest ∆D-dimer quartile. CONCLUSION: Serial normal D-dimer levels have the potential to identify patients at a low risk of recurrent VTE. In addition, ∆D-dimer, irrespective of its elevation above cutoff threshold, may predict recurrent VTE.

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of splanchnic vein thrombosis - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is an uncommon manifestation of venous thromboembolism in the splanchnic venous system, with scarce evidence surrounding its management. We assessed the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH), vitamin-k antagonists (VKAs), or no anticoagulation. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with the primary efficacy outcome being complete recanalization of affected vessels and primary safety outcome being major bleeding. Meta-analysis was done using a random-effects model, with dichotomous outcomes being synthesized with odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95 % CIs. RESULTS: Seven non-randomized and one randomized study involving 883 participants were included for analysis. DOACs were more effective than VKAs (OR = 4.33; 95 % CI: 2.4, 7.83; n = 1 study) in non-cirrhotic patients and no anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients (OR = 3.86; 95 % CI: 1.49, 10.03; n = 3 studies). DOACs had a statistically significant reduction in major bleeding compared to observation [OR = 0.09; 95 % CI: 0.03, 0.29; n = 3 studies], LMWHs [OR = 0.13; 95 % CI: 0.03, 0.29; n = 1 study] and VKAs [OR = 0.12; 95 % CI: 0.02, 0.69; n = 2 studies] in non-cirrhotic patients. No difference in major bleeding was found between DOACs and observation, LMWH, or VKAs in cirrhotic patients. CONCLUSION: DOACs appear to be a favorable alternative to VKAs and LMWHs in non-cirrhotic patients. This avenue of research would benefit from larger studies that adjust for SVT etiologies, patient risk factors, and overall bleeding risk.

The 2023 ACR/EULAR Antiphospholipid Syndrome Classification Criteria.

OBJECTIVE: To develop new antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification criteria with high specificity for use in observational studies and trials, jointly supported by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and EULAR. METHODS: This international multidisciplinary initiative included 4 phases: 1) Phase I, criteria generation by surveys and literature review; 2) Phase II, criteria reduction by modified Delphi and nominal group technique exercises; 3) Phase III, criteria definition, further reduction with the guidance of real-world patient scenarios, and weighting via consensus-based multicriteria decision analysis, and threshold identification; and 4) Phase IV, validation using independent adjudicators' consensus as the gold standard. RESULTS: The 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria include an entry criterion of at least one positive antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) test within 3 years of identification of an aPL-associated clinical criterion, followed by additive weighted criteria (score range 1-7 points each) clustered into 6 clinical domains (macrovascular venous thromboembolism, macrovascular arterial thrombosis, microvascular, obstetric, cardiac valve, and hematologic) and 2 laboratory domains (lupus anticoagulant functional coagulation assays, and solid-phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for IgG/IgM anticardiolipin and/or IgG/IgM anti-ß2 -glycoprotein I antibodies). Patients accumulating at least 3 points each from the clinical and laboratory domains are classified as having APS. In the validation cohort, the new APS criteria versus the 2006 revised Sapporo classification criteria had a specificity of 99% versus 86%, and a sensitivity of 84% versus 99%. CONCLUSION: These new ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary international input. Hierarchically clustered, weighted, and risk-stratified criteria reflect the current thinking about APS, providing high specificity and a strong foundation for future APS research.

2023 ACR/EULAR antiphospholipid syndrome classification criteria.

OBJECTIVE: To develop new antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification criteria with high specificity for use in observational studies and trials, jointly supported by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and EULAR. METHODS: This international multidisciplinary initiative included four phases: (1) Phase I, criteria generation by surveys and literature review; (2) Phase II, criteria reduction by modified Delphi and nominal group technique exercises; (3) Phase III, criteria definition, further reduction with the guidance of real-world patient scenarios, and weighting via consensus-based multicriteria decision analysis, and threshold identification; and (4) Phase IV, validation using independent adjudicators' consensus as the gold standard. RESULTS: The 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria include an entry criterion of at least one positive antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) test within 3 years of identification of an aPL-associated clinical criterion, followed by additive weighted criteria (score range 1-7 points each) clustered into six clinical domains (macrovascular venous thromboembolism, macrovascular arterial thrombosis, microvascular, obstetric, cardiac valve, and hematologic) and two laboratory domains (lupus anticoagulant functional coagulation assays, and solid-phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for IgG/IgM anticardiolipin and/or IgG/IgM anti-ß2-glycoprotein I antibodies). Patients accumulating at least three points each from the clinical and laboratory domains are classified as having APS. In the validation cohort, the new APS criteria vs the 2006 revised Sapporo classification criteria had a specificity of 99% vs 86%, and a sensitivity of 84% vs 99%. CONCLUSION: These new ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary international input. Hierarchically clustered, weighted, and risk-stratified criteria reflect the current thinking about APS, providing high specificity and a strong foundation for future APS research.

Sex differences in thromboprophylaxis of the critically ill: a secondary analysis of a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of critical illness. Sex- or gender-based analyses are rarely conducted and their effect on outcomes is unknown. We assessed for an effect modification of thromboprophylaxis (dalteparin or unfractionated heparin [UFH]) by sex on thrombotic (deep venous thrombosis [DVT], pulmonary embolism [PE], VTE) and mortality outcomes in a secondary analysis of the Prophylaxis for Thromboembolism in Critical Care Trial (PROTECT). METHODS: We conducted unadjusted analyses using Cox proportional hazards analysis, stratified by centre and admission diagnostic category, including sex, treatment, and an interaction term. Additionally, we performed adjusted analyses and assessed the credibility of our findings. RESULTS: Critically ill female (n = 1,614) and male (n = 2,113) participants experienced similar rates of DVT, proximal DVT, PE, any VTE, ICU death, and hospital death. In unadjusted analyses, we did not find significant differences in treatment effect favouring males (vs females) treated with dalteparin (vs UFH) for proximal leg DVT, any DVT, or any PE, but found a statistically significant effect (moderate certainty) favouring dalteparin in males for any VTE (males: hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.96 vs females: HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.68; P = 0.04). This effect remained after adjustment for baseline characteristics (males: HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.96 vs females: HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.68; P = 0.04) and weight (males: HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.96 vs females: HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.73; P = 0.03). We did not identify a significant effect modification by sex on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We found an effect modification by sex of thromboprophylaxis on VTE in critically ill patients that requires confirmation. Our findings highlight the need for sex- and gender-based analyses in acute care research.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La maladie thromboembolique veineuse (MTEV) est une complication fréquente au cours des maladies critiques. Des analyses basées sur le sexe ou le genre sont rarement effectuées et leur effet sur les critères d'évaluation est inconnu. Nous avons évalué une modification de l'effet de la thromboprophylaxie (daltéparine ou héparine non fractionnée [HNF]) selon le sexe sur la maladie thrombotique (thrombose veineuse profonde [TVP], embolie pulmonaire [EP], MTEV) et sur les critères de mortalité au cours d'une analyse secondaire de l'étude PROTECT (essai de prophylaxie de la thromboembolie en soins critiques). MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé des analyses non ajustées au moyen d'une analyse des risques proportionnels de Cox, stratifiées par site et catégorie diagnostique à l'admission, incluant le sexe, le traitement et un terme d'interaction. Nous avons aussi réalisé des analyses ajustées et avons évalué la crédibilité de nos constatations. RéSULTATS: Les participant·es dans un état critique de sexe féminin (n = 1 614) et masculin (n = 2 113) ont présenté des taux semblables de TVP, EP, et MTEV de tout type, de décès en soins intensifs et de décès en milieu hospitalier. Nous n'avons pas trouvé de différences significatives dans les analyses non ajustées en faveur des hommes (par rapport aux femmes) traités par la daltéparine (par rapport à l'HNF) pour la TVP de la cuisse, la TVP de tout type, ou tout type d'EP; en revanche, nous avons trouvé un effet statistiquement significatif (certitude modérée) en faveur de la daltéparine pour la MTEV de tout type (hommes : rapport de risque [RR], 0,71; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,52 à 0,96 par rapport aux femmes : RR, 1,16; IC 95 %, 0,81 à 1,68; P = 0,04). Cet effet a persisté après ajustement pour les caractéristiques à l'inclusion (hommes : RR, 0,70; IC 95 %, 0,52 à 0,96 par rapport aux femmes : RR, 1,17; IC 95 %, 0,81 à 1,68; P = 0,04) et le poids (hommes : RR, 0,70; IC 95 %, 0,52 à 0,96 par rapport aux femmes : RR, 1,20; IC 95 %, 0,83 à 1,73; P = 0,03). Nous n'avons pas identifié de modification significative de l'effet en fonction du sexe sur la mortalité. CONCLUSION: Nous avons trouvé une modification de l'effet en fonction du sexe sur la thromboprophylaxie sur la MTEV chez les patient·es en état critique; cette constatation nécessite une confirmation. Nos constatations soulignent le besoin d'analyses en fonction du sexe et du genre dans la recherche sur les soins aigus.

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the treatment of oral factor Xa inhibitor-associated bleeding: a meta-analysis of fixed versus variable dosing.

Background: The optimal dosing strategy of four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) to treat oral factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor-associated bleeding has not been established. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fixed versus variable 4F-PCC dosing for the management of FXa inhibitor-associated bleeding. Methods: A systematic literature search and meta-analysis of clinical studies was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to January 2022. The primary outcomes included hemostatic effectiveness, mortality, and thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes included 4F-PCC usage, total length of stay in hospital and in intensive care units, and time to 4F-PCC administration. The pooled incidence or mean was calculated using a random-effects model and compared between the 2 dosing strategies. Results: Twenty-five studies were included and data from 1,760 patients (fixed dosing, n = 228; variable dosing, n = 1,532) were analyzed. There were no significant differences in hemostatic effectiveness, thromboembolic events, or mortality rates between the dosing strategies. Hospital length of stay was significantly longer in the fixed-dosing group, with a mean stay of 7.4 days (95% CI: 3.6-11.1) compared to 5.9 days (95% CI: 5.5-6.3) in the variable-dosing group (P < 0.001). The mean initial 4F-PCC dose was significantly higher with variable dosing than fixed dosing (38 IU/kg; 95% CI: 32-44 vs. 27 IU/kg; 95% CI: 26-28, P < 0.001). Conclusions: A fixed-dosing strategy appears to be a safe and effective alternative to variable weight-based dosing and was associated with lower 4F-PCC usage. However, direct comparative studies are needed to confirm these results.

Convalescent plasma therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 in ambulatory versus hospitalized patients: Efficacy and risk of thromboembolism.

Background: Although early evidence concluded a lack of clinical benefit of convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) in COVID-19 management, recent trials have demonstrated the therapeutic potential of CPT in ambulatory care. CPT may also potentiate thromboembolic events, given the presence of coagulation factors and the prothrombotic state of COVID-19. Objectives: The present study aimed to assess and compare the clinical efficacy and the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE)/arterial thromboembolism (ATE) of CPT in ambulatory versus hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from December 2019 to December 2022 for randomized controlled trials that investigated the use of CPT against placebo or standard of care in adult patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome was nonmortality disease progression. Secondary outcomes include VTE, ATE, 28-day mortality, clinical improvement, length of hospitalization, sepsis/fever, and major adverse cardiovascular events. Results: Twenty randomized controlled trials, with 21,340 patients, were included. CPT significantly reduced nonmortality disease progression in ambulatory patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.92; P = .009) but not in hospitalized patients (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.94-1.12; P = .58). The risk of VTE and ATE did not differ between the CPT and the control group (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.82-1.66; P = .40; and OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.37-2.79; P = .98, respectively). No conclusive differences between CPT and control groups were noted in 28-day mortality, clinical improvement, length of hospitalization, risk of sepsis/fever, and major adverse cardiovascular events. Conclusion: In conclusion, treatment of COVID-19 with CPT prevents the progression of COVID-19 in the ambulatory care. It is not associated with an increased risk of VTE, ATE, or other adverse events.

Final Study Report of Andexanet Alfa for Major Bleeding With Factor Xa Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Andexanet alfa is a modified recombinant inactive factor Xa (FXa) designed to reverse FXa inhibitors. ANNEXA-4 (Andexanet Alfa, a Novel Antidote to the Anticoagulation Effects of Factor Xa Inhibitors) was a multicenter, prospective, phase-3b/4, single-group cohort study that evaluated andexanet alfa in patients with acute major bleeding. The results of the final analyses are presented. METHODS: Patients with acute major bleeding within 18 hours of FXa inhibitor administration were enrolled. Co-primary end points were anti-FXa activity change from baseline during andexanet alfa treatment and excellent or good hemostatic efficacy, defined by a scale used in previous reversal studies, at 12 hours. The efficacy population included patients with baseline anti-FXa activity levels above predefined thresholds (≥75 ng/mL for apixaban and rivaroxaban, ≥40 ng/mL for edoxaban, and ≥0.25 IU/mL for enoxaparin; reported in the same units used for calibrators) who were adjudicated as meeting major bleeding criteria (modified International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis definition). The safety population included all patients. Major bleeding criteria, hemostatic efficacy, thrombotic events (stratified by occurring before or after restart of either prophylactic [ie, a lower dose, for prevention rather than treatment] or full-dose oral anticoagulation), and deaths were assessed by an independent adjudication committee. Median endogenous thrombin potential at baseline and across the follow-up period was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: There were 479 patients enrolled (mean age, 78 years; 54% male; 86% White); 81% were anticoagulated for atrial fibrillation, and the median time was 11.4 hours since last dose, with 245 (51%) on apixaban, 176 (37%) on rivaroxaban, 36 (8%) on edoxaban, and 22 (5%) on enoxaparin. Bleeding was predominantly intracranial (n=331 [69%]) or gastrointestinal (n=109 [23%]). In evaluable apixaban patients (n=172), median anti-FXa activity decreased from 146.9 ng/mL to 10.0 ng/mL (reduction, 93% [95% CI, 94-93]); in rivaroxaban patients (n=132), it decreased from 214.6 ng/mL to 10.8 ng/mL (94% [95% CI, 95-93]); in edoxaban patients (n=28), it decreased from 121.1 ng/mL to 24.4 ng/mL (71% [95% CI, 82-65); and in enoxaparin patients (n=17), it decreased from 0.48 IU/mL to 0.11 IU/mL (75% [95% CI, 79-67]). Excellent or good hemostasis occurred in 274 of 342 evaluable patients (80% [95% CI, 75-84]). In the safety population, thrombotic events occurred in 50 (10%) patients; in 16 patients, these occurred during treatment with prophylactic anticoagulation that began after the bleeding event. No thrombotic episodes occurred after oral anticoagulation restart. Specific to certain populations, reduction of anti-FXa activity from baseline to nadir significantly predicted hemostatic efficacy in patients with intracranial hemorrhage (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.54-0.70]) and correlated with lower mortality in patients <75 years of age (adjusted P=0.022; unadjusted P=0.003). Median endogenous thrombin potential was within the normal range by the end of andexanet alfa bolus through 24 hours for all FXa inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with major bleeding associated with the use of FXa inhibitors, treatment with andexanet alfa reduced anti-FXa activity and was associated with good or excellent hemostatic efficacy in 80% of patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02329327.

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.

Prophylactic fresh frozen plasma versus prothrombin complex concentrate for preprocedural management of the coagulopathy of liver disease: A systematic review.

Background: The optimal prophylactic preprocedural management of patients with coagulopathy due to liver disease is not known. Objectives: Our objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) with prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) in the preprocedural management of patients with coagulopathy of liver disease. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to examine published evidence regarding treatment with FFP or PCC in adults with coagulopathy of liver disease undergoing an invasive procedure. Direct comparisons and single-arm studies were eligible. Efficacy outcomes included major bleeding, mortality, and correction of prothrombin time (PT) and/or international normalized ratio (INR). Safety outcomes included thrombosis and transfusion-related complications. Results: A total of 95 articles were identified for full-text review. Nine studies were eligible and included in the review. No randomized trials comparing FFP versus PCC were identified. Only two studies directly compared FFP versus PCC. In these studies, PCC appeared to result in higher rates of correction of PT/INR, but bleeding outcomes were not different. In the single-arm studies, bleeding events appeared low overall. Volume overload was the most common recorded adverse event in patients receiving FFP. Thromboembolic events occurred rarely, but exclusively in the PCC group. Due to heterogeneity in study definitions and bias, meta-analysis was not possible. Our study found no evidence to favor a specific product over another. Conclusions: Insufficient data exist on the effects of FFP versus PCC administration before invasive procedures in patients with coagulopathy of liver disease to make conclusions with respect to relative efficacy or safety.

A Historical Perspective on the Reversal of Anticoagulants.

There has been a landmark shift in the last several decades in the management and prevention of thromboembolic events. From the discovery of parenteral and oral agents requiring frequent monitoring as early as 1914, to the development of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) that do not require monitoring or dose adjustment in the late 20th century, great advances have been achieved. Despite the advent of these newer agents, bleeding continues to be a key complication, affecting 2 to 4% of DOAC-treated patients per year. Bleeding is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Although specific reversal agents for DOACs have lagged the release of these agents, idarucizumab and andexanet alfa are now available as antagonists. However, the efficacy of these reversal agents is uncertain, and complications, including thrombosis, have not been adequately explored. As such, guidelines continue to advise the use of nonspecific prohemostatic agents for patients requiring reversal of the anticoagulant effect of these drugs. As the indications for DOACs and the overall prevalence of their use expand, there is an unmet need for further studies to determine the efficacy of specific compared with nonspecific pro-hemostatic reversal agents. In this review, we will discuss the evidence behind specific and nonspecific reversal agents for both parenteral and oral anticoagulants.