Off-label Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared With Warfarin for Left Ventricular Thrombi.

Importance: Left ventricular (LV) thrombi can arise in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathies. Anticoagulation is thought to reduce the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), but there are no high-quality data on the effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for this indication. Objective: To compare the outcomes associated with DOAC use and warfarin use for the treatment of LV thrombi. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cohort study was performed at 3 tertiary care academic medical centers among 514 eligible patients with echocardiographically diagnosed LV thrombi between October 1, 2013, and March 31, 2019. Follow-up was performed through the end of the study period. Exposures: Type and duration of anticoagulant use. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinically apparent SSE. Results: A total of 514 patients (379 men; mean [SD] age, 58.4 [14.8] years) with LV thrombi were identified, including 300 who received warfarin and 185 who received a DOAC (64 patients switched treatment between these groups). The median follow-up across the patient cohort was 351 days (interquartile range, 51-866 days). On unadjusted analysis, DOAC treatment vs warfarin use (hazard ratio [HR], 2.71; 95% CI, 1.31-5.57; P = .01) and prior SSE (HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.22-3.72; P = .01) were associated with SSE. On multivariable analysis, anticoagulation with DOAC vs warfarin (HR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.28-5.43; P = .01) and prior SSE (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.17-3.66; P = .01) remained significantly associated with SSE. Conclusions and Relevance: In this multicenter cohort study of anticoagulation strategies for LV thrombi, DOAC treatment was associated with a higher risk of SSE compared with warfarin use, even after adjustment for other factors. These results challenge the assumption of DOAC equivalence with warfarin for LV thrombi and highlight the need for prospective randomized clinical trials to determine the most effective treatment strategies for LV thrombi.

Do not waste your time: straight to magnetic resonance imaging for pediatric burners and stingers.

BACKGROUND: Permanent neurologic injury in pediatric patients with burner and stinger syndrome (BSS) is unlikely. This study aims to assess the feasibility of clinical observation without extensive radiologic workup in this selective population. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of patients aged younger than 18 years evaluated at a level I trauma center from 2012 to 2014. Patients were grouped according to positive deficit (PD) or negative deficit (ND) upon physical examination. Demographics, clinical findings, and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty patients (ND, n = 14; PD, n = 16) were evaluated for BSS, most often as a result of injurious football tackle. Age and length of stay were similar between groups. Injury Severity Score was lower in the ND group than the PD group (1.6 ± 1.2 vs 3.8 ± 3.1, respectively; P< .05). Cervical computed tomography was performed on 11 patients (78.6%) in the ND group and 15 patients (93.8%) in the PD group at considerable added cost, with only 1 positive result in the ND group and none in the PD group. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed 2 positive findings in each group, and no surgical interventions were indicated. Ten ND (71.4%) and 12 PD (75%) patients reported complete resolution of symptoms at discharge (P> .05). CONCLUSIONS: Children presenting with BSS experience temporary symptoms that resolve without surgical intervention. Magnetic resonance imaging identified more injuries than computed tomographic imaging; therefore, we suggest that management for BSS should include observation, serial neurologic examinations, and MRI evaluation as appropriate.