Use of an argatroban systemic infusion and purge solution in a patient with a percutaneous ventricular assist device with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

PURPOSE: Thrombocytopenia can occur when using an Impella percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD), and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is often suspected. Data on heparin- and anticoagulant-free purge solutions in these devices are limited. Previous case reports have described argatroban-based purge solutions, both with and without systemic argatroban, at varying concentrations in patients with known or suspected HIT. SUMMARY: A 33-year-old male was transferred to our institution and emergently initiated on life support with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), an Impella pVAD, and continuous venovenous hemofiltration to receive an urgent aortic valve replacement. Over the next several days, the patient's platelet count declined with a nadir of 17 × 103/µL on hospital day 13. The patient's 4T score for probability of HIT was calculated as 4. All heparin products were discontinued on hospital day 15, and the patient was initiated on systemic infusion with argatroban 1,000 µg/mL at a rate of 0.2 µg/kg/min with a purge solution of argatroban 0.05 mg/mL. The systemic infusion remained at a rate of 0.2 µg/kg/min, and the total argatroban dose was, on average, less than 0.25 µg/kg/min. On hospital day 21, the patient was transferred to another institution. CONCLUSION: Systemic infusion and a purge solution with argatroban were used in a patient with an Impella pVAD with multisystem organ dysfunction and suspected HIT. The patient achieved therapeutic activated partial thromboplastin times without adjustment of the systemic argatroban infusion and did not experience bleeding or thrombosis. Further studies concerning the safety and effectiveness of argatroban-based purge solutions in patients with pVADs are needed.

Trust your gut: Effect of a pharmacist-driven pilot project to decrease alvimopan use past gastrointestinal recovery in postsurgical patients.

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: Alvimopan is a peripherally acting opioid receptor antagonist indicated to accelerate gastrointestinal (GI) recovery following surgery, but its benefits past GI recovery are unknown and evidence suggests that it may increase risk for myocardial infarction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a pilot alvimopan stewardship program aimed at intervening to discontinue alvimopan use following GI recovery. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study examining the first 5 months of the alvimopan stewardship pilot program. During this initial period, a pharmacy resident assessed whether each patient met criteria for GI recovery, defined as solid food toleration and first bowel movement or flatus. If a patient met the criteria for GI recovery, the resident intervened and recommended that the primary team discontinue alvimopan. Primary outcomes were the percentage of patients with alvimopan continued past GI recovery and the percentage of patients for whom alvimopan ordered past GI recovery was discontinued following intervention by stewardship. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of accepted recommendations to discontinue alvimopan following GI recovery and the number of alvimopan doses ordered following GI recovery. RESULTS: In total, 73 patients were included in the study analysis, all of whom underwent abdominal and/or urologic surgery. Alvimopan was ordered to be administered in 35.6% (26/73) of patients after GI recovery. The stewardship program intervened and recommended discontinuation on 50% (13/26) of the alvimopan doses ordered past GI recovery. Recommendations were accepted by the primary team for 92.3% (12/13) of the patients. A total of 51 doses of alvimopan were ordered for administration past GI recovery, with an average of 2 doses per patient. CONCLUSION: A pilot pharmacy-driven alvimopan stewardship program was able to identify and intervene on alvimopan orders continued past GI recovery. Interventions decreasing alvimopan use past GI recovery could be of benefit by minimizing potential risk and decreasing potential costs without a negative impact on patient outcomes.