Influence of thrombophilia on risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism while on warfarin: results from a randomized trial.

We sought to determine whether thrombophilic defects increase recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) during warfarin therapy. Six hundred sixty-one patients with unprovoked VTE who were randomized to extended low-intensity (international normalized ratio [INR], 1.5-1.9) or conventional-intensity (INR, 2.0-3.0) anticoagulant therapy were tested for thrombophilia and followed for a mean of 2.3 years. One or more thrombophilic defects were present in 42% of patients. The overall rate of recurrent VTE was 0.9% per patient-year. Recurrent VTE was not increased in the presence of factor V Leiden (hazard ratio [HR], 0.7; 95% CI, 0.2-2.6); the 20210G>A prothrombin gene mutation (HR, 0); antithrombin deficiency (HR, 0); elevated factor VIII (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.1-5.4); elevated factor XI (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.1-5.0), or elevated homocysteine (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.1-5.3), but showed a trend to an increase with an antiphospholipid antibody (HR, 2.9; 95% CI, 0.8-10.5). Compared with patients with no thrombophilic defects, the rate of recurrence was not increased in the presence of one (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.2-2.3) or more than one (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.2-3.4) defect. We conclude that single or multiple thrombophilic defects are not associated with a higher risk of recurrent VTE during warfarin therapy.

Evaluation of a venous-return assist device to treat severe post-thrombotic syndrome (VENOPTS). A randomized controlled trial.

Severe post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) is responsible for considerable disability, reduced quality of life and increased health care costs. Current therapies are limited and often ineffective. We performed a two-centre, randomized, cross-over controlled trial to evaluate Venowave, a novel lower-limb venous-return assist device, for the treatment of severe PTS. Eligible subjects were allocated to receive, in randomized order, Venowave for eight weeks and a control device for eight weeks. The eight-week treatment periods were separated by a four-week period when no device was used (i.e. wash-out period). The primary outcome measure was a 'clinical success' defined as: i) reported benefit from the device; and ii) moderate or greater improvement in symptoms of PTS; and iii) willingness to continue using the device. Secondary outcome measures included quality of life (QOL) as measured by VEINES-QOL questionnaire (higher scores indicate better QOL), and PTS severity as measured by the Villalta PTS scale (higher scores indicate more severe PTS). The study was registered with Clinical Trials. gov (NCT00182208). Thirty-two patients were enrolled. Of these, 26 (80%) were also using graduated compression stockings. Twenty-six participants completed both trial periods. Clinical success occurred in 10 (31%) participants receiving Venowave and four (13%) participants receiving the control device, with two (6%) participants reporting a clinical success with both devices (P = 0.11). Mean VEINES-QOL score at the end of study period was significantly greater (P = 0.004) for Venowave (52.5; SD 5.8) compared to control (50.2; SD 6.2). Mean Villalta scale score at the end of study period was significantly decreased (P = 0.004) for Venowave (12.2; SD 6.3) compared to control (15.0; SD 6.1). In conclusion, Venowave appears to be a very promising new therapy for patients with severe PTS, which may be used alone or in combination with graduated compression stockings.

Comparison of fixed-dose weight-adjusted unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin for acute treatment of venous thromboembolism.

CONTEXT: When unfractionated heparin is used to treat acute venous thromboembolism, it is usually administered by intravenous infusion with coagulation monitoring, which requires hospitalization. However, subcutaneous administration of fixed-dose, weight-adjusted, unfractionated heparin may be suitable for inpatient and outpatient treatment of venous thromboembolism. OBJECTIVE: To determine if fixed-dose, weight-adjusted, subcutaneous unfractionated heparin is as effective and safe as low-molecular-weight heparin for treatment of venous thromboembolism. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, noninferiority trial of 708 patients aged 18 years or older with acute venous thromboembolism from 6 university-affiliated clinical centers in Canada and New Zealand conducted from September 1998 through February 2004. Of the randomized patients, 11 were subsequently excluded from the analysis of efficacy and 8 from the analysis of safety. INTERVENTIONS: Unfractionated heparin was administered subcutaneously as an initial dose of 333 U/kg, followed by a fixed dose of 250 U/kg every 12 hours (n = 345). Low-molecular-weight heparin (dalteparin or enoxaparin) was administered subcutaneously at a dose of 100 IU/kg every 12 hours (n = 352). Both treatments could be administered out of hospital and both were overlapped with 3 months of warfarin therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Recurrent venous thromboembolism within 3 months and major bleeding within 10 days of randomization. RESULTS: Recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 13 patients in the unfractionated heparin group (3.8%) compared with 12 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group (3.4%; absolute difference, 0.4%; 95% confidence interval, -2.6% to 3.3%). Major bleeding during the first 10 days of treatment occurred in 4 patients in the unfractionated heparin group (1.1%) compared with 5 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group (1.4%; absolute difference, -0.3%; 95% confidence interval, -2.3% to 1.7%). Treatment was administered entirely out of hospital in 72% of the unfractionated heparin group and 68% of the low-molecular-weight heparin group. CONCLUSION: Fixed-dose subcutaneous unfractionated heparin is as effective and safe as low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with acute venous thromboembolism and is suitable for outpatient treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00182403.

Influence of warfarin on symptoms of fatigue: findings of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Some patients develop fatigue while taking warfarin, but causality is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether warfarin use is associated with fatigue. METHODS: This investigation was a substudy of a randomized double-blind trial in 13 outpatient thromboembolism clinics. Subjects who had received one month of open-label warfarin therapy for venous thromboembolism due to a transient risk factor were randomly assigned to receive warfarin or placebo for 2 months and followed for another 9 months after stopping the study drug. Fatigue was measured using a Likert scale, and change of fatigue was measured by the patient's global rating. RESULTS: In 87 subjects, the overall ratings of fatigue were 0.1 unit lower (95% CI 0.6 units lower to 0.4 units higher) while taking warfarin. Global rating for change in fatigue intensity showed no increase of fatigue with warfarin use. CONCLUSIONS: The short-term use of warfarin was not associated with symptoms of fatigue.

Comparison of low-intensity warfarin therapy with conventional-intensity warfarin therapy for long-term prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is very effective in preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism but is also associated with a substantial risk of bleeding. After three months of conventional warfarin therapy, a lower dose of anticoagulant medication may result in less bleeding and still prevent recurrent venous thromboembolism. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind study, in which 738 patients who had completed three or more months of warfarin therapy for unprovoked venous thromboembolism were randomly assigned to continue warfarin therapy with a target international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0 to 3.0 (conventional intensity) or a target INR of 1.5 to 1.9 (low intensity). Patients were followed for an average of 2.4 years. RESULTS: Of 369 patients assigned to low-intensity therapy, 16 had recurrent venous thromboembolism (1.9 per 100 person-years), as compared with 6 of 369 assigned to conventional-intensity therapy (0.7 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 2.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 7.0). A major bleeding episode occurred in nine patients assigned to low-intensity therapy (1.1 events per 100 person-years) and eight patients assigned to conventional-intensity therapy (0.9 event per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 1.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.4 to 3.0). There was no significant difference in the frequency of overall bleeding between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 2.1). CONCLUSIONS: Conventional-intensity warfarin therapy is more effective than low-intensity warfarin therapy for the long-term prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism. The low-intensity warfarin regimen does not reduce the risk of clinically important bleeding.

Low-dose warfarin in rehabilitating stroke survivors.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing rehabilitation after thromboembolic stroke have a relatively high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Warfarin, with a target international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0-3.0 is effective for the prevention of VTE. However, because stroke is a major risk factor for bleeding with warfarin, a less intense regimen (target INR < 2.0), might safely prevent VTE in stroke rehabilitation patients. METHODS: This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 2 mg of warfarin in patients undergoing rehabilitation following completed stroke. The major efficacy endpoint was symptomatic, objectively proven VTE or asymptomatic VTE detected by monthly duplex ultrasonography (DU) of the proximal leg veins or mandatory bilateral contrast venography performed at the end of the study. The major safety endpoint was bleeding. RESULTS: There were 475 patients screened for enrollment, 355 had one or more exclusion criterion, and 17 had previously undetected proximal DVT on admission. Of the 103 eligible and consenting patients, 56 received warfarin and 47 received placebo. Of the randomized patients, 88 had successful venography (47 warfarin and 41 placebo). In the warfarin group, three (8%) patients had DVT and one (2%) had proximal DVT whereas in the placebo group, seven (20%) had DVT and five (13%) had proximal DVT. The risk ratio for any DVT in warfarin-treated patients relative to placebo-treated patients was 0.39 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.13-1.37). For proximal DVT, the risk ratio was 0.17 (95% CI, 0.01-1.4). No patients suffered major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: A fixed dose of 2 mg of warfarin per day in patients undergoing stroke rehabilitation is safe and associated with a relative risk reduction of about 80% in the incidence of proximal DVT and 60% in overall DVT.