Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.834
Filtrar
1.
Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban ; 46(2): 207-211, 2021 Feb 28.
Artigo em Inglês, Chinês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33678660

RESUMO

Anticoagulation drugs should be used for patients with mechanical heart valve (MHV) in case of potential risk of thrombosis. Pregnant women with MHV have to change therapies due to teratogenic effect of some anti-coagulation drugs. European Society of Cardiology clinical guidelines for the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy gives specific suggestions for anticoagulation therapy.We have treated 2 patients with mechanical heart valve thrombosis (MVT) during pregnancy: One received low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) throughout the pregnancy and developed MVT at the third trimester of pregnancy; one developed MVT at the first trimester when replacing vitamin K antagonists (VKA) with LMWH. These patients raised secondary reflection on the balance between clinical guideline and personalized medicine. During LMWH therapy, we should dynamically monitor patients' anti-activated factor X (anti-Xa) level to evaluate coagulation function during pregnancy. When a pregnant woman with MHV develops symptoms of acute heart failure, stuck mechanical valve should be paid attention to and surgery should be promptly performed if necessary.


Assuntos
Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Complicações Cardiovasculares na Gravidez , Trombose , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas/efeitos adversos , Valvas Cardíacas , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Gravidez , Complicações Cardiovasculares na Gravidez/tratamento farmacológico , Trombose/tratamento farmacológico
2.
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho ; 48(2): 165-169, 2021 Feb.
Artigo em Japonês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33597351

RESUMO

Cancer patients, especially active cancer patients have high risk of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism(VTE). Virchow's triad, hyper-coagulability, endothelial cell damage, and blood stasis are often found during cancer treatment. Tissue factor expressed on tumor cells activate coagulation, and decrease in antithrombotic activity by topical inflammation and platelet activation increase the risk of VTE. The risk of VTE is further enhanced by surgical intervention and chemotherapy. Anticoagulation is the most important treatment, however warfarin is not suitable for active cancer patients due to drug- drug interaction and gastrointestinal toxicity. In the Western countries, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard choice for cancer-associated VTE. During anticoagulation, risk of recurrence of VTE and major bleeding is very high. Recently, direct oral anticoagulant(DOAC)has been introduced and widely used in Japan after the evidence of DOACs in cancer patients. Gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the frequent adverse events during DOAC treatment. Drug-drug interaction such as P-glycoprotein and CYP3A4 must be considered for safety treatment.


Assuntos
Neoplasias , Tromboembolia Venosa , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Japão , Neoplasias/complicações , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Varfarina
3.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(7): e24189, 2021 Feb 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33607764

RESUMO

ABSTRACT: For patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) following hemorrhagic infarction (HI)/hemorrhage transformation (HT) and complicated with venous thrombosis, the management of anticoagulation is controversial. Our study intends to explore the safety and effectiveness of using low-dose of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to treat NVAF patients with HI (or HT) and complicated with venous thrombosis.Between January 2018 and January 2019, NVAF related acute ischemic stroke patients with HT/HI, hospitalized in the department of neurology or rehabilitation in our hospital, are enrolled retrospectively. Among them, those who were found to have venous thrombosis and undergo anticoagulation (LMWH) during the treatment were extracted. We investigate the efficacy and safety in those patients who have been treated with anticoagulant of LMWH.Five cases accepted LMWH within 3 weeks attributed to the appearance of venous thrombosis, and all of them did not display new symptomatic bleeding or recurrent stroke. However, based on the results of a head computed tomography scan, there were 2 cases of slightly increased intracranial hemorrhage, and then we reduced the dose of anticoagulant. In addition, color ultrasound showed that venous thrombosis disappeared or became stable.Patients with NVAF following HI/HT have a higher risk of thromboembolism. Early acceptance of low-dose LMWH as an anticoagulant is relatively safe and may gain benefit. However, in the process of anticoagulant therapy, we should follow-up head computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging frequently, as well as D-dimer values, limb vascular ultrasound. Besides, the changes of symptoms and signs should be focused to judge the symptomatic bleeding or recurrent stroke. Furthermore, it is better to adjust anticoagulant drug dosage according to specific conditions.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/administração & dosagem , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Trombose Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos
4.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 12: CD008500, 2020 12 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33337539

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy, but the trade-off between safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain. This is the third update of a review first published in February 2012. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis for VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or an active control intervention. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 3 August 2020. We also searched the reference lists of identified studies and contacted content experts and trialists for relevant references. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing any oral or parenteral anticoagulant or mechanical intervention to no thromboprophylaxis or placebo, or comparing two different anticoagulants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on risk of bias, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively. We applied GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We identified six additional randomised controlled trials (3326 participants) for this update, bringing the included study total to 32 (15,678 participants), all evaluating pharmacological interventions and performed mainly in people with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. The certainty of the evidence ranged from high to very low across the different outcomes and comparisons. The main limiting factors were imprecision and risk of bias. Thromboprophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulants (direct factor Xa inhibitors apixaban and rivaroxaban) may decrease the incidence of symptomatic VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.06; 3 studies, 1526 participants; low-certainty evidence); and probably increases the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.68; 3 studies, 1494 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). When compared with no thromboprophylaxis, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.83; 11 studies, 3931 participants; high-certainty evidence); and probably increased the risk of major bleeding events (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.35; 15 studies, 7282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In participants with multiple myeloma, LMWH resulted in lower symptomatic VTE compared with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83; 1 study, 439 participants; high-certainty evidence), while LMWH probably lowers symptomatic VTE more than aspirin (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17; 2 studies, 781 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Major bleeding was observed in none of the participants with multiple myeloma treated with LMWH or warfarin and in less than 1% of those treated with aspirin. Only one study evaluated unfractionated heparin against no thromboprophylaxis, but did not report on VTE or major bleeding. When compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, warfarin may importantly reduce symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20; 1 study, 311 participants; low-certainty evidence) and may result in a large increase in major bleeding (RR 3.82, 95% CI 0.97 to 15.04; 4 studies, 994 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study evaluated antithrombin versus no antithrombin in children. This study did not report on symptomatic VTE but did report any VTE (symptomatic and incidental VTE). The effect of antithrombin on any VTE and major bleeding is uncertain (any VTE: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.73; major bleeding: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.03 to 18.57; 1 study, 85 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In ambulatory cancer patients, primary thromboprophylaxis with direct factor Xa inhibitors may reduce the incidence of symptomatic VTE (low-certainty evidence) and probably increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo. LMWH decreases the incidence of symptomatic VTE (high-certainty evidence), but increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. Evidence for the use of thromboprophylaxis with anticoagulants other than direct factor Xa inhibitors and LMWH is limited. More studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary prophylaxis in specific types of chemotherapeutic agents and types of cancer, such as gastrointestinal or genitourinary cancer.


Assuntos
Assistência Ambulatorial , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Prevenção Primária/métodos , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Antitrombinas/uso terapêutico , Viés , Criança , Inibidores do Fator Xa/uso terapêutico , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Neoplasias/complicações , Embolia Pulmonar/etiologia , Embolia Pulmonar/prevenção & controle , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Varfarina/efeitos adversos , Varfarina/uso terapêutico
5.
Chirurgia (Bucur) ; 115(6): 798-806, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33378639

RESUMO

Microthrombi formation in the pulmonary circulation is one of the main pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for the unfavorable respiratory evolution of CoViD-19 patients. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) anticoagulant therapy is a major pillar of treatment. But sometimes LMWH causes severe complications that can result in death. This is a retrospective, descriptive study, covering September 2020 and presenting 3 cases of severe hemorrhages followed by death in COVID-19 anticoagulated patients in therapeutic doses with LMWH in the hospital units of origin. Patients had hematomas of the rectus abdominal muscles and hemoperitoneum (2 cases) respectively hematoma of left gluteal muscles (1 case). The 2 patients with hematoma of rectus abdominal muscles were operated. The death occurred between 1-4 days after hospitalization.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Evolução Fatal , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
6.
Ann Saudi Med ; 40(6): 462-468, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33307734

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism or extensive thrombosis is relatively common in patients with severe COVID-19 infection and has been associated with increased mortality. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, several prophylactic doses and types of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) are being used worldwide; however, there are no high-quality studies or recommendations for an optimal prophylactic LMWH dose. OBJECTIVES: Investigate the relationship between coagulation parameters and the LMWH dose, and mortality and ICU admission in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on clinical features, coagulation parameters and anticoagulant medications of inpatients with severe COVID-19 were collected for the period between 11 March 2020 and 31 April 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality and ICU admission for prophylactic dose LMWH (0.5 mg/kg twice daily) and therapeutic dose LMWH (1 mg/kg twice daily). SAMPLE SIZE: 154 cases. RESULTS: Ninety-eight (63.6%) patients were treated with the LMWH prophylactic dose and 56 (36.4%) patients were treated with the therapeutic dose. Forty-four (44.9%) of 98 patients using the prophylactic dose LMWH died, while 10 (17.9%) of 56 patients using the therapeutic dose LMWH died (P=.001). Mortality was 6.4-fold higher in the prophylactic dose LMWH users than in the therapeutic dose LMWH users (OR=6.5, 95% CI: 2.4-17.6, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic dosing of LMWH may decrease mortality in patients with severe COVID-19 infected pneumonia. More aggressive thromboprophylaxis regimens using higher doses of heparin should be evaluated in prospective studies. LIMITATIONS: Lack of information about bleeding complications. LMWH was not compared with other anticoagulant therapies. There was no comparison between our two groups on the APACHE score. Used different doses of LMWH in different clinics in our hospital. Single-center, retrospective study. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None.


Assuntos
Quimioprevenção/métodos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular , /isolamento & purificação , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Coagulação Sanguínea/efeitos dos fármacos , /mortalidade , /terapia , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Feminino , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/administração & dosagem , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mortalidade , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tromboembolia/sangue , Tromboembolia/etiologia , Tromboembolia/prevenção & controle , Turquia/epidemiologia
7.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 12: CD012467, 2020 12 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33314078

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a major comorbidity in hospitalised patients. Patients with severe AKI require continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) when they are haemodynamically unstable. CRRT is prescribed assuming it is delivered over 24 hours. However, it is interrupted when the extracorporeal circuits clot and the replacement is required. The interruption may impair the solute clearance as it causes under dosing of CRRT. To prevent the circuit clotting, anticoagulation drugs are frequently used. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting in the extracorporeal circuits during CRRT. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 September 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs or cluster RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of pharmacological interventions to prevent clotting of extracorporeal circuits during CRRT. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted and assessed independently by two authors. Dichotomous outcomes were calculated as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary review outcomes were major bleeding, successful prevention of clotting (no need of circuit change in the first 24 hours for any reason), and death. Evidence certainty was determined using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 34 completed studies (1960 participants) were included in this review. We identified seven ongoing studies which we plan to assess in a future update of this review. No included studies were free from risk of bias. We rated 30 studies for performance bias and detection bias as high risk of bias. We rated 18 studies for random sequence generation,ààsix studies for the allocation concealment, three studies for performance bias, three studies for detection bias,à nine studies for attrition bias,à14 studies for selective reporting and nine studies for the other potential source of bias, as having low risk of bias. We identified eight studies (581 participants) that compared citrate with unfractionated heparin (UFH). Compared to UFH, citrate probably reduces major bleeding (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.62; moderate certainty evidence) and probably increases successful prevention of clotting (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.87; moderate certainty evidence). Citrate may have little or no effect on death at 28 days (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.30, moderate certainty evidence). Citrate versus UFH may reduce the number of participants who drop out of treatment due to adverse events (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.49; low certainty evidence). Compared to UFH, citrate may make little or no difference to the recovery of kidney function (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.21; low certainty evidence). Compared to UFH, citrate may reduceàthrombocytopenia (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.03; low certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether citrate reduces a cost to health care services because of inadequate data. For low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) versus UFH, six studies (250 participants) were identified. Compared to LMWH, UFH may reduce major bleeding (0.58, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.58; low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether UFH versus LMWH reduces death at 28 days or leads to successful prevention of clotting. Compared to LMWH, UFH may reduce the number of patient dropouts from adverse events (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02 to 3.53; low certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether UFH versus LMWH leads to the recovery of kidney function because no included studies reported this outcome. It was uncertain whether UFH versus LMWH leads to thrombocytopenia. It was uncertain whether UFH reduces a cost to health care services because of inadequate data. For the comparison of UFH to no anticoagulation, one study (10 participants) was identified. It is uncertain whether UFH compare to no anticoagulation leads to more major bleeding. It is uncertain whether UFH improves successful prevention of clotting in the first 24 hours, death at 28 days, the number of patient dropouts due to adverse events, recovery of kidney function, thrombocytopenia, or cost to health care services because no study reported these outcomes. For the comparison ofàcitrate to no anticoagulation,àno completed study was identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently,àavailable evidence does not support the overall superiority of any anticoagulant to another. Compared to UFH, citrate probably reduces major bleeding and prevents clotting and probably has little or no effect on death at 28 days. For other pharmacological anticoagulation methods, there is no available data showing overall superiority to citrate or no pharmacological anticoagulation. Further studies are needed to identify patient populations in which CRRT should commence with no pharmacological anticoagulation or with citrate.


Assuntos
Lesão Renal Aguda/terapia , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Coagulação Sanguínea/efeitos dos fármacos , Obstrução do Cateter , Terapia de Substituição Renal Contínua/instrumentação , Lesão Renal Aguda/mortalidade , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Viés , Obstrução do Cateter/etiologia , Ácido Cítrico/administração & dosagem , Ácido Cítrico/efeitos adversos , Terapia de Substituição Renal Contínua/efeitos adversos , Terapia de Substituição Renal Contínua/mortalidade , Filtração/instrumentação , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia/prevenção & controle , Heparina/administração & dosagem , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/administração & dosagem , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Rim/fisiologia , Pacientes Desistentes do Tratamento , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica/efeitos dos fármacos , Trombocitopenia/prevenção & controle
9.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0239222, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33001983

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: To prevent bio-accumulation of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) in patients with decreased kidney function, dosage reduction and anti-Xa monitoring has been suggested. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of pre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH on anti-Xa levels. Furthermore, we investigated the association between anti-Xa levels and bleeding, thrombotic events and mortality. METHODS: In this single center study, we followed 499 patients with decreased renal function in whom anti-Xa levels were measured. We observed how many patients had anti-Xa levels that fell within the reference range, with a standard protocol of a pre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH (25% reduction in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 30 and 60 ml/min/1.73m2 and a reduction of 50% in patients with an eGFR below the 30 ml/min/1.73m2). Furthermore, Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to estimate hazard ratios to investigate the association between anti-Xa levels and major bleeding, thrombotic events and mortality within three months of follow-up. RESULTS: In a cohort of 499 patients (445 dalteparin and 54 nadroparin users), a pre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH led to adequate levels of anti-Xa in only 19% of the patients (12% for the dalteparin users and 50% for nadroparin users). We did not find an association between anti-Xa levels and bleeding, thrombosis or mortality. CONCLUSION: Pre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH leads to low anti-Xa levels in a large proportion, but this was not associated with bleeding, thrombosis or mortality.


Assuntos
Inibidores do Fator Xa/metabolismo , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Rim/efeitos dos fármacos , Rim/fisiopatologia , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Feminino , Hemorragia/fisiopatologia , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/metabolismo , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Trombose/fisiopatologia
10.
Lancet Haematol ; 7(10): e746-e755, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32976752

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Study-level meta-analyses provide high-certainty evidence that heparin reduces the risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism for patients with cancer; however, whether the benefits and harms associated with heparin differ by cancer type is unclear. This individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examines the effect of heparin on survival, venous thromboembolism, and bleeding in patients with cancer in general and by type. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials comparing parenteral anticoagulants with placebo or standard care in ambulatory patients with solid tumours and no indication for anticoagulation published from the inception of each database to January 14, 2017, and updated it on May 14, 2020, without language restrictions. We calculated the effect of parenteral anticoagulant administration on all-cause mortality, venous thromboembolism occurrence, and bleeding related outcomes through multivariable hierarchical models with patient-level variables as fixed effects and a categorical trial variable as a random effect, adjusting for age, cancer type, and metastatic status. Interaction terms were tested to investigate effects in predefined subgroups. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42013003526. FINDINGS: We obtained individual participant data from 14 of 20 eligible randomised controlled trials (8278 [79%] of 10 431 participants; 4139 included in the low-molecular-weight heparin group and 4139 in the control group). Meta-analysis showed an adjusted relative risk (RR) of mortality at 1 year of 0·99 (95% CI 0·93-1·06) and a hazard ratio of 1·01 (95% CI 0·96-1·07). The number of patients with venous thromboembolic events was 158 (4·0%) of 3958 with available data in the low-molecular-weight heparin group compared with 279 (7·1%) of 3957 in the control group. Major bleeding events occurred in 71 (1·7%) of 4139 patients in the control population and 88 (2·1%) in the low-molecular-weight heparin group, and minor bleeding events in 478 (12·1%) of 3945 patients with available data in the control group and 652 (16·6%) of 3937 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group. The adjusted RR was 0·58 (95% CI 0·47-0·71) for venous thromboembolism, 1·27 (0·92-1·74) for major bleeding, and 1·34 (1·19-1·51) for minor bleeding. Prespecified subgroup analysis of venous thromboembolism occurrence by cancer type identified the most certain benefit from heparin treatment in patients with lung cancer (RR 0·59 [95% CI 0·42-0·81]), which dominated the overall reduction in venous thromboembolism. Certainty of the evidence for the outcomes ranged from moderate to high. INTERPRETATION: Low-molecular-weight heparin reduces risk of venous thromboembolism without increasing risk of major bleeding compared with placebo or standard care in patients with solid tumours, but it does not improve survival. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/complicações , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Análise de Sobrevida
11.
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol ; 154: 103074, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32911455

RESUMO

Novel Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) have been considered for treating cancer-related venous thromboembolism (VTE), but safety issues have been raised. We performed a systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of NOACs versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in this setting. Four randomized controlled trials were included, providing data on 2894 patients. Compared to LMWH, NOACs were associated with a significantly lower risk of VTE recurrence and were not associated with an increased risk of major bleedings (MB). NOACs were non inferior to LMWH for a composite outcome of VTE recurrence and MB, pulmonary embolism recurrence and all-cause mortality; however, NOACs were associated with an increased risk of clinically relevant nonmajor bleedings (CRNMB) and gastrointestinal MB. In conclusion, in patients with cancer-related VTE, NOACs are effective and safe in reducing VTE recurrence compared to LMWH. An increased risk of CNRMB and GI MB should nonetheless be considered.


Assuntos
Neoplasias/complicações , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Administração Oral , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos
13.
An Sist Sanit Navar ; 43(2): 251-254, 2020 Aug 31.
Artigo em Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32865189

RESUMO

Infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic disease. So-me authors recommend anticoagulation at therapeutic doses for, at least, the most severely ill patients; this practice is not free of risks, which is why only thromboembolic prophylaxis is recommended by other consensuses. In the case of previously anticoagulated patients, changing the oral anticoagulant for a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is generally recommended. We present the cases of two patients admitted due to COVID-19, without serious clinical data, in whom anticoagulation (acenocoumarol and rivaroxaban, respectively) was replaced by LMWH at therapeutic doses, both presenting abdominal bleeding. This type of bleeding is an infrequent complication in anticoagulated patients, but the concurrence of two cases in a short period of time in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic leads us to consider that there is not yet any clear evidence on therapeutic anticoagulation in SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Hematoma/induzido quimicamente , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia Venosa/virologia , Abdome , Acenocumarol/efeitos adversos , Acenocumarol/uso terapêutico , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Hematoma/diagnóstico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Pandemias , Rivaroxabana/efeitos adversos , Rivaroxabana/uso terapêutico , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico
15.
J Clin Ultrasound ; 48(9): 522-526, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32757278

RESUMO

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the applicability of bedside ultrasonography for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in patients infected with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with and without treatment with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of deceased and surviving patients in whom ultrasonography detected or not a DVT, and in whom LMWH was or not prescribed. RESULTS: The incidence of DVT is higher in the deceased (33/35) than in the surviving (22/46) patients. LMWH was administered in a larger proportion of surviving (18/22) than of deceased (18/33) patients. D-dimer concentrations decreased in patients who received LMWH in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high incidence of DVT in patients who succumbed to COVID-19. Bedside ultrasonography can detect the presence of DVT as early as possible and help assessing the risk of venous thromboembolism, allowing early and reasonable use of LMWH.


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico por imagem , Infecções por Coronavirus/patologia , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico por imagem , Pneumonia Viral/patologia , Trombose Venosa/diagnóstico por imagem , Trombose Venosa/virologia , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/métodos , Infecções por Coronavirus/sangue , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/sangue , Testes Imediatos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Ultrassonografia/métodos , Trombose Venosa/tratamento farmacológico
17.
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther ; 58(11): 617-625, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32729821

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Potential advantages of bemiparin compared to enoxaparin are a longer half-life, once-a-day dosage, and possibly a better safety profile due to the more selective antagonistic action toward Xa coagulation factor. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of bemiparin compared with enoxaparin as prophylaxis or treatment of venous thromboembolic disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials.gov, Google academics, and Conference Abstracts (2014 - 2019) of the American Society of Hematology and the Spanish Society of Hematology and Hemotherapy. Randomized trials that included bemiparin and enoxaparin were included as treatment arms. The outcomes evaluated were the incidence of venous thromboembolic disease and the proportion of adverse events in each group. Two independent researchers selected, evaluated, and extracted the data in duplicate. Four studies with a total of 5,473 patients were included. RESULTS: Most patients were included in prevention studies (N = 5,161). Bemiparin proved the non-inferiority in terms of efficacy with respect to enoxaparin (relative risk: 0.76; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.56 - 1.01; p = 0.06) (heterogeneity I2 = 34%). We recorded 222 adverse events in 2,742 patients treated with bemiparin and 288 adverse events in 2,731 patients treated with enoxaparin (8.1 vs. 10.5 adverse events per 100 patients, respectively; p = 0.003). However, the meta-analysis for safety showed a significant heterogeneity making not possible to pool the result across the trials. CONCLUSION: Bemiparin proved a non-inferior efficacy compared to enoxaparin with a significant reduction in adverse events per 100 patients treated.


Assuntos
Enoxaparina/farmacologia , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/farmacologia , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Enoxaparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
18.
Obstet Gynecol ; 136(2): 394-401, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32649504

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate complications associated with early postpartum therapeutic anticoagulation. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was done to evaluate the association between therapeutic anticoagulation postpartum and major complications (hemorrhagic and wound complications). Secondary outcomes included minor complications, risk factors associated with total complications (including the time to therapeutic anticoagulation resumption after delivery) and recurrent thrombotic events within 6 weeks postpartum. RESULTS: From 2003 to 2015, 232 consecutive women were treated with therapeutic anticoagulation within 96 hours postpartum; among those treated, 91 received unfractionated heparin, 138 received low-molecular-weight heparin, and three received other anticoagulants. The primary outcome, a composite of major hemorrhagic complications (requiring transfusion, hospitalization, volume resuscitation, transfer to intensive care unit, or surgery) and major wound complications, occurred in 7 of 83 (8.4%) for cesarean deliveries and 9 of 149 (6.0%) for vaginal deliveries (P=.490). Total complications (including major and minor hemorrhagic and wound complications) occurred in 13 of 83 (15.7%) for cesarean deliveries compared with 9 of 149 (6.0%) for vaginal deliveries (P=.016). When comparing cases associated with and without complications, the median delay before resuming anticoagulation was significantly shorter for both cesarean (12 vs 33 hours, P=.033) and vaginal deliveries (6 vs 19 hours, P=.006). For vaginal deliveries, 8 of 51 (15.7%) women had complications when anticoagulation was started before 9.25 hours postpartum, compared with 1 of 98 (1.0%) when started after 9.25 hours. For cesarean deliveries, 7 of 21 (33.3%) of women experienced complications compared with 6 of 62 (9.7%) if anticoagulation was started before or after 15.1 hours, respectively. Two (0.9%) episodes of venous thromboembolism occurred within 6 weeks postpartum. CONCLUSION: Among postpartum women who received early therapeutic anticoagulation, major complications occurred in 8.4% for cesarean deliveries and 6.0% for vaginal deliveries. Complications were associated with earlier resumption of therapeutic anticoagulation, particularly before 9.25 hours for vaginal deliveries and before 15.1 hours for cesarean deliveries.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia Pós-Parto/epidemiologia , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Cesárea/efeitos adversos , Parto Obstétrico/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Complicações do Trabalho de Parto/induzido quimicamente , Complicações do Trabalho de Parto/epidemiologia , Hemorragia Pós-Parto/induzido quimicamente , Gravidez , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Ferimentos e Lesões/induzido quimicamente , Ferimentos e Lesões/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
19.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 6: CD005982, 2020 06 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32557627

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of children diagnosed with thrombotic events has been increasing in the last decades. The most common thrombosis risk factor in neonates, infants and children is the placement of a central venous catheter (CVC). It is unknown if anticoagulation prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) decreases CVC-related thrombosis in children. This is an update of the Cochrane Review published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of LMWH prophylaxis on the incidence of CVC-related thrombosis and major and minor bleeding complications in children. Further objectives were to determine the effect of LMWH on occlusion of CVCs, number of days of CVC patency, episodes of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), other side effects of LMWH (allergic reactions, abnormal coagulation profile, heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia and osteoporosis) and mortality during therapy. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 7 May 2019. We undertook reference checking of identified trials to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials comparing LMWH to no prophylaxis (placebo or no treatment), or low-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH) either as continuous infusion or flushes (low-dose UFH aims to ensure the patency of the central line but has no systemic anticoagulation activity), given to prevent CVC-related thrombotic events in children. We selected studies conducted in children aged 0 to 18 years. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently identified eligible studies, which were assessed for study methodology including bias, and extracted unadjusted data where available. In the data analysis step, all outcomes were analysed as binary or dichotomous outcomes. The effects of interventions were summarised with risk ratios (RR) and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: One additional study was included for this update bringing the total to two included studies (with 1135 participants). Both studies were open-label RCTs comparing LMWH with low-dose UFH to prevent CVC-related thrombosis in children. We identified no studies comparing LMWH with placebo or no treatment. Meta-analysis found insufficient evidence of an effect of LMWH prophylaxis in reducing the incidence of CVC-related thrombosis in children with CVC, compared to low-dose UFH (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.75; 2 studies; 787 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study (158 participants) reported symptomatic and asymptomatic CVC-related thrombosis separately and detected no evidence of a difference between LMWH and low-dose UFH (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.93; low-certainty evidence; RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.08; low-certainty evidence; for symptomatic and asymptomatic participants respectively). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether LMWH impacts the risk of major bleeding (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.67; 2 studies; 813 participants; low-certainty evidence); or minor bleeding. One study reported minor bleeding in 53.3% of participants in the LMWH arm and in 44.7% of participants in the low-dose UFH arm (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.58; 1 study; 158 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the other study reported no minor bleeding in either group (RR: not estimable). Mortality during the study period was reported in one study, where two deaths occurred during the study period. Both were unrelated to thrombotic events and occurred in the low-dose UFH arm. The second study did not report mortality during therapy per arm but showed similar 5-year overall survival (low-certainty evidence). No additional adverse effects were reported. Other pre-specified outcomes (including CVC occlusion, patency and CRBSI) were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Pooling data from two RCTs did not provide evidence to support the use of prophylactic LWMH for preventing CVC-related thrombosis in children (low-certainty evidence). Evidence was also insufficient to confirm or exclude a difference in the incidence of major and minor bleeding complications in the LMWH prophylaxis group compared to low-dose UFH (low and very low certainty respectively). No evidence of a clear difference in overall mortality was seen. Studies did not report on the outcomes catheter occlusion, days of catheter patency, episodes of CRBSI and other side effects of LMWH (allergic reactions, abnormal coagulation profile, heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia and osteoporosis). The certainty of the evidence was downgraded due to risk of bias of the included studies, imprecision and inconsistency, preventing conclusions in regards to the efficacy of LMWH prophylaxis to prevent CVC-related thrombosis in children.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Trombose/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Obstrução do Cateter/estatística & dados numéricos , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Heparina/administração & dosagem , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Lactente , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Trombose/etiologia
20.
Trials ; 21(1): 574, 2020 Jun 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32586394

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether high doses of Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH) (i.e. Enoxaparin 70 IU/kg twice daily) compared to standard prophylactic dose (i.e., Enoxaparin 4000 IU once day), in hospitalized patients with COVID19 not requiring Invasive Mechanical Ventilation [IMV], are: a)more effective in preventing clinical worsening, defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following events, whichever comes first: 1.Death2.Acute Myocardial Infarction [AMI]3.Objectively confirmed, symptomatic arterial or venous thromboembolism [TE]4.Need of either: a.Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (Cpap) or Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) orb.IMV in patients who at randomisation were receiving standard oxygen therapy5.IMV in patients who at randomisation were receiving non-invasive mechanical ventilationb)Similar in terms of major bleeding risk TRIAL DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised controlled, superiority, open label, parallel group, two arms (1:1 ratio), in-hospital study. PARTICIPANTS: Inpatients will be recruited from 7 Italian Academic and non-Academic Internal Medicine Units, 2 Infectious Disease Units and 1 Respiratory Disease Unit. INCLUSION CRITERIA (ALL REQUIRED): 1. Age > 18 and < 80 years 2. Positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic (on pharyngeal swab of deep airways material) 3. Severe pneumonia defined by the presence of at least one of the following criteria: a.Respiratory Rate ≥25 breaths /minb.Arterial oxygen saturation≤93% at rest on ambient airc.PaO2/FiO2 ≤300 mmHg 4. Coagulopathy, defined by the presence of at least one of the following criteria: a.D-dimer >4 times the upper level of normal reference rangeb.Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy (SIC) score >4 5. No need of IMV EXCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Age <18 and >80 years 2. IMV 3. Thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 80.000 mm3) 4. Coagulopathy: INR >1.5, aPTT ratio > 1.4 5. Impaired renal function (eGFR calculated by CKD-EPI Creatinine equation < 30 ml/min) 6. Known hypersensitivity to enoxaparin 7. History of heparin induced thrombocytopenia 8. Presence of an active bleeding or a pathology susceptible of bleeding in presence of anticoagulation (e.g. recent haemorrhagic stroke, peptic ulcer, malignant cancer at high risk of haemorrhage, recent neurosurgery or ophthalmic surgery, vascular aneurysms, arteriovenous malformations) 9. Concomitant anticoagulant treatment for other indications (e.g. atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, prosthetic heart valves) 10. Concomitant double antiplatelet therapy 11. Administration of therapeutic doses of LMWH, fondaparinux, or unfractionated heparin (UFH) for more than 72 hours before randomization; prophylactic doses are allowed 12. Pregnancy or breastfeeding or positive pregnancy test 13. Presence of other severe diseases impairing life expectancy (e.g. patients are not expected to survive 28 days given their pre-existing medical condition) 14. Lack or withdrawal of informed consent INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Control Group (Low-Dose LMWH): patients in this group will be administered Enoxaparin (Inhixa®) at standard prophylactic dose (i.e., 4000 UI subcutaneously once day). Intervention Group (High-Dose LMWH): patients in this group will be administered Enoxaparin (Inhixa®) at dose of 70 IU/kg every 12 hours, as reported in the following table. This dose is commonly used in Italy when a bridging strategy is required for the management of surgery or invasive procedures in patients taking anti-vitamin K oral anticoagulants Body Weight (kg)Enoxaparin dose every 12 hours (IU)<50200050-69400070-89600090-1108000>11010000 The treatment with Enoxaparin will be initiated soon after randomization (maximum allowed starting time 12h after randomization). The treatment will be administered every 12 hours in the intervention group and every 24 hours in the control group. Treatments will be administered in the two arms until hospital discharge or the primary outcomes detailed below occur. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary Efficacy Endpoint: Clinical worsening, defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following events, whichever comes first: 1.Death2.Acute Myocardial Infarction [AMI]3.Objectively confirmed, symptomatic arterial or venous thromboembolism [TE]4.Need of either: a.Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (Cpap) or Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) orb.IMV in patients who at randomisation were in standard oxygen therapy by delivery interfaces5.Need for IMV, in patients who at randomisation were in Cpap or NIV Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Clinical worsening will be analysed as a binary outcome as well as a time-to-event one. Secondary Efficacy Endpoints: Any of the following events occurring within the hospital stay 1.Death2.Acute Myocardial Infarction [AMI]3.Objectively confirmed, symptomatic arterial or venous thromboembolism [TE]4.Need of either: a.Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (Cpap) or Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) orb.IMV in patients who at randomisation were in standard oxygen therapy by delivery interfaces5.Need for IMV in patients who at randomisation were in Cpap or NIV6.Improvement of laboratory parameters of disease severity, including: o D-dimer levelo Plasma fibrinogen levelso Mean Platelet Volumeo Lymphocyte/Neutrophil ratioo IL-6 plasma levels MORTALITY AT 30 DAYS: Information about patients' status will be sought in those who are discharged before 30 days on Day 30 from randomisation. Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Each of these events will be analysed as a binary outcome and as a time-to-event one. Primary safety endpoint: Major bleeding, defined as an acute clinically overt bleeding associated with one or more of the following: Decrease in haemoglobin of 2 g/dl or more;Transfusion of 2 or more units of packed red blood cells;Bleeding that occurs in at least one of the following critical sites [intracranial, intraspinal, intraocular (within the corpus of the eye; thus, a conjunctival bleed is not an intraocular bleed), pericardial, intra-articular, intramuscular with compartment syndrome, or retroperitoneal];Bleeding that is fatal (defined as a bleeding event that was the primary cause of death or contributed directly to death);Bleeding that necessitates surgical intervention Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Each of these events will be analysed as a binary outcome and as a time-to-event one. Secondary safety endpoint: Clinically Relevant non-major bleeding, defined as an acute clinically overt bleeding that does not meet the criteria for major and consists of: 1.Any bleeding compromising hemodynamic2.Spontaneous hematoma larger than 25 cm2, or 100 cm2 if there was a traumatic cause3.Intramuscular hematoma documented by ultrasonography4.Epistaxis or gingival bleeding requiring tamponade or other medical intervention5.Bleeding from venipuncture for >5 minutes6.Haematuria that was macroscopic and was spontaneous or lasted for more than 24 hours after invasive procedures7.Haemoptysis, hematemesis or spontaneous rectal bleeding requiring endoscopy or other medical intervention8.Any other bleeding requiring temporary cessation of a study drug. Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Each of these events will be analysed as a binary outcome and as a time-to-event one. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation (with a 1:1 randomisation ratio) will be centrally performed by using a secure, web-based system, which will be developed by the Methodological and Statistical Unit at the Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria of Modena. Randomisation stratified by 4 factors: 1) Gender (M/F); 2) Age (<75/≥75 years); 3) BMI (<30/≥30); 4) Comorbidities (0-1/>2) with random variable block sizes will be generated by STATA software. The web-based system will guarantee the allocation concealment. Blinding (masking) The study is conceived as open-label: patients and all health-care personnel involved in the study will be aware of the assigned group. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The target sample size is based on the hypothesis that LMWH administered at high doses versus low doses will significantly reduce the risk of clinical worsening. The overall sample size in this study is expected to be 300 with 150 in the Low-Dose LMWH control group and 150 in the High-Dose LMWH intervention group, recruited over 10-11 months. Assuming an alpha of 5% (two tailed) and a percentage of patients who experience clinical worsening in the control group being between 25% and 30%, the study will have 80% power to detect at least 50% relative reduction in the risk of death between low and high doses of heparin. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.2 of 11/05/2020. Recruitment start (expected): 08/06/2020 Recruitment finish (expected): 30/04/2021 Trial registration EudraCT 2020-001972-13, registered on April 17th, 2020 Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus , Transtornos da Coagulação Sanguínea/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Hospitalização , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Respiração Artificial , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...