Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 4.525
Filtrar
2.
J Thromb Haemost ; 18(11): 3099-3105, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33174388

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Observational studies indicate that children hospitalized with COVID-19-related illness, like adults, are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). A multicenter phase 2 clinical trial of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in children hospitalized with COVID-19-related illness has recently been initiated in the United States. To date, there remains a paucity of high-quality evidence to inform clinical practice world-wide. Therefore, the objective of this scientific statement is to provide consensus-based recommendations on the use of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in children hospitalized for COVID-19-related illnesses, and to identify priorities for future research. METHODS: We surveyed 20 pediatric hematologists and pediatric critical care physicians from several continents who were identified by Pediatric/Neonatal Hemostasis and Thrombosis Subcommittee leadership as having experience and expertise in the use of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis and/or the management of COVID-19-related illness in children. A comprehensive review of the literature on COVID-19 in children was also performed. RESULTS: Response rate was 90%. Based on consensus of expert opinions, we suggest the administration of low-dose low molecular weight heparin subcutaneously twice-daily as anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis (in the absence of contraindications, and in combination with mechanical thromboprophylaxis with sequential compression devices, where feasible) in children hospitalized for COVID-19-related illness (including the multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children [MIS-C]) who have markedly elevated D-dimer levels or superimposed clinical risk factors for hospitalassociated VTE. For children who are clinically unstable or have severe renal impairment, we suggest the use of unfractionated heparin by continuous intravenous infusion as anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. In addition, continued efforts to characterize VTE risk and risk factors in children with COVID-19, as well as to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis strategies in children hospitalized with COVID-19-related illness (including MIS-C) via cooperative multicenter trials, were identified among several key priorities for future research. CONCLUSION: These consensus-based recommendations on the use of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in children hospitalized for COVID-19-related illnesses and priorities for future research will be updated as high-quality evidence emerges.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/normas , Hospitalização , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Pesquisa/normas , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Fatores Etários , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Consenso , Infecções por Coronavirus/sangue , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Pesquisas sobre Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/sangue , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento , Tromboembolia Venosa/sangue , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Adulto Jovem
3.
Clin Appl Thromb Hemost ; 26: 1076029620961450, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33141613

RESUMO

Two of the more common potential complications after arthroplasty are venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolus (PE), and excess bleeding. Appropriate chemoprophylaxis choices are essential to prevent some of these adverse events and from exacerbating others. Risk stratification to prescribe safe and effective medications in the prevention of postoperative VTE has shown benefit in this regard. The Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at Syosset Hospital/Northwell Health, which performs over 1200 arthroplasties annually, has validated and is using the 2013 version of the Caprini Risk Assessment Model (RAM) to stratify each patient for risk of postoperative VTE. This tool results in a culling of information, past and present, personal and familial, that provides a truly thorough evaluation of the patient's risk for postoperative VTE. The Caprini score then guides the medication choices for thromboprophylaxis. The Caprini score is only valuable if the data is properly collected, and we have learned numerous lessons after applying it for 18 months. Risk stratification requires practice and experience to achieve expertise in perioperative patient evaluation. Having access to pertinent patient information, while gaining proficiency in completing the Caprini RAM, is vital to its efficacy. Ongoing, real time analyses of patient outcomes, with subsequent change in process, is key to improving patient care.


Assuntos
Artroplastia de Substituição/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Medição de Risco/métodos , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Artroplastia de Substituição/métodos , Artroplastia de Quadril/efeitos adversos , Artroplastia de Quadril/métodos , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Artroplastia do Joelho/métodos , Feminino , Hemorragia/etiologia , Hemorragia/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Pré-Medicação , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia
4.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 76(4): 369-371, 2020 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33027192

RESUMO

The use of heparin has been shown to decrease the mortality in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical impact of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with fondaparinux versus enoxaparin among 100 hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The incidence of pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, major bleeding (MB), clinically relevant non-MB, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and in-hospital mortality was compared between patients on fondaparinux versus enoxaparin therapy. The 2 groups were homogeneous for demographic, laboratory, and clinical characteristics. In a median follow-up of 28 (IQR: 12-45) days, no statistically significant difference in venous thromboembolism (14.5% vs. 5.3%; P = 0.20), MB and clinically relevant non-MB (3.2% vs. 5.3%, P = 0.76), ARDS (17.7% vs. 15.8%; P = 0.83), and in-hospital mortality (9.7% vs. 10.5%; P = 0.97) has been shown between the enoxaparin group versus the fondaparinux group. Our preliminary results support the hypothesis of a safe and effective use of fondaparinux among patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in internal medicine units.


Assuntos
Antitrombinas/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores do Fator Xa/uso terapêutico , Fondaparinux/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Trombose Venosa/etiologia , Trombose Venosa/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Antitrombinas/efeitos adversos , Enoxaparina/efeitos adversos , Enoxaparina/uso terapêutico , Inibidores do Fator Xa/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Fondaparinux/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Embolia Pulmonar/complicações , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Trombose Venosa/epidemiologia
5.
Khirurgiia (Mosk) ; (10): 73-78, 2020.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33047589

RESUMO

The need for thromboprophylaxis in traumatological and orthopedic operations is determined by a constant increase in the level of injuries of the population, and as a result, fluctuating coagulation indicators. Risk factors inherent in modern society that correlate primarily with reduced physical activity and excessive consumption of unbalanced (carbohydrate) nutrition, bad habits (nicotinism, alcoholism and other toxic dependencies), increased life expectancy and comorbidity - these and other causes can lead to an increase in the incidence of vascular accidents in patients with large limb bone fractures. The goal is to compare the effectiveness and clinical safety of using parnaparin sodium (Fluxum) and enoxaparin sodium as the prevention of thrombosis in the treatment of lower limb bone fractures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comparative assessment of the effectiveness and clinical safety of thrombosis prevention in the treatment of lower limb bone fractures using low-molecular weight heparins: parnaparin sodium (Fluxum) and enoxaparin sodium. RESULTS: Taking into account the literature data on the significant risk of venous thromboembolic complications, we successfully conduct the thromboprophylaxis in patients with the traumatological and orthopedic profile, including in 2019 using the drug parnaparin sodium (Fluxum, «Alfasigma¼). Our own comparative clinical experience has shown that with the convenience of taking enoxaparin sodium and the completeness of the scheme, the prevention of thrombosis with the use of parnaparin sodium shows the tendency to better clinical effectiveness and safety. CONCLUSION: The choice of anticoagulants in traumatological and orthopedic practice, with obvious ease of use, provides the complete scheme for the prevention of thrombosis. Further research is needed on the routine use of sodium parnaparin in order to prevent thronbosis in the treatment of fractures of various localization.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Enoxaparina/administração & dosagem , Fixação de Fratura/efeitos adversos , Fraturas Ósseas/cirurgia , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/administração & dosagem , Trombose/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Fraturas Ósseas/complicações , Humanos , Trombose/etiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia
8.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes ; 156-157: 33-39, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33023840

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Considering the amount of national and international scientific evidence regarding the use of anticoagulants in the periprocedural prevention of thromboembolism, the decision-making process when prescribing anticoagulants is complex. Due to frequent prescriptions for inpatients, the topic is of high significance. This decision-making process in our hospital is the main focus of the study. METHODS: In a standardised survey, a target group of physicians was asked about their decision-making process with regard to the prescription of anticoagulants in the periprocedural period. For this study a questionnaire was developed consisting of 12 survey questions. Data from 130 participants was collected and analysed. RESULTS: Generally, there was a high level of agreement on the importance of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Significant differences exist between medical specialities. A gap between scientific evidence and clinical practice among the respondents could be identified. The decision-making process when prescribing anticoagulants was not documented by the physicians. CONCLUSIONS: A combined approach consisting of structured documentation with electronic decision support in combination with standardised treatment methods and educational measures can be a useful solution.


Assuntos
Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Tromboembolia Venosa , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Alemanha , Humanos , Pacientes Internados , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle
9.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 10: CD013399, 2020 10 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33038027

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The risk of venous thromboembolism is increased in adults and enhanced by asparaginase-based chemotherapy, and venous thromboembolism introduces a secondary risk of treatment delay and premature discontinuation of key anti-leukaemic agents, potentially compromising survival. Yet, the trade-off between benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is uncertain.  OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives were to assess the benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis for first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism in adults with ALL receiving asparaginase-based therapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. The secondary objectives were to compare the benefits and harms of different groups of primary systemic thromboprophylaxis by stratifying the main results per type of drug (heparins, vitamin K antagonists, synthetic pentasaccharides, parenteral direct thrombin inhibitors, direct oral anticoagulants, and blood-derived products for antithrombin substitution). SEARCH METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search on 02 June 2020, with no language restrictions, including (1) electronic searches of Pubmed/MEDLINE; Embase/Ovid; Scopus/Elsevier; Web of Science Core Collection/Clarivate Analytics; and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and (2) handsearches of (i) reference lists of identified studies and related reviews; (ii) clinical trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov registry; the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry; the World Health Organisation's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP); and pharmaceutical manufacturers of asparaginase including Servier, Takeda, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Ohara Pharmaceuticals, and Kyowa Pharmaceuticals), and (iii) conference proceedings (from the annual meetings of the American Society of Hematology (ASH); the European Haematology Association (EHA); the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO); and the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH)). We conducted all searches from 1970 (the time of introduction of asparaginase in ALL treatment). We contacted the authors of relevant studies to identify any unpublished material, missing data, or information regarding ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs); including quasi-randomised, controlled clinical, cross-over, and cluster-randomised trial designs) comparing any parenteral/oral preemptive anticoagulant or mechanical intervention with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or comparing two different pre-emptive anticoagulant interventions in adults aged at least 18 years with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based chemotherapy regimens. For the description of harms, non-randomised observational studies with a control group were eligible for inclusion.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Using a standardised data collection form, two review authors independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias for each outcome using standardised tools (RoB 2.0 tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies) and the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes included first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included asymptomatic venous thromboembolism, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, adverse events (i.e. clinically relevant non-major bleeding and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia for trials using heparins), and quality of life. Analyses were performed according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. For non-randomised studies, we evaluated all studies (including studies judged to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains) in a sensitivity analysis exploring confounding.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 23 non-randomised studies that met the inclusion criteria of this review, of which 10 studies provided no outcome data for adults with ALL. We included the remaining 13 studies in the 'Risk of bias' assessment, in which we identified invalid control group definition in two studies and judged outcomes of nine studies to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains and outcomes of two studies at serious risk of bias. We did not assess the benefits of thromboprophylaxis, as no RCTs were included. In the main descriptive analysis of harms, we included two retrospective non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at serious risk of bias. One study evaluated antithrombin concentrates compared to no antithrombin concentrates. We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.19 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on venous thromboembolism-related mortality (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.94 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We do not know whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and quality of life in adults with ALL treated with asparaginase-based chemotherapy, as data were insufficient. The remaining study (224 participants) evaluated prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin versus no prophylaxis. However, this study reported insufficient data regarding harms including all-cause mortality, major bleeding, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and quality of life. In the sensitivity analysis of harms, exploring the effect of confounding, we also included nine non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at critical risk of bias primarily due to uncontrolled confounding. Three studies (179 participants) evaluated the effect of antithrombin concentrates and six studies (1224 participants) evaluated the effect of prophylaxis with different types of heparins. When analysing all-cause mortality; venous thromboembolism-related mortality; and major bleeding (studies of heparin only) including all studies with extractable outcomes for each comparison (antithrombin and low-molecular-weight heparin), we observed small study sizes; few events; wide CIs crossing the line of no effect; and substantial heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots. Although the observed heterogeneity could arise through the inclusion of a small number of studies with differences in participants; interventions; and outcome assessments, the likelihood that bias due to uncontrolled confounding was the cause of heterogeneity is inevitable. Subgroup analyses were not possible due to insufficient data.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We do not know from the currently available evidence, if thromboprophylaxis used for adults with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is associated with clinically appreciable benefits and acceptable harms. The existing research on this question is solely of non-randomised design, seriously to critically confounded, and underpowered with substantial imprecision. Any estimates of effect based on the existing insufficient evidence is very uncertain and is likely to change with future research.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Asparaginase/efeitos adversos , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Antitrombinas/efeitos adversos , Antitrombinas/uso terapêutico , Viés , Causas de Morte , Humanos , Placebos/uso terapêutico , Tromboembolia Venosa/induzido quimicamente , Tromboembolia Venosa/mortalidade
10.
Clin Appl Thromb Hemost ; 26: 1076029620945398, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32883088

RESUMO

Venous thromboembolism, occlusion of dialysis catheters, circuit thrombosis in ECMO devices, all in the face of prophylactic and sometimes even therapeutic anti-coagulation, are frequent features of COVID-19 coagulopathy. The trials available to guide clinicians are methodologically limited. There are several unresolved controversies including 1) Should all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 receive prophylactic anti-coagulation? 2) Which patients should have their dosage escalated to intermediate dose? 3) Which patients should be considered for full-dose anti-coagulation even without a measurable thromboembolic event and how should that anti-coagulation be monitored? 4) Should patients receive post-discharge anti-coagulation? 5) What thrombotic issues are related to the various medications being used to treat this coagulopathy? 6) Is anti-phospholipid anti-body part of this syndrome? 7) How do the different treatments for this disease impact the coagulation issues? The aims of this article are to explore these questions and interpret the available data based on the current evidence.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Transtornos da Coagulação Sanguínea/tratamento farmacológico , Transtornos da Coagulação Sanguínea/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Produtos de Degradação da Fibrina e do Fibrinogênio/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Transtornos da Coagulação Sanguínea/diagnóstico , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Prognóstico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Medição de Risco , Síndrome Respiratória Aguda Grave/diagnóstico , Síndrome Respiratória Aguda Grave/epidemiologia , Análise de Sobrevida , Resultado do Tratamento , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia
11.
Am Surg ; 86(9): 1098-1105, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32967431

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Standardization of preoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk assessment remains challenging due to variation in risk assessment models (RAMs) and the cumbersome workflow addition that most RAMs represent. We aimed to develop a parsimonious RAM that is automatable and actionable within the preoperative workflow. METHODS: We performed a case-controlled review of all 18 VTE cases reported over a 12-month period and 171 matched controls included in an institutional National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) data set. We examined the predictive value of the Caprini, Padua, and NSQIP RAMs. We identified the 5 most impactful risk factors in VTE development by contribution to the known RAMs. We compared the predictive ability of cancer, age, body mass index, black race, and American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) score, to the Caprini, Padua, and NSQIP RAMs for VTE outcomes. Finally, we evaluated concordance between each of the models. RESULTS: The Caprini Score was found to be 88.9% sensitive and 32.7% specific using a threshold of 5. The Padua score was found to be 61.1% sensitive and 47.4% specific using a threshold of 4. The novel 5-factor RAM was found to be 94.4% sensitive and 38.0% specific using a threshold of 4. The Caprini and Padua models were discordant in 26% of patients. DISCUSSION: Cumbersome manual data entry contributes to the ongoing challenge of standardized VTE risk assessment and prophylaxis. Universally documented information and patient demographics can be utilized to create clinical decision support tools that can improve the efficiency of perioperative workflow and improve the quality of care.


Assuntos
Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios/métodos , Melhoria de Qualidade , Medição de Risco/métodos , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiologia , Humanos , Incidência , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle
12.
Int Heart J ; 61(5): 993-998, 2020 Sep 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32921671

RESUMO

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a life-threatening complication after trauma. Several studies have reported VTE prophylaxis using low-molecular-weight heparin; however, there is no consensus for prophylaxis after trauma. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of our new anticoagulation therapy protocol using unfractionated heparin (UFH) plus intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) to prevent post-traumatic VTE in high-risk trauma patients.This study enrolled 70 trauma patients who were admitted to the emergency medical center of Nagasaki University Hospital and had Risk Assessment Profile (RAP) scores ≥ 5. After stopping bleeding at the trauma site, all patients received intravenous UFH (10,000 U/day) plus IPC, which was continued for 14 days or until the patients could walk. On days 7 and 14, all patients underwent lower extremity sonography for deep-vein thrombosis screening. VTE incidences between patients with the above intervention and historical controls with IPC alone were compared.No significant differences in age, sex, and the RAP score were observed between the 105 controls and intervention patients. VTE occurrence was fewer in patients with the intervention (14.3%) than in the controls (28.6%; P = 0.029). No hemorrhagic complications occurred after UFH administration. Multivariable logistic analysis revealed a significant association between the intervention and low incidence of VTE (odds ratio: 0.390; 95% confidence interval: 0.163-0.913; P = 0.030).Routine UFH administration with IPC may prevent post-traumatic VTE without adverse events.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Dispositivos de Compressão Pneumática Intermitente , Embolia Pulmonar/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Trombose Venosa/prevenção & controle , Ferimentos e Lesões/terapia , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Produtos de Degradação da Fibrina e do Fibrinogênio/metabolismo , Hospitalização , Humanos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Tempo de Tromboplastina Parcial , Medição de Risco , Trombofilia/sangue , Ferimentos e Lesões/sangue
13.
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
14.
Pharm. pract. (Granada, Internet) ; 18(3): 0-0, jul.-sept. 2020. tab, graf
Artigo em Inglês | IBECS | ID: ibc-194200

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Total knee replacement (TKR) is a major orthopedic surgery that is considered high risk for the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes that resulted from the use of a new proposed VTE risk stratification protocol for selecting a suitable extended VTE prophylaxis for post TKR surgery patients administered in conjunction with patient education programs. METHOD: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in two medical centers in Saudi Arabia. A total of 242 patients were enrolled in the study, 121 patients in each group. The experimental group (A) was assessed by using the proposed VTE risk stratification protocol and also took part in patient education programs about TKR and its complications. The control group (B) was assessed by using the 2005 Caprini risk assessment tool and no education programs were given to this group. Both groups were followed for 35 days post operation. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 65.86 (SD 8.67) and the majority of them were female 137 (56.6%). The mean body mass index of the study sample was 32.46 (SD 5.51). There were no significant differences between the two groups except for surgery type; the proportion of bilateral TKR in group A was higher than in group B (69/121 (28.5%) vs. 40/121(16.5%), p˂0.05). There were no confirmed pulmonary embolism cases in the study sample and diagnosis of deep-vein thrombosis was confirmed in 12/242 (5.0%) of patients: 1/121 (0.8%) in group A and 11/121 (9.1%) in group B (p˂0.05). The readmission rate for all patients was 2.5% (6/242), all of whom were in group B (p˂0.05). CONCLUSION: The proposed VTE risk stratification protocol that was applied in conjunction with patient education programs reduced VTE complications and readmission events, post TKR surgery


No disponible


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Profilaxia Pós-Exposição/métodos , Artroplastia do Joelho/métodos , Educação de Pacientes como Assunto , Readmissão do Paciente
15.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci ; 24(17): 9169-9171, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32965010

RESUMO

NLRP3 (NOD-, LRR- and pyrin domain-containing protein 3) inflammasome has recently become an intriguing target of several chronic and viral diseases. Here, we argue that targeting NLRP3 inflammasome could be a strategy to prevent cardiovascular outcomes [fulminant myocarditis, heart failure, venous thromboembolism (VTE)] and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We discuss the rationale for NLRP3 targeting in clinical trials as an effective therapeutic strategy aimed to improve prognosis of COVID-19, analyzing the potential of two therapeutic options (tranilast and OLT1177) currently available in clinical practice.


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Proteína 3 que Contém Domínio de Pirina da Família NLR/metabolismo , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Citocinas/metabolismo , Humanos , Inflamassomos/metabolismo , Miocardite/prevenção & controle , Proteína 3 que Contém Domínio de Pirina da Família NLR/antagonistas & inibidores , Nitrilos/uso terapêutico , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Prognóstico , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , ortoaminobenzoatos/uso terapêutico
16.
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
17.
Vnitr Lek ; 66(4): 225-231, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32972179

RESUMO

Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has become a standard of treatment of cancer-associated thromboembolism (CAT). Until recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) have not had data about efficacy and safety in cancer patients. However, in the last two years, four randomized open-label studies comparing DOAC and LMWH in the treatment of CAT have been published. The first one was a large trial with edoxaban, followed by two smaller studies with rivaroxaban and apixaban, and, recently, by another large trial with apixaban. There are some differences among the studies concerning design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, length of treatment. In summary, DOAC are associated with a trend to the reduction of the risk of recurrence of venous thromboembolism; however, this is at the expense of some increase in bleeding risk. This risk is differential; the prevailing site of bleeding is the upper part of gastrointestinal tract, and, to a lesser extent, genitourinary tract. The updated guidelines for the treatment of CAT suggest DOAC as an alternative, however with careful consideration of the risk of bleeding and the risk of drug interactions. So far, the guidelines have mentioned edoxaban and rivaroxaban. With emerging evidence, apixaban is expected to play a role as well.


Assuntos
Neoplasias , Tromboembolia Venosa , Administração Oral , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia/tratamento farmacológico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Neoplasias/complicações , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle
18.
J Atheroscler Thromb ; 27(10): 1123-1137, 2020 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32863290

RESUMO

AIM: Patients with acute infectious diseases are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Clinicians should be aware of the VTE risk in patients with COVID-19, many of whom present with severe coagulation disorders. METHOD: We used an online platform to conduct a cross-sectional questionnaire survey among doctors in mainland China in March 2020. The questionnaire was designed to figure out the clinician's current awareness of VTE prevention and detection rates, as well as the current status of VTE prophylaxis in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: We collected 1,636 replies, of which 1,579 were valid. Among these, 991 (63%) clinicians were involved directly in frontline treatment. Most of the clinicians (1,492, or 94%) thought it was necessary to assess the VTE risk in patients with COVID-19. However, only 234 (24%) clinicians performed appropriate assessment during the COVID-19 outbreak. For patients with mild/moderate COVID-19, 752 (76%) clinicians would prescribe exercise and water to prevent VTE. For patients with severe COVID-19, 448 (45%) clinicians would prescribe mechanical devices if the patient had a high bleeding risk, and 648 (65%) clinicians would choose LMWH as prophylaxis if the patient had a low bleeding risk. The VTE detection rate was not that high in both mild/moderate and severe patients. CONCLUSION: Although most clinicians recommended prescribing VTE prophylaxis to patients with COVID-19, the practice still needs to be improved. A real-world registry to investigate the true incidence of VTE, and the effect of prescribing appropriate prophylaxis for patients with COVID-19, is necessary in the future.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Padrões de Prática Médica , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia Venosa/virologia , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , China , Competência Clínica , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Tromboembolia Venosa/diagnóstico
20.
Vasc Health Risk Manag ; 16: 317-324, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32801728

RESUMO

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious complication in hospitalized patients. It is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Therefore, its prevention is of great importance. There is paucity of data on the incidence of VTE in hospitalized patients in Cameroon. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of symptomatic VTE, its risk factors and the proportion of patients at risk that receive thromboprophylaxis in patients hospitalized in the medical and surgical units in two hospitals in the South West Region of Cameroon. Methods: A prospective study was performed in the medical and surgical units from January to March 2018. All consecutive eligible patients admitted for at least 3 days were included. Patient profile and risk factors were recorded. Patients were followed and evaluated for signs and symptoms of VTE until discharge from hospital. Suspected VTE was confirmed using compression ultrasonography and computed tomography. Results: A total of 314 patients were included of which 58.7% were females. The mean age was 46±17.9 years. Patients aged <40 years represented 42% of the study population. Three cases of symptomatic VTE were recorded. The incidence of symptomatic VTE was 1% (95% CI: 0.3-2.8%). The prevalence of VTE risk was 93.6% with 32.5% being at high risk. The risk was 94.6% in medical patients and 92.8% in surgical patients. Among the patients at risk, only 32.5% received thromboprophylaxis. Thromboprophylaxis was significantly higher in surgical patients compared to medical patients (45.2% versus 18.7%; p<0.0001). Conclusion: The incidence of VTE in hospitalized medical and surgical patients appeared low but likely underestimated considering the high prevalence of patients at risk of VTE coupled with the underutilization of thromboprophylaxis. Clinicians should assess risk of VTE in conjunction with the clinical situation to determine the most appropriate type of prophylaxis as well as the duration of prophylaxis for VTE.


Assuntos
Fibrinolíticos/uso terapêutico , Hospitalização , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/efeitos adversos , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Idoso , Camarões/epidemiologia , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Feminino , Fidelidade a Diretrizes , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Padrões de Prática Médica , Estudos Prospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Tromboembolia Venosa/diagnóstico , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA