The effect of administering preprocedural VITamin K on the international normalized ratio in patients anticoagulated with ACEnocoumarol (VITKACE-study): a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The effect of the vitamin K antagonist acenocoumarol on coagulation needs to be reversed when patients undergo an invasive procedure with considerable bleeding risk. A strategy to achieve this is by administering oral vitamin K before a procedure while continuing acenocoumarol. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect on periprocedural international normalized ratio (INR) values and safety using oral vitamin K as anticoagulant reversal method. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, consecutive patients using acenocoumarol undergoing elective procedures between 2019 and 2022 were included. According to standard of care in our hospital, patients took 10 mg oral vitamin K 36 to 48 hours before the procedure while continuing their normal use of acenocoumarol. Effectiveness to lower INR to <1.8 preprocedural was assessed. Bleeding and thrombotic complications within 30 days after the procedure were assessed. Periprocedural course of INR was monitored by collecting additional blood samples. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were included for analysis. On the day of the procedure, an adequate INR of <1.8 was achieved in 99% of patients. One clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding complication and no thrombotic complications were observed during the first 30 days after the procedure. INR gradually restored to therapeutic level during the days after the procedure. CONCLUSION: Using oral vitamin K while patients continue acenocoumarol intake is an effective way to adequately lower INR before an invasive procedure. Low amount of bleeding complications and absence of thromboembolic complications suggest that this is a safe strategy. The INR values returned gradually to therapeutic range after the procedure, probably contributing to the observed low bleeding rate.

The Effect of Antiepileptic Drugs on Cognition: Patient Perceived Cognitive Problems of Topiramate versus Levetiracetam in Clinical Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Neurocognitive complaints may interfere with long-term antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment and are an important issue in clinical practice. Most data about drug-induced cognitive problems are derived from highly controlled short-term clinical trials. We analyzed such cognitive complaints for the two most commonly used AEDs in a clinical setting using patient perceived problems as primary outcome measure. METHOD: All patients of the epilepsy center Kempenhaeghe that received topiramate (TPM) or levetiracetam (LEV) from the introduction to mid 2004 were analyzed using a medical information system, an automated medical file. Patients were analyzed after 6, 12, and 18 months of treatment. RESULTS: Four hundred and two patients used either TPM (n = 260) or LEV (n = 142); 18 months retention showed a statistically significant difference, revealing 15% more patients that continued LEV compared to TPM: 18 months retention 46% for TPM and 61% for LEV [F (1.400) = 3.313, p = 0.043]. Neurocognitive complaints accounted for a significant number of drug discontinuations and especially the high frequency of neurocognitive complaints in the first period of TPM treatment appeared to be significant different from LEV [F(2,547) = 3.192, p = 0.042]. In the remaining patients, the difference in neurocognitive complaints was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: cognitive complaints are common in TPM treatment and frequently lead to drug withdrawal. The impact of LEV on cognitive function is only mild. This leads to a much higher (15%) drug discontinuation rate for TPM compared to LEV.