Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Pancreatic Cancer: Breaking Down a Complex Clinical Dilemma.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) frequently occurs in patients with cancer, and particularly those with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Therapeutic anticoagulation with either low-molecular-weight heparin or a direct oral anticoagulant is clearly beneficial in patients who develop a VTE. However, whether thromboprophylaxis improves patient outcomes remains unclear. Studies assessing this risk show a 10%-25% risk of VTE, with reduction to 5%-10% with thromboprophylaxis but no impact on survival. To aid in the risk stratification of patients, several tools have been developed to identify those at highest risk for a VTE event. However, the clinical application of these risk stratification models has been limited, and most patients, even those at the highest risk, will never have a VTE event. New oral anticoagulants have greatly improved the feasibility of prophylaxis but do show increased risk of bleeding in patients with the underlying gastrointestinal dysfunction frequently found in patients with pancreatic cancer. Recently, several completed clinical trials shed new light on this complicated risk versus benefit decision. Here, we present this recent evidence and discuss important considerations for the clinician in determining whether to initiate thromboprophylaxis in patients with PDAC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Given the high risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), whether to initiate prophylactic anticoagulation is a complex clinical decision. This review discusses recent evidence regarding the risk stratification and treatment options for thromboprophylaxis in patients with PDAC, with the goal of providing practicing clinicians with updates on recent developments in the field. This article also highlights important considerations for individualizing the treatment approach for a given patient given the lack of general consensus of uniform recommendations for this patient population.

Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia during Obstetric Hospital Admissions.

INTRODUCTION: The rate of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) on a population basis is unknown. The objective of this study was to characterize the risk for HIT during antepartum, delivery, and postpartum hospitalizations in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A large administrative database was used to determine the risk of HIT in hospitalized obstetric patients who received unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Patients were presumed to have HIT if they were exposed to UFH or LMWH, received a diagnosis of HIT, and were administered a medication for the treatment of HIT including bivalirudin, argatroban, fondaparinux, or lepirudin. We queried severe complications of HIT including arterial thrombosis, limb amputation, heart failure, and death. RESULTS: We identified 66,468 antepartum hospitalizations, 66,741 delivery hospitalizations, and 16,325 postpartum readmissions where women received pharmacologic prophylaxis. Of these, 10 antepartum admissions, 1 delivery admission, and 14 postpartum readmissions involved a diagnosis of HIT with treatment of bivalirudin, argatroban, fondaparinux, or lepirudin. There were no deaths and no diagnoses of arterial thrombosis, limb amputation, heart failure, and death. CONCLUSION: Risk for HIT among hospitalized obstetric patients is low. In this cohort, no cases of death or severe complications were noted in relation to the diagnosis.

Bleeding and Thrombotic Events During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Postcardiotomy Shock.

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation therapy management during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is particularly difficult in postcardiotomy shock patients given a significant bleeding risk. We sought to determine the effect of anticoagulation treatment on bleeding and thrombosis risk for postcardiotomy shock patients on ECMO. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who received ECMO for postcardiotomy shock from July 2007 through July 2019. Characteristics of patients who had bleeding and thrombosis were investigated, and risk factors were assessed by multilevel logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 152 patients who received ECMO for postcardiotomy shock, 33 (23%) had 40 thrombotic events and 64 (45%) had 86 bleeding events. Predictors of bleeding were intraoperative packed red blood cell transfusion (odds ratio [OR] 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.09), platelet transfusion (OR 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.16), international normalized ratio (OR 1.18; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.37), and activated partial thromboplastin time greater than 60 seconds (OR 2.32; 95% CI, 1.14 to 4.73). Predictors of thrombosis were anticoagulant use (OR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.79), surgical venting (OR 3.07; 95% CI, 1.29 to 7.31), hemoglobin (OR 1.38; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.79), and central cannulation (OR 2.06; 95% CI, 1.03 to 4.11). The daily predicted probability of thrombosis was between 0.075 and 0.038 for patients who did not receive anticoagulation and decreased to between 0.030 and 0.013 for patients who received anticoagulation treatment at activated partial thromboplastin times between 25 and 80 seconds. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy can reduce thromboembolic events in postcardiotomy shock patients on ECMO, but bleeding risk may outweigh this benefit at activated partial thromboplastin times greater than 60 seconds.

Can lightning strike twice? Wild-type transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis associated with rare liver disease.

Wild-type ATTR cardiac amyloidosis (ATTRwt-CA) is not as rare as previously thought to be. Patients with infiltrative cardiac amyloidosis often present with right-sided heart failure (HF) symptomatology. Clinically significant liver disease and cirrhosis has not been reported in ATTRwt-CA. We present two cases of ATTRwt-CA with right-sided HF and abnormal liver function tests initially thought to be secondary to congestive hepatopathy but found to have rare and unrelated liver disease. These cases highlight the importance of developing a broad differential diagnosis and leveraging a multidisciplinary team approach in evaluating patients for unusual causes of cirrhosis/other chronic liver diseases when ATTR cardiac amyloidosis patients present with congestive hepatopathy.