Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of 3-factor versus 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for emergent warfarin reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Margraf, David J; Brown, Sarah J; Blue, Heather L; Bezdicek, Tamara L; Wolfson, Julian; Chapman, Scott A.
Afiliação
  • Margraf DJ; Department of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, 7-115E Weaver-Densford Hall, 308 Harvard St. SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA.
  • Brown SJ; Health Sciences Libraries, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Blue HL; Department of Pharmacy Practice and Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, Duluth, MN, USA.
  • Bezdicek TL; Fairview Pharmacy Services, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Wolfson J; Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Chapman SA; Department of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, 7-115E Weaver-Densford Hall, 308 Harvard St. SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA. chapm004@umn.edu.
BMC Emerg Med ; 22(1): 14, 2022 01 24.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35073849
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Patients requiring emergent warfarin reversal (EWR) have been prescribed three-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC3) and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC4) to reverse the anticoagulant effects of warfarin. There is no existing systematic review and meta-analysis of studies directly comparing PCC3 and PCC4.

METHODS:

The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effectiveness of achieving study defined target INR goal after PCC3 or PCC4 administration. Secondary objectives were to determine the difference in safety endpoints, thromboembolic events (TE), and survival during the patients' hospital stay. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to estimate the odds ratios (OR), and heterogeneity associated with the outcomes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed.

RESULTS:

Ten full-text manuscripts and five abstracts provided data for the primary and secondary outcomes. Patients requiring EWR had more than three times the odds of reversal to goal INR when they were given PCC4 compared to PCC3 (OR = 3.61, 95% CI 1.97-6.60, p < 0.001). There was no meaningful clinical association or statistically significant result between PCC4 and PCC3 groups in TE (OR = 1.56, 95% CI 0.83-2.91, p = 0.17), or survival during hospital stay (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.81-2.23, p = 0.25).

CONCLUSION:

PCC4 is more effective than PCC3 in meeting specific predefined INR goals and has similar safety profiles in patients requiring emergent reversal of the anticoagulant effects of warfarin.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Varfarina / Anticoagulantes Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Varfarina / Anticoagulantes Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article