Fixed dose subcutaneous low molecular weight heparins versus adjusted dose unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism

Iatrogenic neurology

Iatrogenic disease is one of the most frequent causes of hospital admissions and constitutes a growing public health problem. The most common type of iatrogenic neurologic disease is pharmacologic, and the central and peripheral nervous systems are particularly vulnerable. Despite this, iatrogenic disease is generally overlooked as a differential diagnosis among neurologic patients. The clinical picture of pharmacologically mediated iatrogenic neurologic disease can range from mild to fatal. Common and uncommon forms of drug toxicity are comprehensively addressed in this chapter. While the majority of neurologic adverse effects are listed and referenced in the tables, the most relevant issues are further discussed in the text.

Rationale and methodology for a multicentre randomised trial of fibrinolysis for pulmonary embolism that includes quality of life outcomes

BACKGROUND

Submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) has a low mortality rate but can degrade functional capacity.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aims to provide rationale, methodology, and initial findings of a multicentre, randomised trial of fibrinolysis for PE that used a composite end-point, including quality of life measures.

METHODS

This investigator-initiated study was funded by a contract between a corporate partner and the investigator's hospital (the prime site). The investigator was the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sponsor. The prime site subcontracted, indemnified, and trained consortia members. Consenting, normotensive patients with PE and right ventricular strain (by echocardiography or biomarkers) received low-molecular-weight heparin and random assignment to a single bolus of tenecteplase or placebo in double-blinded fashion. The outcomes were: (i) in-hospital rate of intubation, vasopressor support, and major haemorrhage, or (ii) at 90 days, death, recurrent PE, or composite that defined poor quality of life (echocardiography, 6 min walk test and surveys). The planned sample size was n = 200.

RESULTS

Eight sites enrolled 87 patients over 5 years. The ratio of patients screened for each enrolled was 7.4 to 1, equating to 11 h screening time per patient enrolled. Primary barrier to enrolment was the cost of screening. Two patients died (2.5%, 95%CI [0-8%]), one developed shock, but 18 (22%, 95%CI: [13-30%]) had a poor quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

An investigator-initiated, FDA-regulated, multicentre trial of fibrinolysis for submassive PE was conducted, but was limited by screening costs and a low mortality rate. Quality of life measurements might represent a more important patient-centred end-point.

Once versus twice daily low molecular weight heparin for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

In the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is administered once or twice daily. A once daily treatment regimen is more convenient for the patient and may optimise home treatment. However, it is not clear whether a once daily treatment regimen is as safe and effective as a twice daily treatment regimen. This is the second update of a review first published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of once daily versus twice daily administration of LMWH.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched May 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, Issue 4).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials in which LMWH given once daily is compared with LMWH given twice daily for the initial treatment of VTE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies were included with a total of 1508 participants. The pooled data showed no statistically significant difference in recurrent VTE between the two treatment regimens (OR 0.82, 0.49 to 1.39; P = 0.47). A comparison of major haemorrhagic events (OR 0.77, 0.40 to 1.45; P = 0.41), improvement of thrombus size (OR 1.41, 0.66 to 3.01; P = 0.38) and mortality (OR 1.14, 0.62 to 2.08; P = 0.68) also showed no statistically significant differences between the two treatment regimens. None of the five included studies reported data on post-thrombotic syndrome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Once daily treatment with LMWH is as effective and safe as twice daily treatment with LMWH.

Low-molecular-weight or unfractionated heparin in venous thromboembolism: the influence of renal function

BACKGROUND

In patients with acute venous thromboembolism and renal insufficiency, initial therapy with unfractionated heparin may have some advantages over low-molecular-weight heparin.

METHODS

We used the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) Registry data to evaluate the 15-day outcome in 38,531 recruited patients. We used propensity score matching to compare patients treated with unfractionated heparin with those treated with low-molecular-weight heparin in 3 groups stratified by creatinine clearance levels at baseline: >60 mL/min, 30 to 60 mL/min, or <30 mL/min.

RESULTS

Patients initially receiving unfractionated heparin therapy (n = 2167) more likely had underlying diseases than those receiving low-molecular-weight heparin (n = 34,665). Propensity score-matched groups of patients with creatinine clearance levels >60 mL/min (n = 1598 matched pairs), 30 to 60 mL/min (n = 277 matched pairs), and <30 mL/min (n = 210 matched pairs) showed an increased 15-day mortality for unfractionated heparin compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (4.5% vs 2.4% [P = .001], 5.4% vs 5.8% [P = not significant], and 15% vs 8.1% [P = .02], respectively), an increased rate of fatal pulmonary embolism (2.8% vs 1.2% [P = .001], 3.2% vs 2.5% [P = not significant], and 5.7% vs 2.4% [P = .02], respectively), and a similar rate of fatal bleeding (0.3% vs 0.3%, 0.7% vs 0.7%, and 0.5% vs 0.0%, respectively). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients treated with unfractionated heparin were at increased risk for all-cause death (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.4) and fatal pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.6).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with low-molecular-weight heparin, initial therapy with unfractionated heparin was associated with a higher mortality and higher rate of fatal pulmonary embolism in patients with creatinine clearance levels >60 mL/min or <30 mL/min, but not in those with levels between 30 and 60 mL/min.

Low-molecular-weight heparin use with thrombolysis: is it effective and safe? Ten years' clinical experience

BACKGROUND

There is no data on the use of subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (SC LMWH) in cases that require thrombolysis.

OBJECTIVE

Having used SC LMWH with thrombolytics for more than 10 years, we aimed to review our data, share our experiences and find out whether the use of SC LMWH with thrombolytics had been effective and safe.

METHOD

This is a retrospective cohort study. Patients who were diagnosed as acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and received either SC LMWH treatment or SC LMWH with thrombolytics in our hospital (a tertiary hospital) between 2000 and 2010 were included in the study. For both treatments, the rates of mortality and complications were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 392 patients, 210 female (53.5%) and 182 male (46.5%) with an average age of 60 years, ±16 SD, with acute PE, were included in the study. Of these patients, 107 (27.2%) were massive and 285 (72.8%) were nonmassive and were administered SC LMWH plus thrombolytics and only SC LMWH, respectively. The mortality rate was 16.8% (18 of 107) in patients who were massive and 3.5% (10 of 285) for those who were nonmassive (p < 0.001). Major hemorrhage occurred in 3.7% (n = 4) and 0.7% (n = 2) and minor hemorrhage in 12.1% (n = 13) and in 3.8% (n = 11) of the cases who received SC LMWH plus thrombolytics and SC LMWH, respectively.

CONCLUSION

SC LMWH use with thrombolytics seems to be feasible and safe. Prospective, large, randomized control trials are still required in order to confirm these results.

Dosing practice of low molecular weight heparins and its efficacy and safety in cardiovascular inpatients: a retrospective study in a Chinese teaching hospital

Background

Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are safe and effective anticoagulant options for cardiovascular patients when applied as body weight-adjusted doses. However, there are some barriers that make it difficult to implement weight-adjusted doses in clinical practice. Therefore, it is vital to learn the dosing practices of LMWH and its efficacy and safety in clinical practice.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted in cardiovascular inpatients who had received at least one dose of LMWH during a 6-month period. Appropriateness of LMWH dosing was determined and major clinical outcomes (major adverse vascular events and major bleeding) during hospitalization were evaluated.

Results

A total of 376 admissions representing 364 patients received LMWH treatment. Of these, 17.0% (64/376) of admissions did not have body weight records. Of the 312 admissions included for the outcome study, only 34 cases (10.9%) received the recommended doses of LMWH, while 51 cases (16.3%) received mild underdoses, 223 cases (71.5%) received major underdoses and 4 (1.3%) received excess doses. There were 10 major adverse vascular events, which occurred more often in patients receiving excess doses of LMWH than in patients receiving recommended, mild or major underdoses (50%, 2.9%, 2.0% and 2.7%, respectively, P < 0.001). After multivariable analysis, severe renal insufficiency was an independent risk factor for major adverse vascular events [odds ratio (OR), 31.93; 95% confidence interval (CI), 5.99-170.30; P < 0.001]. No major bleeding was recorded.

Conclusions

Underdose of LMWH is commonly used in cardiovascular inpatients, which was suboptimal according to guidelines. Using LMWH at a fixed, low dose for treatment purposes in patients without severe renal insufficiency was not associated with a higher risk of adverse vascular events in the current study, though larger studies with extended follow-ups are required to fully assess the long-term consequences of LMWH underdosing.

Large inter-individual variation of the pharmacodynamic effect of anticoagulant drugs on thrombin generation

Anticoagulation by a standard dosage of an inhibitor of thrombin generation presupposes predictable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the anticoagulant. We determined the inter-individual variation of the effect on thrombin generation of a fixed concentration of direct and antithrombin-mediated inhibitors of thrombin and factor Xa. Thrombin generation was determined by calibrated automated thrombinography in platelet-poor plasma from 44 apparently healthy subjects which was spiked with fixed concentrations of otamixaban, melagatran, unfractionated heparin, dermatan sulfate and pentasaccharide. The variability of the inhibitory effect of the different anticoagulants within the population was determined using the coefficient of variation, i.e. the standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean. The inter-individual coefficients of variation of the endogenous thrombin potential and peak height before inhibition were 18% and 16%, respectively and became 20%-24% and 24%-43% after inhibition. The average inhibition of endogenous thrombin potential and peak height (ETP, peak) brought about by the anticoagulants was respectively: otamixaban (27%, 83%), melagatran (56%, 63%), unfractionated heparin (43%, 58%), dermatan sulfate (68%, 57%) and pentasaccharide (25%, 67%). This study demonstrates that the addition of a fixed concentration of any type of anticoagulant tested causes an inhibition that is highly variable from one individual to another. In this respect there is no difference between direct inhibitors of thrombin and factor Xa and heparin(-like) inhibitors acting on the same factors.

Bleeding risk during treatment of acute thrombotic events with subcutaneous LMWH compared to intravenous unfractionated heparin; a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Low Molecular Weight Heparins (LMWH) are at least as effective antithrombotic drugs as Unfractionated Heparin (UFH). However, it is still unclear whether the safety profiles of LMWH and UFH differ. We performed a systematic review to compare the bleeding risk of fixed dose subcutaneous LMWH and adjusted dose UFH for treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Major bleeding was the primary end point.

METHODS

Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library) were searched up to May 2010 with no language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials in which subcutaneous LMWH were compared to intravenous UFH for the treatment of acute thrombotic events were selected. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data on study design, study quality, incidence of major bleeding, patients' characteristics, type, dose and number of daily administrations of LMWH, co-treatments, study end points and efficacy outcome. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were included. A total of 14,002 patients received UFH and 14,635 patients LMWH. Overall, no difference in major bleeding was observed between LMWH patients and UFH (OR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.60-1.04). In patients with VTE LMWH appeared safer than UFH, (OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.47-1.00).

CONCLUSION

The results of our systematic review suggest that the use of LMWH in the treatment of VTE might be associated with a reduction in major bleeding compared with UFH. The choice of which heparin to use to minimize bleeding risk must be based on the single patient, taking into account the bleeding profile of different heparins in different settings.

Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

This article addresses the treatment of VTE disease.

METHODS

We generated strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high-quality (Grade A), moderate-quality (Grade B), and low-quality (Grade C) evidence.

RESULTS

For acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend initial parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Grade 1B) or anticoagulation with rivaroxaban. We suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux over IV unfractionated heparin (Grade 2C) or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for PE with hypotension (Grade 2C). For proximal DVT or PE, we recommend treatment of 3 months over shorter periods (Grade 1B). For a first proximal DVT or PE that is provoked by surgery or by a nonsurgical transient risk factor, we recommend 3 months of therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if provoked by a nonsurgical risk factor and low or moderate bleeding risk); that is unprovoked, we suggest extended therapy if bleeding risk is low or moderate (Grade 2B) and recommend 3 months of therapy if bleeding risk is high (Grade 1B); and that is associated with active cancer, we recommend extended therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if high bleeding risk) and suggest LMWH over vitamin K antagonists (Grade 2B). We suggest vitamin K antagonists or LMWH over dabigatran or rivaroxaban (Grade 2B). We suggest compression stockings to prevent the postthrombotic syndrome (Grade 2B). For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we suggest prophylactic-dose fondaparinux or LMWH over no anticoagulation (Grade 2B), and suggest fondaparinux over LMWH (Grade 2C).

CONCLUSION

Strong recommendations apply to most patients, whereas weak recommendations are sensitive to differences among patients, including their preferences.

[Treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism]

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism may be considered as different manifestations of the same disease: venous thromboembolism. Under the condition of entirely stable hemodynamics, treatment follows exactly the same principles. The phase of initial therapy has a duration of 5-10 days and has remained so far a domain of parenteral anticoagulants (low molecular weight heparin, fondaparinux). The phase of early maintenance therapy is instituted with an overlap and has a duration of 3-6 months; vitamin K antagonists with a target INR of 2.0-3.0 are the standard. Patients with a high risk of recurrence and a low risk of bleeding will enter a phase of prolonged or even indefinite maintenance therapy. Again, vitamin K antagonists with a target INR of 2.0-3.0 are the standard. A target INR of 1.5-2.0 may be considered an alternative for patients in whom a very stable anticoagulation with less frequent INR testing is desirable. Clear recommendations can be made for venous thromboembolism treatment in pregnancy, in the post partum and lactation periods, as well as for patients with severe renal impairment. New anticoagulants (thrombin inhibitors, factor Xa inhibitors) have made significant progress in their clinical development and will soon become available as an alternative for all three phases of therapy.

Treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients. Current strategies and new therapeutic options

Cancer is a major and independent risk factor of venous thromboembolism (VTE). In clinical practice, a high number of VTE events occurs in patients with cancer, and treatment of cancer-associated VTE differs in several aspects from treatment of VTE in the general population. However, treatment in cancer patients remains a major challenge, as the risk of recurrence of VTE as well as the risk of major bleeding during anticoagulation is substantially higher in patients with cancer than in those without cancer. In several clinical trials, different anticoagulants and regimens have been investigated for treatment of acute VTE and secondary prophylaxis in cancer patients to prevent recurrence. Based on the results of these trials, anticoagulant therapy with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) has become the treatment of choice in cancer patients with acute VTE in the initial period and for extended and long-term anticoagulation for 3-6 months. New oral anticoagulants directly inhibiting thrombin or factor Xa, have been developed in the past decade and studied in large phase III clinical trials. Results from currently completed trials are promising and indicate their potential use for treatment of VTE also in cancer patients. However, the role of the new oral thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors for VTE treatment in cancer patients still has to be clarified in further studies specifically focusing on cancer-associated VTE. This brief review will summarize the current strategies of initial and long-term VTE treatment in patients with cancer and discuss the potential use of the new oral anticoagulants.