Direct thrombin inhibitors versus vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins for prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee replacement

Superior outcomes with Argatroban for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background Argatroban, lepirudin, desirudin, bivalirudin, and danaparoid are commonly used to manage heparin-induced thrombocytopenia related complications. However, the most suitable drug for this condition still remains controversial. Aim of the review This Bayesian network meta-analysis study compared the most common anticoagulant drugs used in the management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Method All clinical trials comparing two or more anticoagulant therapies for suspected or confirmed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia were considered for inclusion. Studies concerning the use of heparins or oral anticoagulants were not considered. Data concerning hospitalisation length, thromboembolic, major, and minor haemorrhagic events, and mortality rate were collected. The network analyses were made through the STATA routine for Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model analysis with standardised mean difference (SMD) and log odd ratio (LOR) effect measures. Results Data from a total of 4338 patients were analysed. The overall mean age was 62.31 ± 6.6 years old. Hospitalization length was considerably shorter in favour of the argatroban group (SMD: − 1.70). Argatroban evidenced the lowest rate of major (LOR: − 1.51) and minor (LOR: − 0.57) haemorrhagic events. Argatroban demonstrated the lowest rate of thromboembolic events (LOR: 0.62), and mortality rate (LOR: − 1.16). Conclusion Argatroban performed better overall for selected patients with HIT. Argatroban demonstrated the shortest hospitalization, and lowest rate of haemorrhages, thromboembolisms, and mortality compared to bivalirudin, lepirudin, desirudin, and danaparoid.

Review of Therapeutic Options for the Prevention of VTE in Total Joint Arthroplasty

Hip and knee arthroplasty patients are at high risk of perioperative venous thromboembolic events (VTE). VTE has been well studied in this population and it is recommended that total joint arthroplasty recipients receive chemoprophylactic anticoagulation due to risk factors inherent to the surgical intervention. There are few concise resources for the orthopedic surgeon that summarize data regarding post-operative anticoagulation in the context of currently available therapeutic options and perioperative standards of practice. The periodic reexamination of literature is essential as conclusions drawn from studies predating perioperative protocols that include early mobilization and sequential compression devices as standards of practice in total joint arthroplasty are no longer generalizable to modern-day practice. We reviewed a large number of recently published research studies related to post-operative anticoagulation in total joint arthroplasty populations that received a high Level of Evidence grade. Current literature supports the use of oral aspirin regimens in place of more aggressive anticoagulants, particularly among low risk patients. Oral aspirin regimens appear to have the additional benefit of lower rates of bleeding and wound complications. Less consensus exists among high risk patients and more potent anticoagulants may be indicated. However, available evidence does not demonstrate clear superiority among current options, all of which may place patients at a higher risk of bleeding and wound complications. In this situation, chemoprophylactic selection should reflect specific patient needs and characteristics.

Pentasaccharides for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common condition with potentially serious and life-threatening consequences. The standard method of thromboprophylaxis uses an anticoagulant such as low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or warfarin. In recent years, another type of anticoagulant, pentasaccharide, an indirect factor Xa inhibitor, has shown good anticoagulative effect in clinical trials. Three types of pentasaccharides are available: short-acting fondaparinux, long-acting idraparinux and idrabiotaparinux. Pentasaccharides cause little heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and are better tolerated than unfractionated heparin, LMWH and warfarin. However, no consensus has been reached on whether pentasaccharides are superior or inferior to other anticoagulative methods.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of pentasaccharides versus other methods of thromboembolic prevention (thromboprophylaxis) in people who require anticoagulant treatment to prevent venous thromboembolism.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (last searched March 2016) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 2). The CIS searched trial databases for details of ongoing and unpublished studies. Review authors searched LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences) and the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews identified by electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials on any type of pentasaccharide versus other anticoagulation methods (pharmaceutical or mechanical) for VTE prevention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data in predesigned tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review 25 studies with a total of 21,004 participants. All investigated fondaparinux for VTE prevention; none investigated idraparinux or idrabiotaparinux. Studies included participants undergoing abdominal surgery, thoracic surgery, bariatric surgery or coronary bypass surgery; acutely ill hospitalised medical patients; people requiring rigid or semirigid immobilisation; and those with superficial venous thrombosis. Most studies focused on orthopaedic patients. We lowered the quality of the evidence because of heterogeneity between studies and a small number of events causing imprecision.When comparing fondaparinux with placebo, we found less total VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.38; 5717 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 64%; P < 0.00001), less symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.36; 6503 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 0%; P < 0.0001), less total DVT (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.40; 5715 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 67%; P < 0.00001), less proximal DVT (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.39; 2746 participants; 7 studies; I2 = 64%; P = 0.0004) and less total pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.62; 6412 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.008) in the fondaparinux group. The quality of the evidence was moderate for total VTE, total DVT and proximal DVT, and high for symptomatic VTE and total PE.When fondaparinux was compared with LMWH, analyses indicated that fondaparinux reduced total VTE and DVT (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; 9339 participants; 11 studies; I2 = 64%; P < 0.0001; and RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.71; 9356 participants; 10 studies; I2 = 67%; P < 0.0001, respectively), and showed a trend toward reduced proximal DVT (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.02; 8361 participants; 9 studies; I2 = 53%; P = 0.06). Symptomatic VTE (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.63; 12240 participants; 9 studies; I2 = 35%; P = 0.90) and total PE (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.34; 12350 participants; 10 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.51) indicated no difference between fondaparinux and LMWH. The quality of the evidence was moderate for total VTE, symptomatic VTE, total DVT and total PE, and low for proximal DVT.We showed that fondaparinux increased major bleeding compared with both placebo and LWMH (RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.48 to 4.44; 6659 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.0008; moderate-quality evidence; and RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.75; 12,501 participants; 11 studies; I2 = 24%; P = 0.008; high-quality evidence, respectively). All-cause mortality was not different between fondaparinux and placebo or LMWH (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.22; 6674 participants; 8 studies; I2 = 14%; P = 0.26; moderate-quality evidence; and RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.22; 12,400 participants; 11 studies; I2 = 0%; P = 0.44; moderate-quality evidence, respectively).One study compared fondaparinux with variable and fixed (1 mg per day) doses of warfarin after elective hip or knee replacement surgery and showed no difference in primary and secondary outcomes between fondaparinux and both variable and fixed doses of warfarin. The quality of the evidence was very low. One small study compared fondaparinux with edoxaban in patients with severe renal impairment undergoing lower-limb orthopaedic surgery and reported no thromboembolic events, major bleeding events or deaths in either group. The quality of the evidence was very low. One small study compared fondaparinux with mechanical thromboprophylaxis. Results showed no difference in total VTE and total DVT between fondaparinux and mechanical thromboprophylaxis. This study reported no cases pertaining to the other outcomes of this review. The quality of the evidence was low.There were insufficient studies to permit meaningful conclusions for subgroups of clinical conditions other than orthopaedic surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate to high quality evidence shows that fondaparinux is effective for short-term prevention of VTE when compared with placebo. It can reduce total VTE, DVT, total PE and symptomatic VTE, and does not demonstrate a reduction in deaths compared with placebo. Low to moderate quality evidence shows that fondaparinux is more effective for short-term VTE prevention when compared with LMWH. It can reduce total VTE and total DVT and does not demonstrate a reduction in deaths when compared with LMWH. However, at the same time, moderate to high quality evidence shows that fondaparinux increases major bleeding when compared with placebo and LMWH. Therefore, when fondaparinux is chosen for the prevention of VTE, attention should be paid to the person's bleeding and thrombosis risks. Most data were derived from patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Therefore, the conclusion predominantly pertains to these patients. Data on fondaparinux for other clinical conditions are sparse.

Novel Oral Anticoagulants for Venous Thromboembolism with Special Emphasis on Risk of Hemorrhagic Complications and Reversal Agents

Warfarin was the only oral anticoagulant available for the treatment of venous thromboembolism for about half a century until the recent approval of novel oral agents dabigatran, rivoraxaban and apixaban. This presents new classes of medications less cumbersome to use. They do not require frequent laboratory monitoring or have nurmerous drug interactions. On the other hand it also poses a challenge to the physicians deciding which agent to use in specific patient populations, how to predict the bleeding risk compared to warfarin and between the different novel agents and how to manage bleeding with relatively recent discovery of few potential antidotes. This review summarizes the major trials that led to the approval of these agents and their exclusion criteria helping physicians understand which patient types might not benefit from these agents. It provides clinical pearls invaluable in everyday practice such as transitioning between traditional and novel anticoagulants, dose adjustments for high risk populations, drug interactions and cost analysis. Futhermore, the review provides direct comparisons with warfarin and indirect comparisons among the novel agents in terms of efficacy and bleeding risk narrating the numbers of patients with intracranial, gastrointestinal and fatal hemorrhages in each of the major trials. We hope that this review will help the physicians inform their patients about the benefits and risks of these agents and enable them to make an informed selection of the most appropriate anticoagulant.

Acupuncture safety in patients receiving anticoagulants: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Theoretically, acupuncture in anticoagulated patients could increase bleeding risk. However, precise estimates of bleeding complication rates from acupuncture in anticoagulated patients have not been systematically examined.

OBJECTIVE

To critically evaluate evidence for safety of acupuncture in anticoagulated patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

Of 39 potentially relevant citations, 11 met inclusion criteria: 2 randomized trials, 4 case series, and 5 case reports. Seven provided reporting quality sufficient to assess acupuncture safety in 384 anticoagulated patients (3974 treatments). Minor-moderate bleeding related to acupuncture in an anticoagulated patient occurred in one case: a large hip hematoma, managed with vitamin K reversal and warfarin discontinuation following reevaluation of its medical justification. Blood-spot bleeding, typical for any needling/injection and controlled with pressure/cotton, occurred in 51 (14.6%) of 350 treatments among a case series of 229 patients. Bleeding deemed unrelated to acupuncture during anticoagulation, and more likely resulting from inappropriately deep needling damaging tissue or from complex anticoagulation regimens, occurred in 5 patients. No bleeding was reported in 2 studies (74 anticoagulated patients): 1 case report and 1 randomized trial prospectively monitoring acupuncture-associated bleeding as an explicit end point. Altogether, 1 moderate bleeding event occurred in 3974 treatments (0.003%).

CONCLUSION

Acupuncture appears to be safe in anticoagulated patients, assuming appropriate needling location and depth. The observed 0.003% complication rate is lower than the previously reported 12.3% following hip/knee replacement in a randomized trial of 27,360 anticoagulated patients, and 6% following acupuncture in a prospective study of 229,230 all-type patients. Prospective trials would help confirm our findings.

Genetic risk factors for major bleeding in patients treated with warfarin in a community setting

The influence of warfarin pharmacogenomics on major bleeding risk has been little studied in long-term users and non-specialist care settings. We conducted a case-control study to evaluate associations between CYP2C9*2/*3, VKORC1(1173), and CYP4F2*3 variants and major bleeding among patients treated with warfarin in a community setting. We calculated major bleeding odds ratios, adjusting for race, duration of warfarin use, age, gender, and body mass index. In 265 cases and 305 controls with 3.4 and 3.7 mean years of warfarin use, respectively, CYP4F2*3 was associated with decreased major bleeding risk (odds ratio: 0.62; 95% confidence interval: 0.43-0.91). CYP2C9*2/*3 and VKORC1(1173) had null associations overall, but there was a nonsignificant increase in major bleeding risk in patients with duration <6 months (odds ratio: 1.30; 95% confidence interval: 0.60-2.83; odds ratio: 1.23; 95% confidence interval: 0.57-2.64, respectively). In summary, in the largest study of warfarin pharmacogenomics and major bleeding to date, we found a 38% lower risk in patients with CYP4F2*3, potentially reflecting interaction with warfarin and dietary vitamin K intake and warranting additional evaluation.

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.

Idraparinux or idrabiotaparinux for long-term venous thromboembolism treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a prevalent disease with potential serious consequences. Idraparinux and idrabiotaparinux are two kinds of long-acting pentasaccharides. Evidence has shown that idraparinux and idrabiotaparinux are effective anticoagulants. However, up to now, there is no consensus on whether they are better than other anticoagulation methods for long-term VTE treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of idraparinux or idrabiotaparinux versus other anticoagulation methods for long-term VTE treatment.

METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, Web of science, clinical trial registry web sites (clinical trials,WHO clinical trial registry), Googlescholar, PubMed related articles and companies' web sites electronically up to Dec 30(th), 2012 and manually searched the reference lists and conference proceedings. Only randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving adult patients comparing idraparinux and/or idrabiotaparinux versus other anticoagulation methods for long-term VTE treatment was included. Two reviewers evaluated the studies and extracted data independently. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) were calculated as outcome measures and Revman 5.2 software was used to analyze data. Our primary efficacy and safety outcomes were the recurrent VTE and major bleeding rates.

RESULTS

We included four RCTs and involved 8584 participants on idraparinux or idrabiotaparinux versus standard warfarin for VTE treatment from 9364 references. We did not perform meta-analysis on the VTE rate because of the significant heterogeneity. We used the fixed effect model to analyze the safety outcomes and demonstrated that idraparinux or idrabiotaparinux decreased major bleeding rate significantly (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.98, P = 0.04) but had a trend to increase the all cause mortality (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.57, P = 0.05) compared with warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS

Until now there is not sufficient evidence to clarify whether idraparinux or idrabiotaparinux is as effective and safe as the standard warfarin treatment for VTE treatment.

Evidence-based review for patients undergoing elective hip and knee replacement

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the evidence for different interventions in the preoperative, perioperative and post-operative care for people undergoing elective total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement surgery.

METHOD

A multidisciplinary working group comprising consumers, managers and clinicians from the areas of orthopaedics, rheumatology, aged care and rehabilitation evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews/meta-analyses concerning aspects of preoperative, perioperative and post-operative clinical care periods for THR/TKR through systematic searching of Medline, Embase, CENTRAL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from May 2007 to April 2011. Multiple reviewers determined study eligibility and one or more members extracted primary study findings. The body of evidence were assessed and specific recommendations made according to NHMRC guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-five aspects were identified for review. Recommendations for 16 of 25 areas of care were made: impact of waiting, multidisciplinary preparation, preoperative exercise, smoking cessation, interventions for comorbid conditions, predictors of outcome, clinical pathways, implementation of a blood management programme, antibiotic prophylaxis, regional anaesthesia and analgesia, use of a tourniquet in knee replacement, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, early post-operative cryotherapy, early mobilization and continuous passive motion. In the post-operative period, study heterogeneity across all aspects of care precluded specific recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a deficiency in the quality of the evidence supporting key aspects of the continuum of care for primary THR/TKR surgery. Consequently, recommendations were limited. Prioritization and funding for research into areas likely to impact clinical practice and patient outcomes after elective joint replacement surgery are the next important steps.

Reducing ineffective practice: Challenges in identifying low-value health care using Cochrane systematic reviews

Objectives:

Despite international agreement that stopping low value practices will increase efficiency, identifying them is difficult and controversial. Opponents of centralized lists of low value practices stress that the actual problem is inappropriate low value use, and better targeting and implementation of treatment thresholds is needed. Our objective was to use Cochrane Reviews to identify low value practices to support local disinvestment decisions.

Methods:

New or updated reviews were included if the authors concluded that the uncertain effectiveness of an intervention meant it should only be used in research, or that it was ineffective or harmful and should not be used. The reviews go through a production and quality assurance process, and are published as ‘Cochrane Quality and Productivity topics’ through the NHS Evidence website ( http://www.library.nhs.uk/qipp/ ).

Results:

Over a six-month period, 65 Cochrane reviews were processed by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Of these, 28 identified potentially low value practices in the UK context. This was primarily due to a lack of randomized evidence of effectiveness, rather than robust evidence of a lack of effectiveness, or evidence of harm.

Conclusions:

Identifying low-value health care practices for local disinvestment (total or partial) is both practically and politically challenging, yet it is necessary to manage health budgets. This project identified that Cochrane Reviews can potentially identify low value health care practices. However, each review has to be reinterpreted for the UK context and additional analysis has to be undertaken to facilitate local implementation. Recommendations to improve the usability of systematic reviews are made.

Dabigatran etexilate: an oral direct thrombin inhibitor for the management of thromboembolic disorders

BACKGROUND

Until recently, warfarin was the only oral anticoagulant available in the United States. Its narrow therapeutic index, interpatient variability in dose response, and drug and food interactions make it difficult to use. Dabigatran etexilate (DE) is a new oral direct thrombin inhibitor that was approved in the US and in Canada for the prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), as well as in Europe and Canada for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE).

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the role of DE for the prevention and treatment of VTE, as well as for the prevention of stroke in patients with AF.

METHODS

Peer-reviewed clinical trials, review articles, and treatment guidelines were identified from MEDLINE and the Current Contents database (both 1966-February 15, 2012) using the search terms dabigatran, VTE, Afib, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, pharmacoeconomics, and cost-effectiveness. Citations from available articles were also reviewed for additional references.

RESULTS

For VTE prophylaxis, DE 150 or 220 mg orally daily has demonstrated either superiority or noninferiority to subcutaneous enoxaparin once daily in most studies. However, one study failed to demonstrate noninferiority to subcutaneous enoxaparin dosed BID in the composite end point of VTE, and all-cause mortality. For VTE treatment, DE 150 mg BID orally was shown to be noninferior to warfarin in preventing recurrent events. For AF, DE 150 mg BID orally is superior to warfarin in the prevention of thromboembolism, whereas 110 mg BID is noninferior to warfarin. Pharmacoeconomic analyses performed in the United Kingdom and Ireland found that DE can be cost-saving compared with enoxaparin in the prevention of VTE. Adverse effects of DE reported in clinical studies include dyspepsia (12%-13%) and bleeding (minor bleeding: 6%-22%).

CONCLUSIONS

DE exhibited a safety profile and efficacy comparable to enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis; comparable safety profile and efficacy to warfarin for VTE treatment; and superiority (150 mg BID orally) in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism compared with warfarin in patients with AF. The relative ease of oral administration, no need for routine monitoring, and lack of significant drug interactions, may favor use of DE over other anticoagulants. However, there is no antidote for DE currently available.

A systematic review of Cochrane anticoagulation reviews

CONTEXT

I coauthored a published review of anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and published a review on the same topic in MedGenMed (now the Medscape Journal of Medicine). In contrast to the article in Medscape, the discussion and conclusions in the Cochrane review were altered appreciably during the review process. Consequently, I decided to critique all anticoagulation drug-related reviews and protocols in the Cochrane database with feedback letters concerning any issues of potential controversy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Using key words in the search engine of the Cochrane Reviews, I located reviews and protocols involving anticoagulant drugs. I critiqued each anticoagulation review and protocol and sent a total of 57 feedback letters to Cochrane concerning each publication to elicit a response/rebuttal from the authors.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Cochrane anticoagulation review editors acknowledged receipt of all letters. As of 12 months after receipt of my last letter, the Cochrane authors have replied to 13 of the 57 and agreed with many of my points. Two protocols were withdrawn after my feedback letters were acknowledged. The 58 Cochrane anticoagulation drug reviews, including mine, contained 9 categories of methodological errors (207 total instances) and 4 types of biases (18 total instances). This review of those Cochrane reviews suggests that the effectiveness of anticoagulants for 30 medical indications is questionable.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of anticoagulants for treatment and prophylaxis for 30 current medical indications should be reconsidered by the scientific community and medical regulatory agencies. At least 50,000 people per year worldwide have fatal bleeding due to anticoagulant treatment or prophylaxis for these indications.