Prothrombin complex concentrate for perioperative reversal of vitamin K antagonist treatment in bleeding and non-bleeding patients requiring acute surgical intervention

Pro-coagulant haemostatic factors for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in people without haemophilia

BACKGROUND

Some hospital patients may be at risk of or may present with major bleeding. Abnormalities of clotting (coagulation) are often recorded in these people, and the traditional management has been with transfusions of blood components, either to prevent bleeding (prophylactic) or to treat bleeding (therapeutic). There is growing interest in the use of targeted therapies with specific pro-coagulant haemostatic (causing bleeding to stop and to keep blood within a damaged blood vessel) factor concentrates in place of plasma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and safety of pro-coagulant haemostatic factors and factor concentrates in the prevention and treatment of bleeding in people without haemophilia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2018, issue 3), MEDLINE (from 1948), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1938), PubMed (publications in process to 18 April 2018), PROSPERO, Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), LILACS (from 1980), IndMED (from 1985), KoreaMed (from 1934), Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index (from 1990) and ongoing trial databases to 18 April 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that compared intravenous administration of a pro-coagulant haemostatic factor concentrate, either with placebo, current best or standard treatment, or another pro-coagulant haemostatic factor concentrate for prevention or treatment of bleeding. There was no restriction on the types of participants. We excluded studies of desmopressin, tranexamic acid and aminocaproic acid and use of pro-coagulant haemostatic factors for vitamin K over-anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 31 RCTs with 2392 participants and 22 ongoing trials. There were 13 therapeutic RCTs that randomised 1057 participants (range from 20 to 249 participants) and 18 prophylactic trials that randomised 1335 participants (range 20 to 479 participants). The pro-coagulant haemostatic factor concentrate was fibrinogen in 23 trials, Factor XIII in seven trials and pro-thrombin complex concentrates (PCC) in one trial.Seventeen trials had industrial funding or support, eight studies either did not declare their funding or were unclear about their source of funding and six studies declared non-industrial funding sources.Certainty in the evidence and included study biasOur certainty in the evidence, using GRADE criteria, ranged from very low to high across all outcomes. We assessed most outcomes as being of low certainty. Risks of bias were a concern in many of the RCTs; randomisation methodology was unclear in 15 RCTs, with allocation concealment unclear in 14 RCTs and at high risk of bias in five RCTs. The blinding status of outcome assessors was unclear in 13 RCTs and at high risk of bias in five RCTs, although most outcomes in these trials were objective and not prone to observer bias. Study personnel were often unblinded or insufficient information was available to assess their level of blinding (five RCTs were at unclear risk and seven at high risk of bias).Primary outcomesAll-cause mortality was reported by 21 RCTs, arterial thromboembolic events by 22 RCTs, and venous thromboembolic events by 21 RCTs.Fibrinogen concentrate: prophylactic trials with inactive comparator (nine RCTs)The trials had heterogeneous clinical settings and outcome time points, so we did not pool the data. Compared to placebo, there was no evidence that prophylactic fibrinogen concentrate reduced all-cause mortality (4 RCTs; 248 participants). Compared to inactive comparators there was low- to moderate-quality evidence that prophylactic fibrinogen concentrate did not increase the risk of arterial or venous thromboembolic complications (7 RCTs; 398 participants).Fibrinogen concentrate: prophylactic trials with active comparator (two RCTs)There was no mortality or incidence of thromboembolic events in these two RCTs (with 57 participants).Fibrinogen concentrate: therapeutic trials with inactive comparator (eight RCTs)The trials had heterogeneous surgical settings and outcome time points, so we pooled data for subgroups only. Compared to an inactive comparator, there was no evidence (quality ranging from low to high) that fibrinogen concentrate reduced all-cause mortality in actively bleeding participants (7 RCTs; 724 participants). Compared to inactive comparators there was no evidence that the use of fibrinogen concentrate in active bleeding increased arterial (7 RCTs; 607 participants) or venous (6 RCTs; 562 participants) thromboembolic events.Fibrinogen concentrate: therapeutic trials with active comparator (four RCTs)We did not pool the outcome data, as they were not measured at comparable time points. Compared to other active pro-coagulant agents, there was no evidence (very low to moderate quality) that fibrinogen concentrate reduced all-cause mortality in actively bleeding participants (4 RCTs; 220 participants). There was no evidence that fibrinogen concentrate increased the risk of arterial (3 RCTs; 126 participants) or venous (4 RCTs; 220 participants) thromboembolic events.FactorXIII: Prophylactic trials with inactive comparator (six trials)The trials were heterogeneous in their surgical settings and time points for outcome analysis, so we pooled data for subgroups only. Compared to an inactive comparator, there was no evidence that prophylactic Factor XIII reduced all-cause mortality (5 RCTs; 414 participants). There was no evidence (very low to low quality) of a difference in the arterial or venous event rate between Factor XIII and inactive comparators (4 trials; 354 participants).FactorXIII: therapeutic trials with inactive comparator (one trial)There was no mortality or incidence of thromboembolic events in this trial.Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC): prophylactic trials with inactive comparator (one trial)There was no evidence (moderate quality) that PCC reduced all-cause mortality (1 trial; 78 participants). No thromboembolic complications were reported in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The paucity of good-quality comparable evidence precludes the drawing of conclusions for clinical practice. Further research is required to determine the risk-to-benefit ratio of these interventions. The sample sizes of future RCTs would need to be greatly increased to detect a reduction in mortality or thromboembolic events between treatment arms. To improve consistency in outcome reporting, the development of core outcome sets is essential and may help address a number of the limitations identified in this review.

Prothrombin complex concentrate for reversal of vitamin K antagonist treatment in bleeding and non-bleeding patients

BACKGROUND

Treatment with vitamin K antagonists is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Reversal therapy with prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) is used increasingly and is recommended in the treatment of patients with bleeding complications undertaking surgical interventions, as well as patients at high risk of bleeding. Evidence is lacking regarding indication, dosing, efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the benefits and harms of PCC compared with fresh frozen plasma in the acute medical and surgical setting involving vitamin K antagonist-treated bleeding and non-bleeding patients. We investigated various outcomes and predefined subgroups and performed sensitivity analysis. We examined risks of bias and applied trial sequential analyses (TSA) to examine the level of evidence, and we prepared a 'Risk of bias' table to test the quality of the evidence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to 1 May 2013: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE (Ovid SP); EMBASE (Ovid SP); International Web of Science; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (via BIREME); the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database; advanced Google and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). We applied a systematic and sensitive search strategy to identify relevant randomized clinical trials and imposed no language or date restrictions. We adapted our MEDLINE search strategy for searches in all other databases. We reran the search in October 2014 and found one potential new study of interest. We added this study to a list of 'Studies awaiting classification', and we will incorporate this study into the formal review findings at the time of the review update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of publication status, date of publication, blinding status, outcomes published or language. We contacted investigators and study authors to request relevant data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently abstracted data and resolved disagreements by discussion. Our primary outcome measures were 'overall mortality longest follow-up' and 'overall 28-day mortality'. We performed subgroup analyses to assess the effects of PCC in adults in terms of various clinical and physiological outcomes. We presented pooled estimates of the effects of interventions on dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs), and on continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of bias by assessing trial methodological components and risk of random error through TSA.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs with a total of 453 participants and determined that none of these trials had overall low risk of bias. We found six ongoing trials from which we were unable to retrieve further data. Three trials provided data on mortality. Meta-analysis showed no statistical effect on overall mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.33; very low quality of evidence). We were unable to associate use of PCC with the number of complications probably related to the intervention (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.09; very low quality of evidence). Lack of transfusion data and apparent differences in study design prevented review authors from finding a beneficial effect of PCC in reducing the volume of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfused to reverse the effect of vitamin K antagonist treatment. The number of new occurrences of transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) did not seem to be associated with the use of PCC (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43; very low quality of evidence). Still, the included studies demonstrate the possibility of equally reversing vitamin K-induced coagulopathy using PCC without the need for transfusion of FFP. No effect on other predefined outcomes was observed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the four included RCTs, use of prothrombin complex concentrate does not appear to reduce mortality or transfusion requirements but demonstrates the possibility of reversing vitamin K-induced coagulopathy without the need for transfusion of fresh frozen plasma. All included trials have high risk of bias and are underpowered to detect mortality, benefit or harm. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity is high, and definitions of clinically important outcomes such as adverse events are highly dissimilar between trials. Only weak observational evidence currently supports the use of PCC in vitamin K antagonist-treated bleeding and non-bleeding patients, and the current systematic review of RCTs does not support the routine use of PCC over FFP. Additional high-quality research is urgently needed.