Predictive value of the Kuijer score for bleeding and other adverse in-hospital events in patients with venous thromboembolism

Risk Scores in Venous Thromboembolism Guidelines of ESC, ACCP, and ASH: An Updated Review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Risk scores associated with VTE have been widely used in clinical practice. Among numerous scores published, those included in guidelines are usually typical risk scores which have been extensively validated and globally recognized. This review provides an updated overview of the risk scores associated with VTE endorsed by 3 guidelines which are highly recognized in the field of VTE including the European Society of Cardiology, American College of Chest Physicians, and American Society of Hematology, focusing on the development, modification, validation, and comparison of these scores, to provide a comprehensive and updated understanding of all the classic risk scores associated with VTE to medical readers including but not limited to cardiologists, pulmonologists, hematologists, intensivists, physicians, surgeons, and researchers. Although each score recommended by these guidelines was more or less validated, there may still be room for further improvement. It may still be necessary to seek simpler, more practical, and more universally applicable VTE-related risk scores in the future.

Perioperative Anticoagulation in Patients with Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is a paucity of evidence for managing perioperative anticoagulation in patients with cancer. This review aims to provide clinicians who provide care for patients with cancer an overview of the available information and strategies needed to provide optimal care in a perioperative setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is new evidence available around the management of perioperative anticoagulation in patients with cancer. The new literature and guidance were analyzed and summarized in this review. Management of perioperative anticoagulation in individuals with cancer is a challenging clinical dilemma. The approach to managing anticoagulation requires clinicians to review both disease and treatment specific patient factors that can contribute to both thrombotic and bleed risks. A thorough patient-specific assessment is essential in ensuring patients with cancer receive appropriate care in the perioperative setting.

Mansoor's Self-Report Tool for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment predicts adverse in-hospital events in patients with pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening acute disease accompanied by high morbidity and mortality. Regarding hospitalizations of patients with PE, risk stratification of these patients is crucial. Thus, risk stratification tools like risk scores are of key interest.

METHODS

The nationwide German inpatient sample of the years 2005-2018 was used for this present analysis. Hospitalized PE patients were stratified according to Mansoor's Self-Report Tool for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment class, and the performance of this score was evaluated to predict adverse in-hospital events.

RESULTS

Overall, 1 174 196 hospitalizations of PE patients (53.5% females; 56.4% ≥70 years) were registered in Germany between 2005 and 2018. According to the Mansoor's self-report tool for cardiovascular risk assessment, 346 126 (29.5%) PE patients were classified as high risk. Higher Mansoor's Self-Report Tool for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment class was predictive for in-hospital death (OR 1.129 [95%CI 1.117-1.141], P < 0.001), shock (OR 1.117 [95%CI 1.095-1.140], P < 0.001), cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR 1.109 [95%CI 1.092-1.126], P < 0.001), right ventricular dysfunction (OR 1.039 [95%CI 1.030-1.048], P < 0.001), intracerebral bleeding (OR 1.316 [95%CI 1.275-1.358], P < 0.001), and gastro-intestinal bleeding (OR 1.316 [95%CI 1.275-1.358], P < 0.001). Systemic thrombolysis was not associated with lower in-hospital mortality in high-risk class (OR 5.139 [95%CI 4.961-5.323], P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prognostic performance of the Mansoor's Self-Report Tool for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment for risk stratification of PE patients was poor and not able to identify those PE patients, who might benefit from systemic thrombolysis. However, the Mansoor's Self-Report Tool for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment was moderately helpful to identify PE patients at higher risk for bleeding events.

Management of bleeding risk in patients who receive anticoagulant therapy for venous thromboembolism: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Predictive and Diagnostic Variables in Thrombotic Disease

Patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) require anticoagulant therapy to prevent recurrent VTE and death, which exposes them to an inherent increased risk of bleeding. Identification of patients at high risk of bleeding, and mitigating this risk, is an essential component of the immediate and long-term therapeutic management of VTE. The bleeding risk can be estimated by either implicit judgment, weighing individual predictors (clinical variables or biomarkers), or by risk prediction tools developed for this purpose. Management of bleeding risk in clinical practice is, however, far from standardized. International guidelines are contradictory and lack clear and consistent guidance on the optimal management of bleeding risk. This report of the ISTH subcommittee on Predictive and Diagnostic Variables in Thrombotic Disease summarizes the evidence on the prediction of bleeding in VTE patients. We systematically searched the literature and identified 34 original studies evaluating either predictors or risk prediction models for prediction of bleeding risk on anticoagulation in VTE patients. Based on this evidence, we provide recommendations for the standardized management of bleeding risk in VTE patients.

In Search of the Appropriate Anticoagulant-Associated Bleeding Risk Assessment Model for Cancer-Associated Thrombosis Patients

Simple Summary

Patients with venous thromboembolism events in the context of cancer should receive anticoagulants as long as the cancer is active. Therefore, a tailor-made anticoagulation strategy should rely on an individualized assessment of the risks of recurrent venous thromboembolism and anticoagulant-associated bleeding. No existing risk assessment model for anticoagulant-associated bleeding risk has been validated for cancer-associated thrombosis. To obtain a better risk assessment model to assess anticoagulant-associated bleeding risk in cancer-associated thrombosis patients, we deemed it necessary to answer questions related to how and when to assess anticoagulant-associated bleeding risk as well as what factors to assess for which patients.

Abstract

Patients with venous thromboembolism events (VTE) in the context of cancer should receive anticoagulants as long as the cancer is active. Therefore, a tailor-made anticoagulation strategy should rely on an individualized risk assessment model (RAM) of recurrent VTE and anticoagulant-associated bleeding. The aim of this review is to investigate the applicability of the currently available RAMs for anticoagulant-associated bleeding after VTE in the CAT population and to provide new insights on how we can succeed in developing a new anticoagulant-associated bleeding RAM for the current medical care of CAT patients. A systematic search for peer-reviewed publications was performed in PubMed. Studies, including systematic reviews, were eligible if they comprised patients with VTE and used a design for developing a prediction model, score, or other prognostic tools for anticoagulant-associated bleeding during anticoagulant treatment. Out of 15 RAMs, just the CAT-BLEED was developed for CAT patients and none of the presented RAMs developed for the VTE general population were externally validated in a population of CAT patients. The current review illustrates the limitations of the available RAMs for anticoagulant-associated bleeding in CAT patients. The development of a RAM for bleeding risk assessment in patients with CAT is warranted.

Risk Factors for Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with Paralysis and Deep Venous Thrombosis

Background. Venous thromboembolism is a frequent complication and an important cause of death in patients with paralysis. We aimed to investigate predictors of pulmonary embolism (PE) and the impact of PE on the survival of patients with paralysis in comparison to those with deep venous thrombosis or thrombophlebitis (DVT). Methods: Patients were selected by screening the German nationwide inpatient sample (2005–2017) for paralysis, and were stratified for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and the VTE-sub-entity PE (ICD-code I26). Impact of PE on mortality and predictors for PE were analyzed. Results: Overall, 7,873,769 hospitalizations of patients with paralysis were recorded in Germany 2005–2017, of whom 1.6% had VTE and 7.0% died. While annual hospitalizations increased (2005: 520,357 to 2017: 663,998) (β 12,421 (95% CI 10,807 to 14,034), p < 0.001), in-hospital mortality decreased from 7.5% to 6.7% (β −0.08% (95% CI −0.10% to −0.06%), p < 0.001). When focusing on 82,558 patients with paralysis hospitalized due to VTE (51.8% females; 58.3% aged ≥ 70 years) in 2005–2017, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in patients with paralysis and PE than in those with DVT only (23.8% vs. 6.3%, p < 0.001). Cancer (OR 2.18 (95% CI 2.09–2.27), p < 0.001), heart failure (OR 1.83 (95% CI 1.76–1.91), p < 0.001), COPD (OR 1.63 (95% CI 1.53–1.72), p < 0.001) and obesity (OR 1.42 (95% CI 1.35–1.50), p < 0.001) were associated with PE. PE (OR 4.28 (95% CI 4.07–4.50), p < 0.001) was a strong predictor of in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: In Germany, annual hospitalizations of patients with paralysis increased in 2005–2017, in whom VTE and especially PE substantially affected in-hospital mortality. Cancer, heart failure, COPD, obesity and acute paraplegia were risk factors of PE.