Evaluation of Warfarin Reversal with 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate Compared to 3-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center

Ultra-Early Hemostatic Therapy for Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: An Updated Review

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is the second most common type of stroke, accounting for approximately 10-20% of all strokes, and is linked to severe neurological disability and death. Since the most accurate predictor of outcome in patients with ICH is hematoma volume, there is a great need for pharmacologic therapy that can reduce hematoma expansion and resultant mass effect and edema. This is especially critical within the ultra-early window of 3-4 hours after the presentation. Hemostatic therapies are exceptionally important for those patients taking antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications to reverse the effects of these medications and therefore prevent hematoma expansion. Furthermore, the recent publication of the 2023 Guideline for the Management of Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association, the first update to the guidelines since 2012, underscores the importance of optimizing anticoagulation reversal for this population. The purpose of this selective, nonsystematic review is to examine current literature regarding the use of hemostatic therapies in ICH, with particular attention paid to antiplatelet, anticoagulation, and antifibrinolytic therapies.

3-Factor versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrates for the Reversal of Vitamin K Antagonist-Associated Coagulopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Long-term anticoagulation is used worldwide to prevent or treat thrombotic events. Anticoagulant therapy using vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) is well established; however, anticoagulants carry an increased risk of potentially life-threatening bleeding. In cases of bleeding or need for surgery, patients require careful management, balancing the need for rapid anticoagulant reversal with risk of thromboembolic events. Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) replenish clotting factors and reverse VKA-associated coagulopathy. Two forms of PCC, 3-factor (3F-PCC) and 4-factor (4F-PCC), are available. Using PRISMA methodology, we systematically reviewed whether 4F-PCC is superior to 3F-PCC for the reversal of VKA-associated coagulopathy. Of the 392 articles identified, 48 full texts were reviewed, with 11 articles identified using criteria based on the PICOS format. Data were captured from 1,155 patients: 3F-PCC, n = 651; 4F-PCC, n = 504. ROBINS-I was used to assess bias. Nine studies showed international normalized ratio (INR) normalization to a predefined goal, ranging from ≤1.5 to ≤1.3, following PCC treatment. Meta-analysis of the data showed that 4F-PCC was favorable compared with 3F-PCC overall (odds ratio [OR]: 3.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.88-6.52, p < 0.0001) and for patients with a goal INR of ≤1.5 or ≤1.3 (OR: 3.45; 95% CI: 1.42-8.39, p = 0.006; OR: 3.25; 95% CI: 1.30-8.13, p = 0.01, respectively). However, heterogeneity was substantial (I 2 = 62%, I 2 = 70%, I 2 = 64%). Neither a significant difference in mortality (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.42-1.24, p = 0.23) nor in thromboembolisms was reported. These data suggest that 4F-PCC is better suited than 3F-PCC for the treatment of patients with VKA-associated coagulopathy, but further work is required for a definitive recommendation.

Comparison of 3-factor versus 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for emergent warfarin reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-022-00568-x.

How do you manage ANTICOagulant therapy in neurosurgery? The ANTICO survey of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery (SINCH)

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulant assumption is a concern in neurosurgical patient that implies a delicate balance between the risk of thromboembolism versus the risk of peri- and postoperative hemorrhage.

METHODS

We performed a survey among 129 different neurosurgical departments in Italy to evaluate practice patterns regarding the management of neurosurgical patients taking anticoagulant drugs. Furthermore, we reviewed the available literature, with the aim of providing a comprehensive but practical summary of current recommendations.

RESULTS

Our survey revealed that there is a lack of knowledge, mostly regarding the indication and the strategies of anticoagulant reversal in neurosurgical clinical practice. This may be due a lack of national and international guidelines for the care of anticoagulated neurosurgical patients, along with the fact that coagulation and hemostasis are not simple topics for a neurosurgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

To overcome this issue, establishment of hospital-wide policy concerning management of anticoagulated patients and developed in an interdisciplinary manner are strongly recommended.

Propensity score adjusted comparison of three-factor versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for emergent warfarin reversal: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Prothrombin Complex Concentrates (PCC) are prescribed for emergent warfarin reversal (EWR). The comparative effectiveness and safety among PCC products are not fully understood.

METHODS

Patients in an academic level one trauma center who received PCC3 or PCC4 for EWR were identified. Patient characteristics, PCC dose and time of dose, pre- and post-INR and time of measurement, fresh frozen plasma and vitamin K doses, and patient outcomes were collected. Patients whose pre-PCC International Normalized Ratio (INR) was > 6 h before PCC dose or the pre-post PCC INR was > 12 h were excluded. The primary outcome was achieving an INR ≤ 1.5 post PCC. Secondary outcomes were the change in INR over time, post PCC INR, thromboembolic events (TE), and death during hospital stay. Logistic regression modelled the primary outcome with and without a propensity score adjustment accounting for age, sex, actual body weight, dose, initial INR value, and time between INR measurements. Data are reported as median (IQR) or n (%) with p < 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were included (PCC3 = 57, PCC4 = 23). More PCC4 patients achieved goal INR (87.0% vs. 31.6%, odds ratio (OR) = 14.4, 95% CI: 3.80-54.93, p < 0.001). This result remained true after adjusting for possible confounders (AOR = 10.7, 95% CI: 2.17-51.24, p < 0.001). The post-PCC INR was lower in the PCC4 group (1.3 (1.3-1.5) vs. 1.7 (1.5-2.0)). The INR change was greater for PCC4 (2.3 (1.3-3.3) vs. 1.1 (0.6-2.0), p = 0.003). Death during hospital stay (p = 0.52) and TE (p = 1.00) were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

PCC4 was associated with a higher achievement of goal INR than PCC3. This relationship was observed in the unadjusted and propensity score adjusted results.

Inactivated Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate Dosing Practices for Reversal of Warfarin-Related Intracranial Hemorrhage

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Inactivated four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (I4F-PCC, Kcentra^®) has become an important agent for the urgent or emergent reversal of bleeding associated with vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin. There is recognized inter-institutional variability with the use of I4F-PCC, especially as it relates to dosing practices. We sought to characterize variations in I4F-PCC dosing practices and their impact on patient outcomes and describe overall real-world clinical practice surrounding I4F-PCC utilization in the context of the management of warfarin-related intracranial hemorrhage (ICH).

METHODS

This is a multicenter retrospective pragmatic registry study of adult patients admitted at a participating study site between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015, who received I4F-PCC for reversal of warfarin-related ICH. Practices around warfarin-related ICH reversal in context of I4F-PCC utilization are described, including repeat I4F-PCC dosing, adjunctive reversal agents, and dose rounding policies (i.e., rounding doses to nearest vial size vs preparing exact/unrounded doses). All research was approved by local human investigation committees at each institution.

RESULTS

Seventeen institutions contributed data on 528 patients to this registry. These institutions were primarily urban centers (74%), located in the southeast USA (47%), with Level 1 Trauma designation (79%), and with Comprehensive Stroke Center designation (74%). Most patients included in the study had sustained a non-traumatic ICH (68%), had a median admission GCS of 14 (IQR 7-15), and were receiving warfarin for atrial fibrillation (57.4%). There was substantial time latency between baseline INR and I4F-PCC (median 2.4 h, IQR 1.4-4.5 h). Most patients received adjunctive reversal agents, including vitamin K (89.5%) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) (31.9%). A smaller proportion (6.0%) of patients received repeat I4F-PCC dosing. The median ICU length of stay (LOS) was 3 days (IQR 2-7 days), median hospital LOS was 6 days (IQR 3-12 days), and overall mortality rate was 28.8%. For institutions rounding doses to the nearest vial size, the first post-I4F-PCC dose INR was statistically but not clinically significantly lower than for institutions without vial size dose rounding, with comparable degrees of INR reduction from baseline. No differences were observed between dose rounding cohorts in adverse effects, ICU or hospital LOS, modified Rankin score at discharge, or mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients received single doses of I4F-PCC, with adjunctive reversal agents and rounding doses to vial size. The time difference from baseline INR to factor product administration is a potential opportunity for process improvement in the management of warfarin-related ICH.

A Retrospective Comparison of 3-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate Products for Warfarin Reversal

Background and Purpose

Current guidelines suggest that 3-factor prothrombin complex concentrate is a possible alternative to 4-factor products for the emergent reversal of bleeding secondary to warfarin. While multiple observational studies have evaluated various forms of 3-factor prothrombin complex concentrate individually, no study has compared the efficacy of the 2 products. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of Bebulin™ and Profilnine™ for the emergent reversal of warfarin-associated major bleeding.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving both Bebulin™ and Profilnine™ at an urban, academic medical center with comprehensive stroke center designation and a neurosurgical center of excellence. All patients were treated at a single center that utilized a fixed, weight-based dosing protocol. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients in each group achieving a goal international normalization ratio of 1.4 or less.

Results

There was a significant difference in goal international normalization ratio achieved favoring Bebulin™ (85.5% vs 27.3%; P < .001) over Profilnine™. Median dose per kilogram of actual body weight was the same between the groups. When we assessed results by baseline™ international normalization ratio subgroup, more patients in the Bebulin™ group achieved goal when baseline values were 6 or less. No thrombotic events were documented in either group.

Conclusions

We found that patients treated with Bebulin™ experienced significantly higher rates of successful international normalization ratio reversal when compared to those who received Profilnine™. Further research is needed to determine the comparative efficacy between the 2 agents.

Three-Factor Versus Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for the Emergent Management of Warfarin-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) produce a more rapid and complete INR correction compared with 3-factor PCC in patients receiving warfarin. It is unknown if this improves clinical outcomes in the setting of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH).

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included patients presenting with warfarin-associated ICH reversed with either 4- or 3-factor PCC. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, discharge location, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital-free days, INR reversal, and thromboembolic (TE) events at 90 days. Each was analyzed using regression analysis. Continuous and binary outcomes were analyzed using linear and logistic regression, respectively, while ordinal regression was used for discharge location.

RESULTS

Of the 103 patients, 63 received 4-factor PCC. Median age was 79 years [interquartile intervals(IQI 73-84)], median presenting INR was 2.7 (2.2-3.3), and presenting ICH was intraparenchymal in 51% of patients. In-hospital and 30-day mortality were 25 and 35%, respectively. In-hospital mortality was greater among those who received 4-factor PCC, yet was not statistically significant (OR 2.2, 95% CI 0.59-9.4, p = 0.26), as having Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≤8 explained most of the difference (OR 48, 95% CI 14-219, p <0.001). The effect of 4-factor PCC was not statistically significant in any of the secondary analyses. Crude rates of TE events were higher in the 4-factor PCC group (19 vs. 10%), though not significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital mortality was not improved with the use of 4- versus 3-factor PCC in the emergent reversal of warfarin-associated ICH. Secondary clinical outcomes were similarly nonsignificant.

Prothrombin Complex Concentrates for Perioperative Vitamin K Antagonist and Non-vitamin K Anticoagulant Reversal

Vitamin K antagonist therapy is associated with an increased bleeding risk, and clinicians often reverse anticoagulation in patients who require emergency surgical procedures. Current guidelines for rapid anticoagulation reversal for emergency surgery recommend four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate and vitamin K coadministration. The authors reviewed the current evidence on prothrombin complex concentrate treatment for vitamin K antagonist reversal in the perioperative setting, focusing on comparative studies and in the context of intracranial hemorrhage and cardiac surgery. The authors searched Cochrane Library and PubMed between January 2008 and December 2017 and retrieved 423 English-language papers, which they then screened for relevance to the perioperative setting; they identified 36 papers to include in this review. Prothrombin complex concentrate therapy was consistently shown to reduce international normalized ratio rapidly and control bleeding effectively. In comparative studies with plasma, prothrombin complex concentrate use was associated with a greater proportion of patients achieving target international normalized ratios rapidly, with improved hemostasis. No differences in thromboembolic event rates were seen between prothrombin complex concentrate and plasma, with prothrombin complex concentrate also demonstrating a lower risk of fluid overload events. Overall, the studies the authors reviewed support current recommendations favoring prothrombin complex concentrate therapy in patients requiring vitamin K antagonist reversal before emergency surgery.

Prothrombin complex concentrate for vitamin K antagonist reversal in acute bleeding settings: efficacy and safety

Introduction: Current guidelines recommend the administration of prothrombin complex concentrate in combination with vitamin K for normalization of coagulation in patients presenting with vitamin K antagonist-associated major bleeding, but until recently no adequately powered comparative trials had been conducted to support these recommendations. In this article, the authors review the evidence from studies assessing prothrombin complex concentrate treatment in these patients. Areas covered: A PubMed search (spanning January 1900 to September 2018) was conducted using the following search terms: prothrombin complex concentrate* AND (warfarin or (vitamin K antagonist*)), and papers relevant to major hemorrhagic events were identified; results from studies that used a randomized controlled trial (RCT) or a prospective design are presented here. Overall, the identified studies support the current guideline recommendations and indicate that prothrombin complex concentrates have at least similar safety profiles to other treatment options, such as fresh frozen plasma and recombinant activated factor VII. Expert opinion: It is hoped that the results from studies discussed here will inform future guideline updates; however, local clinical practice may also occasionally act as a barrier to adoption of guideline recommendations. There is an urgent need for further RCTs/prospective trials directly comparing PCC and plasma administration in acute bleeding settings.

Three- versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the reversal of warfarin-induced bleeding

Objective:

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 3-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (3F-PCC) compared to 4-factor PCC (4F-PCC) in warfarin-associated bleeding.

Methods:

This multicenter, retrospective, cohort study analyzed data from patients admitted between May 2011 and October 2014 who received PCC for warfarin-associated bleeding. The primary outcome was the rate of international normalized ratio (INR) normalization, defined as an INR ≤1.3, after administration of 3F-PCC compared to 4F-PCC. Other variables of interest included the incidence of additional reversal agents, new thromboembolic events, and mortality.

Results:

A total of 134 patients were included in the analysis. The average dose of PCC administered was 24.6 ± 9.3 units/kg versus 36.3 ± 12.8 units/kg in the 3F-PCC and 4F-PCC groups, respectively, P < 0.001. Baseline INR in the 3F-PCC and 4F-PCC groups was 3.61 ± 2.3 and 6.87 ± 2.3, respectively P < 0.001. 4F-PCC had a higher rate of INR normalization at first INR check post-PCC administration compared to 3F-PCC (84.2% vs. 51.9%, P = 0.0001). Thromboembolic events, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and mortality were similar among both groups.

Conclusion:

The use of 4F-PCC leads to a more significant reduction in INR compared to 3F-PCC though no difference in mortality or length of stay was observed. Thromboembolism rates were similar among both groups.

Three- versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates for "factor-based" resuscitation in a porcine hemorrhagic shock model

BACKGROUND

Bleeding is a leading cause of preventable death after severe injury. Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) treat inborn coagulation disorders and reverse oral anticoagulants, but are proposed for use in "factor-based" resuscitation strategies. Few studies exist for this indication in acidosis, or that compare 3-factor PCC (3PCC) versus 4-factor PCC (4PCC) products. We aimed to assess and compare their safety and efficacy in a porcine model of severe hemorrhagic shock and coagulopathy.

METHODS

Twenty-five adult Yorkshire swine underwent 35% volume hemorrhage, ischemia-reperfusion injury, and protocolized crystalloid resuscitation. Seventeen animals were randomized at 4 hours after model creation to receive a 45-IU/kg dose of either 3PCC or 4PCC. An additional eight animals received autologous plasma transfusion before 4PCC to better characterize response to PCC. Individual factor levels were drawn at 4 hours and 6 hours.

RESULTS

The model created significant acidosis with mean pH of 7.21 and lactate of 9.6 mmol/L. After PCC, 66.7% of 3PCC animals and 25% of 4PCC animals (regardless of plasma administration) developed consumptive coagulopathy. The animals that developed consumptive coagulopathy had manifested the "lethal triad" with lower temperatures (36.3°C vs. 37.8°C), increased acidosis (pH, 7.14 vs. 7.27; base excess, -12.1 vs. -6.5 mEq/L), and worse coagulopathy (prothrombin time, 17.1 vs. 14.6 seconds; fibrinogen, 87.9 vs. 124.1 mg/dL) (all p < 0.05). In the absence of a consumptive coagulopathy, 3PCC and 4PCC improved individual clotting factors with transient improvement of prothrombin time, but there was significant depletion of fibrinogen and platelets with no lasting improvement of coagulopathy.

CONCLUSION

PCC failed to correct coagulopathy and was associated with fibrinogen and platelet depletion. Of greater concern, PCC administration resulted in consumptive coagulopathy in the more severely ill animals. The incidence of consumptive coagulopathy was markedly increased with 3PCC versus 4PCC, and these products should be used with caution in this setting.

Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Vitamin K Antagonist-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage - Global Evidence and the Japanese Perspective

Patients receiving vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are at increased risk of bleeding. Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in this population, and is a particular concern among Japanese clinicians, given reports of an elevated risk of this bleeding type in patients of Asian ethnicity. Patients with VKA-associated ICH require rapid international normalized ratio (INR) reversal, and treatment guidelines suggest the use of prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) or plasma for this purpose. Although European and US guidelines recommend PCCs for the treatment of VKA-associated major bleeding, they do not make a specific recommendation in the setting of ICH, owing to the lack of comparative evidence. In contrast, Japanese guidelines recommend the use of PCCs rather than plasma for VKA reversal in patients with ICH; however, these agents are not currently licensed in Japan for this indication. Here we review the available evidence on the use of PCCs for the treatment of VKA-associated ICH, both globally and specifically in Japanese settings. Overall, the evidence reviewed here supports the use of PCC for rapid VKA reversal in these patients.

3-Factor Versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Warfarin Reversal in Severe Bleeding: A Multicenter, Retrospective, Propensity-Matched Pilot Study

Current guidelines recommend 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4PCC) for emergent reversal of bleeding secondary to warfarin. While current research has demonstrated superiority of 4PCC over plasma, direct comparisons with 3-factor PCC (3PCC) are lacking. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of 3PCC and 4PCC. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who received PCC at one of four medical centers. All patients in the 3PCC group were treated at one center that utilizes a fixed, weight-based dosing protocol. After evaluation of all patients meeting inclusion criteria, propensity-score matching was used to adjust for differences in treatment characteristics. There was no difference in the primary outcome of INR ≤ 1.4 between 3PCC and 4PCC in both the unmatched (85.7 vs. 90.6 %; p = 0.37) and matched (84.2 vs. 92.1 %; p = 0.48) analyses. There was a significant difference in goal INR achieved favoring 4PCC (56.3 vs 90.0 %; p < 0.02) when baseline INR > 4.0. A total of three thrombotic events were documented, all in the 4PCC group. We found no difference in the rate of INR reversal in those treated with 3PCC and 4PCC. However, those with a baseline INR > 4.0 may experience more successful INR reversal with 4PCC.

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for life-threatening bleeds or emergent surgery: A retrospective evaluation

PURPOSE

Previous trials investigating usage of four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) excluded patients with various thrombotic risk factors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 4F-PCC in a real-world setting based on an institutional protocol that does not have strict exclusion criteria.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of adult patients who received 4F-PCC. The primary outcome was a confirmed thromboembolism within 14 days after 4F-PCC administration. Secondary outcomes included international normalized ratio (INR) correction to <1.5 at first draw and incidence of INR rebound for patients undergoing reversal of warfarin and hemostatic effectiveness for patients experiencing a bleed.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients received 4F-PCC. Sixty-three (67.7%) were reversed for bleeding and 30 (32.3%) for surgery. Eleven patients (11.8%) developed a thromboembolism within 14 days. The median (interquartile range) time to event was 5 (2-7) days. Significant risk factors were heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (P= .01) and major surgery within 14 days (P= .02), as well as the presence of >6 thrombotic risk factors (P= .01). For patients post-warfarin reversal, 45/63 (71.4%) achieved INR correction at first draw, 55/63 (87.3%) achieved INR correction within 24 hours, and 14/55 (25.5%) experienced INR rebound. Of these 14 patients, 8 (57.1%) did not receive concomitant vitamin K.

CONCLUSIONS

4F-PCC was associated with a notable thromboembolic risk. All patient-specific risk factors should be considered prior to administration. 4F-PCC remains a useful agent for warfarin reversal. Lack of concomitant vitamin K may contribute to INR rebound.

Fresh frozen plasma versus prothrombin complex concentrate in patients with intracranial haemorrhage related to vitamin K antagonists (INCH): a randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Haematoma expansion is a major cause of mortality in intracranial haemorrhage related to vitamin K antagonists (VKA-ICH). Normalisation of the international normalised ratio (INR) is recommended, but optimum haemostatic management is controversial. We assessed the safety and efficacy of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) versus prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) in patients with VKA-ICH.

METHODS

We did an investigator-initiated, multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial. Patients aged at least 18 years with VKA-ICH who presented within 12 h after symptom onset with an INR of at least 2·0 were randomly assigned (1:1) by numbered sealed envelopes to 20 mL/kg of intravenous FFP or 30 IU/kg of intravenous four-factor PCC within 1 h after initial cerebral CT scan. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with INR 1·2 or lower within 3 h of treatment initiation. Masking of treatment was not possible, but the primary analysis was observer masked. Analyses were done using a treated-as-randomised approach. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2008-005653-37, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00928915.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 7, 2009, and Jan 9, 2015, 54 patients were randomly assigned (26 to FFP and 28 to PCC) and 50 received study drug (23 FFP and 27 PCC). The trial was terminated on Feb 6, 2015, after inclusion of 50 patients after a safety analysis because of safety concerns. Two (9%) of 23 patients in the FFP group versus 18 (67%) of 27 in the PCC group reached the primary endpoint (adjusted odds ratio 30·6, 95% CI 4·7-197·9; p=0·0003). 13 patients died: eight (35%) of 23 in the FFP group (five from haematoma expansion, all occurring within 48 h after symptom onset) and five (19%) of 27 in the PCC group (none from haematoma expansion), the first of which occurred on day 5 after start of treatment. Three thromboembolic events occurred within 3 days (one in the FFP group and two in the PCC group), and six after day 12 (one and five). 43 serious adverse events (20 in the FFP group and 23 in the PCC group) occurred in 26 patients. Six serious adverse events were judged to be FFP related (four cases of haematoma expansion, one anaphylactic reaction, and one ischaemic stroke) and two PCC related (ischaemic stroke and pulmonary embolism).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with VKA-related intracranial hemorrhage, four-factor PCC might be superior to FFP with respect to normalising the INR, and faster INR normalisation seemed to be associated with smaller haematoma expansion. Although an effect of PCC on clinical outcomes remains to be shown, our data favour the use of PCC over FFP in intracranial haemorrhage related to VKA.

FUNDING

Octapharma.