Plasma anti-FXa level as a surrogate marker of the adequacy of thromboprophylaxis in critically ill patients: A systematic review

A retrospective multicenter cohort study of the association between anti-Factor Xa values and death, thromboembolism, and bleeding in patients with critical COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Patients with critical COVID-19 have a high risk of thromboembolism, but intensified thromboprophylaxis has not been proven beneficial. The activity of low-molecular-weight heparins can be monitored by measuring anti-Factor Xa. We aimed to study the association between anti-Factor Xa values and death, thromboembolism, and bleeding in patients with critical COVID-19.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study included adult patients with critical COVID-19 admitted to an intensive care unit at three Swedish hospitals between March 2020 and May 2021 with at least one valid peak and/or trough anti-Factor Xa value. Within the peak and trough categories, patients' minimum, median, and maximum values were determined. Logistic regressions with splines were used to assess associations.

RESULTS

In total, 408 patients had at least one valid peak and/or trough anti-Factor Xa measurement, resulting in 153 patients with peak values and 300 patients with trough values. Lower peak values were associated with thromboembolism for patients' minimum (p = 0.01), median (p = 0.005) and maximum (p = 0.001) values. No association was seen between peak values and death or bleeding. Higher trough values were associated with death for median (p = 0.03) and maximum (p = 0.002) values and with both bleeding (p = 0.01) and major bleeding (p = 0.02) for maximum values, but there were no associations with thromboembolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Measuring anti-Factor Xa activity may be relevant for administrating low-molecular-weight heparin to patients with critical COVID-19. Lower peak values were associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism, and higher trough values were associated with an increased risk of death and bleeding. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was retrospectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05256524, February 24, 2022.

Anti-factor Xa Activity Is Not Associated With Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Enoxaparin for Thromboprophylaxis: A Retrospective Observational Study

Background

Anti-factor Xa activity has been suggested as a surrogate parameter for judging the effectiveness of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparins in critically ill patients. However, this practice is not supported by evidence associating low anti-factor Xa activity with venous thromboembolism.

Methods

We performed a retrospective observational study including 1,352 critically ill patients admitted to 6 intensive care units of the Medical University of Vienna, Austria between 01/2015 and 12/2018. Included patients received prophylactically dosed enoxaparin (≤100 IU/kg body weight per day). We analyzed median peak, 12-h trough and 24-h trough anti-factor Xa activity per patient and compared anti-factor Xa activity between patients without vs. with venous thromboembolic events.

Results

19 patients (1.4%) developed a total of 22 venous thromboembolic events. We did not observe a difference of median (IQR) anti-factor Xa activity between patients without venous thromboembolism [peak 0.22 IU/mL (0.14–0.32); 12-h trough 0.1 IU/mL (<0.1–0.17), 24-h trough < 0.1 IU/mL (<0.1– <0.1)] vs. patients with venous thromboembolism [peak 0.33 IU/mL (0.14–0.34); 12-h trough 0.12 IU/mL (<0.1–0.26); 24-h trough < 0.1 IU/mL (<0.1–<0.1)].

Conclusion

Patients who developed venous thromboembolism had anti-factor Xa activities comparable to those who did not suffer from venous thromboembolism.

Comparison of doses of heparin for venous thromboembolism and bleeding in pregnant women

The evaluation criteria for dosage of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for pregnant women at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) remain unclear. A retrospective study was performed to investigate the relative appropriate LMWH administration strategy and dosage for pregnant women at risk of VTE. 219 pregnant women with perinatal and postpartum VTE were reviewed and divided into group A (fixed dose group: n=73, 5000 IU dalteparin daily for all women), group B (weight group: n=73, 2500 IU dalteparin daily for women less than 50 kg; 5000 IU dalteparin daily for women more than 50 kg), and group C (anti-factor Xa (FXa) + weight group: n=73, 5000 IU once daily for women less than 50 kg; 7500 IU once daily for women weighing 50-80 kg; 10,000 IU once daily for women weighing over 80 kg). Further dose administration was adjusted according to peak anti-FXa level, maintaining the peak at the 0.5-1.0 IU/mL range. Women in group C presented lower incidence of VTE and other pregnancy complications than group A and group B. Adjusting the dosage of LMWH according to both weight and anti-FXa level of pregnant women not only prevented VTE but also reduced the risk of postpartum hemorrhage induced by LMWH administration. In addition, adjusting the dose of LMWH according to anti-FXa level and body weight also affected the recurrence of VTE and the occurrence of postpartum hemorrhage in pregnant women.

Monitoring of Enoxaparin during Hemodialysis Covered by Regional Citrate Anticoagulation in Acute Kidney Injury: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background: Current guidelines recommend the monitoring of anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) levels to avoid an accumulation of low-molecular-weight heparins in patients with acute kidney injury, but there is no evidence on how to proceed with such monitoring during continuous renal replacement therapy. Against this background, we investigated the potential accumulation of enoxaparin administered subcutaneously for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in critically ill patients during continuous renal replacement therapy covered by regional citrate anticoagulation. Methods: Anti-Xa levels were measured at baseline (≤12 h before renal replacement therapy) and on three consecutive days (A to C) when enoxaparin had reached trough levels. Supplementary testing included modified assays of rotational thromboelastometry known to be highly sensitive for low-molecular-weight heparins. Results: The 16 men and 13 women included were adults comparable in age, body mass index, thromboembolism risk assessment, and clinical severity of the disease. Throughout the four examinations, the median trough levels of anti-Xa remained below the detection limit of the test (<0.1 IU mL⁻¹), with interquartile ranges of <0.1 to 0.14 IU mL⁻¹ at baseline and <0.1 to 0.16 IU mL⁻¹ on days A/B/C. All rotational thromboelastometry parameters of clot initiation and clot formation dynamics did not significantly change from baseline to day C. Conclusions: Neither anti-Xa levels nor modified assays of rotational thromboelastometry revealed any accumulation of enoxaparin administered for thromboprophylaxis during continuous renal replacement therapy covered by regional citrate anticoagulation. Although generally recommended in patients with acute kidney injury, monitoring of anti-Xa levels should be questioned in this defined setting.

Anti-Xa levels in critically ill children receiving enoxaparin for venothromboembolism prophylaxis

Venothrombolism (VTE) prophylaxis is increasingly utilized in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Enoxaparin, a low-molecular weight heparin, is frequently used for this purpose. Enoxaparin can also be used for therapeutic anticoagulation in cases of known thrombus. In such cases, monitoring involves obtaining serum anti- Xa levels with a target value of 0.5-1 units/mL. No monitoring recommendations currently exist for enoxaparin when intended for pediatric VTE prophylaxis. We hypothesize that a clinically important number of patients on VTE prophylaxis with enoxaparin have serum anti-Xa levels consistent with values targeted for therapeutic anticoagulation. We found that over 20% of patients on VTE prophylaxis with enoxaparin had serum anti-Xa levels consistent with true therapeutic anticoagulation (anti-Xa level 0.5-1 units/mL) during their enoxaparin course and 5% achieved values of supratherapeutic anticoagulation (anti-Xa level >1 units/mL). Serum anti-Xa level did not correlate with once versus twice daily dosing, body mass index (BMI), or creatinine level. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) was found to have a positive odds ratio for an anti-Xa level ≥ 0.5 units/mL. We believe that this incidence of unintended therapeutic anticoagulation indicates a clinically significant number and therefore routine anti-Xa evaluation while on VTE prophylaxis is warranted within our population.

Utility of coagulation analyses to assess thromboprophylaxis with dalteparin in intensive care unit patients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of coagulation analyses to assess thromboprophylaxis with dalteparin in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

Prospective observational study of ICU patients receiving dalteparin prophylaxis at Oslo University Hospital in Norway. Trough and peak antithrombin, protein C, anti-factor Xa activity (aFXa), d-dimer, thromboelastography, calibrated automated thrombogram and microparticles were analysed. Levels were compared in patients with and without venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI) with use of renal replacement therapy (RRT) and variable dalteparin dose.

RESULTS

Among 50 included patients (76% male, mean age 62 years) five (10%) developed VTE and eight (16%) major bleeding. Median through aFXa level was 0.03 (0.02-0.05) IU/mL, and 48 (96%) of patients were within and two (4%) above target range. Peak aFXa level was 0.21 (0.13-0.29) IU/mL, the number of patients below, within and above prophylactic range were 21 (42%), 25 (50%) and four (8%). Peak aFXa levels were similar in patients with and without VTE (0.18 vs 0.21 IU/L, P = .72), major bleeding (0.22 vs 0.21 IU/mL, P = .38) and AKI with RRT (0.18 vs 0.24, P = .13), but lower in patients receiving dalteparin 5000 IU od compared to 7500 IU od (0.19 vs 0.30 IU/mL, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive care unit patients receiving dalteparin prophylaxis had half of patients within prophylactic peak aFXa target range. Peak aFXa levels was affected by administered dalteparin dose, but not presence of VTE, major bleeding or AKI with RRT.

Continuous intravenous infusion of enoxaparin controls thrombin formation more than standard subcutaneous administration in critically ill patients. A sub-study of the ENOKSI thromboprophylaxis RCT

INTRODUCTION

Standard subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) thromboprophylaxis yields low anti-factor Xa activity in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of the study was to assess coagulation status in ICU patients randomized to receive enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis either as a standard subcutaneous bolus (SCB) or continuous intravenous infusion (CII) for 3 consecutive days after the initiation of LMWH thromboprophylaxis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-eight patients were studied by conventional coagulation variables: prothrombin fragment F 1+2 (F 1+2) representing FXa inhibition and antithrombin (AT). Additionally, 18 patients were analyzed by the thrombin generation assay-calibrated automated thrombogram (TGA-CAT). Blood samples were collected before the initiation of the LMWH thromboprophylaxis (ie, baseline), at 51 h, and at 72 h.

RESULTS

At beginning, no differences in coagulation biomarkers were observed. The levels of F 1+2 were significantly lower at 51 and 72 h in the CII group than in the SCB group. AT levels increased during the follow-up in the CII group, unlike in the SCB group. TGA-CAT was poor in some patients overall. In a subset of patients at 51 h lag time (4.3 vs 7.5 min, respectively, P < 0.05) and time to peak (7.7 vs 14.3 min, respectively, P < 0.05) were prolonged in the SCB group. At 72 h, however, peak thrombin was lower in the CII than in the SCB group: 271 vs 356 nM, respectively (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis administered by CII inhibited more prominently FXa and preserved better the AT level, compared with standard subcutaneous care.

Venous thromboembolism in burns patients: Are we underestimating the risk and underdosing our prophylaxis?

BACKGROUND

Burns patients exhibit all factors of Virchow's triad and are thus at high theoretical risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). At our tertiary referral burns unit, a standard dose of low molecular weight heparin, which acts primarily by inhibiting Factor Xa, is given for thromboprophylaxis. However, the pharmacokinetics of enoxaparin are altered following a burn injury, and thus burns patients are likely underdosed on their thromboprophylaxis. The objectives of this study were to determine the incidence and risk factors for VTE among burns patients at the Victorian Adult Burns Service (VABS) and to determine the adequacy of the current enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis regimen through measurement of anti-factor Xa (AFXa) levels and comparison with established reference ranges.

METHODS

This study consisted of two parts. In part 1, the Burns Registry of Australia and New Zealand (BRANZ) was reviewed for cases of VTE in burns patients admitted to the VABS from 2013 - 2018. Part 2 was a prospective study that determined peak and trough AFXa levels in patients admitted to the VABS with >10% total body surface area (TBSA) burns.

RESULTS

Part 1. Totally, 1,475 patients were admitted to the VABS between 2013 - 2018. There were 20 cases of VTE (1.36%). Percent TBSA of burn (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.03 - 1.06), full thickness burns (OR = 2.78, 95% CI: 1.15 - 6.73), ICU admission (OR = 15.08, 95% CI: 5.01 - 45.44), mechanical ventilation (OR = 10.62, 95% CI: 4.05 - 27.91), operative procedures (OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.29 - 1.59), and a longer hospital stay (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.04 - 1.07) were all associated with an increased VTE risk. Part 2. A total of 20 participants with >10% TBSA burns were recruited to the prospective study. Peak anti Factor Xa (AFXa) levels were measured for all 20 participants with 15% recording an initial prophylactic peak AFXa level within reference range. Upon subsequent measurements, 50% of participants reached a prophylactic peak AFXa level. Trough AFXa levels were measured for 17 participants with no participant recording an initial or subsequent trough AFXa level at or above the prophylactic threshold.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates a high incidence of VTE among burns patients at the VABS, especially among the major burns patients, and a thromboprophylaxis protocol that is ineffective in achieving prophylactic levels of AFXa level. The evidence suggests a need to evaluate different dosing protocols among burns patients in order to improve AFXa levels, with the aim of decreasing incidence of VTE in high-risk patients.

Prophylactic anti-coagulation after severe burn injury in critical care settings

BACKGROUND

Severely burnt patients are at an increased risk of thromboembolic complications, hence sufficient prophylactic anticoagulation is of paramount importance. Local guidelines at the Burns Centre in the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham therefore advise increasing the standard dose of low molecular weight heparin in these patients. An audit was carried out to assess the current practice in burns patients to ensure adequate anticoagulation and adherence to guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data was collected on all burns patients in the Burns Centre over a two-year period. The main objectives were to assess:anticoagulation regimes prescribed to severe burns patientsmonitoring of Anti-Factor Xa levelsadjustment of dosing based on the resultsThe locally produced trust guidelines were used as the comparator.

RESULTS

All burns patients were prescribed anticoagulation, but often the dose was not increased as suggested in the guidelines. Although most of the severely burnt patients were prescribed adjusted higher doses of anti-coagulation, only 60% of these patients were monitored with Anti-Factor Xa assays. Of these assays, 66% showed sub-prophylactic levels. The majority of results led to the adjustment of the dose of anticoagulant. However, often dose changes were made late.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The audit confirmed the need for increased doses of prophylactic anticoagulation in severe burns. The better adherence to the guidelines can be achieved by additional training and implementation of decision support via electronic prescribing system.