Evaluation of andexanet alfa and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for reversal of rivaroxaban- and apixaban-associated intracranial hemorrhages

Efficacy and Safety of Andexanet Alfa Versus Four Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Emergent Reversal of Factor Xa Inhibitor Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Factor Xa inhibitors (FXaI) are increasingly used for anticoagulation therapy, yet their association with intracranial hemorrhage poses a significant challenge. Although andexanet alfa (AA) and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) have shown promise in reversing FXaI effects, their comparative efficacy and safety remain uncertain. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a literature search on electronic databases to obtain the relevant studies until May 16, 2024. Our primary outcomes were successful anticoagulation reversal, overall mortality (including 30-day and in-hospital mortality), and thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital and intensive care unit stay and hematoma volume expansion. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. We included 16 eligible studies with a total of 2,977 patients. A statistically significant improvement in hemostatic efficacy rates was in favor of the AA group (risk ratio [RR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.20, P = 0.02). Lower overall mortality rates were found in the AA group (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.88, P = 0.004). However, no difference was found in 30-day mortality rates (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.58-1.16, P = 0.26). In terms of thromboembolic events, more events were found in the AA group (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.01-2.15, P = 0.046). AA was associated with a longer duration of hospital stay compared to 4F-PCC (mean difference [MD] 0.64, 95% CI 0.07-1.22, P = 0.03). Neither a significant difference in length of intensive care unit stay (MD 0.25, 95% CI - 0.36 to 0.86, P = 0.41) nor a significant difference in hematoma volume expansion was reported (MD - 0.89, 95% CI - 3.11 to 1.34, P = 0.435). Our results suggest that AA is superior to 4F-PCC in enhancing the hemostatic efficacy and reducing the overall and in-hospital mortality rates. More thromboembolic events are thought to be associated with the use of AA. However, more studies are required to validate whether the better results of AA in improving hemostatic efficacy are enough to make up for their higher cost and their possible risk of thromboembolic events.

Advances in the medical treatment and diagnosis of intracranial hemorrhage associated with oral anticoagulation

INTRODUCTION

With the increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF), it entails expanding oral anticoagulants (OACs) use, carrying a higher risk of associated hemorrhagic events, including intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Despite advances in OACs development with a better safety profile and reversal agent for these anticoagulants, there is still no consensus on the optimal management of patients with OACs-associated ICH.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors have carried out an exhaustive search on the advances in recent years. The authors provide an update on the management of ICH in anticoagulated patients, as well as an update on the latest evidence on anticoagulation resumption, recent therapeutic strategies, and investigational drugs that could play a role in the future.

EXPERT OPINION

Following an ICH event in an anticoagulated patient, a comprehensive clinical evaluation is imperative. Anticoagulation should be promptly withdrawn and reversed. Once the patient is stabilized, a reintroduction of anticoagulation should be considered, typically within a timeframe of 4-8 weeks, if feasible. If re-anticoagulation is not possible, alternative options such as Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion are available.

Advances and Future Trends in the Diagnosis and Management of Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage accounts for approximately 10% to 15% of all strokes in the United States and remains one of the deadliest. Of concern is the increasing prevalence, especially in younger populations. This article reviews the following: epidemiology, risk factors, outcomes, imaging findings, medical management, and updates to surgical management.

Co-administration of Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate With Andexanet alfa for Reversal of Nontraumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

Objective: Andexanet alfa is approved for the reversal of life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding due to factor-Xa inhibitors. Data are limited on outcomes for patients who receive both andexanet alfa and 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC). The aim of this case series is to evaluate the safety and efficacy outcomes in patients receiving the two agents in combination. Methods: Electronic medical records of patients who received both 4F-PCC and andexanet alfa for nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage from January 2019 to March 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Hemostatic efficacy and complications related to concurrent use of 4F-PCC with andexanet alfa were documented. Results: Nine patients received 4F-PCC and andexanet alfa for reversal of factor Xa inhibitor-associated intracranial bleeding, eight of whom required reversal of apixaban. Of these nine patients, five patients died within 28 days for a 56% incidence of mortality. The average time from 4F-PCC administration to andexanet alfa administration was 3 hours and 9 minutes. Most doses of andexanet alfa were given for concern for bleed expansion after 4F-PCC administration. Hemostatic efficacy based on stability of repeat computed tomography scans post-administration of both agents was found in six patients (66.67%), with a 55.56% n incidence of thromboembolism, including two pulmonary embolisms, two deep vein thromboses, and one renal artery thrombosis. Conclusion: Risks and benefits should be weighed to determine if there is benefit to adding andexanet alfa to 4F-PCC in patients with incomplete hemostasis and life-threatening hemorrhage. The combination of andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC may increase the risk of thrombotic complications without improving mortality.

Andexanet alpha versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate in DOACs anticoagulation reversal: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is currently a lack of evidence for the comparative effectiveness of Andexanet alpha and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in anticoagulation reversal of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The primary aim of our systematic review was to verify which drug is more effective in reducing short-term all-cause mortality. The secondary aim was to determine which of the two reverting strategies is less affected by thromboembolic events.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were analysed in the systematic review and quantitative synthesis. In all-cause short-term mortality, Andexanet alpha showed a risk ratio (RR) of 0.71(95% CI 0.37-1.34) in RCTs and PSMs, compared to 4F-PCC (I2 = 81%). Considering the retrospective studies, the pooled RR resulted in 0.84 (95% CI 0.69-1.01) for the common effects model and 0.82 (95% CI 0.63-1.07) for the random effects model (I2 = 34.2%). Regarding the incidence of thromboembolic events, for RCTs and PSMs, the common and the random effects model exhibited a RR of 1.74 (95% CI 1.09-2.77), and 1.71 (95% CI 1.01-2.89), respectively, for Andexanet alpha compared to 4F-PCC (I2 = 0%). Considering the retrospective studies, the pooled RR resulted in 1.21 (95% CI 0.87-1.69) for the common effects model and 1.18 (95% CI 0.86-1.62) for the random effects model (I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Considering a large group of both retrospective and controlled studies, Andexanet alpha did not show a statistically significant advantage over 4F-PCC in terms of mortality. In the analysis of the controlled studies alone, Andexanet alpha is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews, 2024, CRD42024548768.

Reprint of: Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus andexanet alfa for direct oral anticoagulant reversal

BACKGROUND

Optimal reversal agent for direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)-associated major bleeding has not been described. Before the approval of andexanet alfa (AA) in 2018, 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) was recommended by major guidelines. Currently, AA is recommended as the first-line agent by most guidelines. With a paucity of literature comparing the 2 agents, there is clinical value in assessing hemostatic efficacy and safety of the 2 agents.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate hemostatic efficacy and safety of AA and 4F-PCC in all DOAC-associated major bleedings.

METHODS

A multicenter, retrospective chart review was performed of adult subjects who were admitted for a DOAC-associated major bleeding and received 4F-PCC from February 2018 to May 2019 or AA from May 2019 to September 2021. Some of the exclusion criteria included not receiving a DOAC, receiving multiple reversal agents during the same hospitalization, receiving reversal for any nonmajor bleeding indication, and not receiving the full dose of a reversal agent. The primary outcome was hemostatic efficacy 24 hours after the end of the reversal agent administration. Secondary outcomes included time to administration, hospital mortality, length of stay, need for surgery, and need for additional blood product. Safety outcome was incidence of thrombotic events.

RESULTS

There were 99 subjects included in the 4F-PCC group and 84 subjects in the AA group. Hemostatic efficacy was achieved in 69 subjects (69.7%) in the 4F-PCC group and 63 subjects (75%) in the AA group (P = 0.927). In-hospital mortality was seen in 20 subjects (20.2%) in the 4F-PCC group and 10 subjects (11.9%) in the AA group. Thrombotic events were seen in 7 subjects (7.1%) in the 4F-PCC group and 6 subjects (7.1%) in the AA group.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, and number of thrombotic events between 4F-PCC and AA.

Stroke

Stroke affects up to one in five people during their lifetime in some high-income countries, and up to almost one in two in low-income countries. Globally, it is the second leading cause of death. Clinically, the disease is characterised by sudden neurological deficits. Vascular aetiologies contribute to the most common causes of ischaemic stroke, including large artery disease, cardioembolism, and small vessel disease. Small vessel disease is also the most frequent cause of intracerebral haemorrhage, followed by macrovascular causes. For acute ischaemic stroke, multimodal CT or MRI reveal infarct core, ischaemic penumbra, and site of vascular occlusion. For intracerebral haemorrhage, neuroimaging identifies early radiological markers of haematoma expansion and probable underlying cause. For intravenous thrombolysis in ischaemic stroke, tenecteplase is now a safe and effective alternative to alteplase. In patients with strokes caused by large vessel occlusion, the indications for endovascular thrombectomy have been extended to include larger core infarcts and basilar artery occlusion, and the treatment time window has increased to up to 24 h from stroke onset. Regarding intracerebral haemorrhage, prompt delivery of bundled care consisting of immediate anticoagulation reversal, simultaneous blood pressure lowering, and prespecified stroke unit protocols can improve clinical outcomes. Guided by underlying stroke mechanisms, secondary prevention encompasses pharmacological, vascular, or endovascular interventions and lifestyle modifications.

Traumatic Brain Injury in Patients under Anticoagulant Therapy: Review of Management in Emergency Department

The best management of patients who suffer from traumatic brain injury (TBI) while on oral anticoagulants is one of the most disputed problems of emergency services. Indeed, guidelines, clinical decision rules, and observational studies addressing this topic are scarce and conflicting. Moreover, relevant issues such as the specific treatment (and even definition) of mild TBI, rate of delayed intracranial injury, indications for neurosurgery, and anticoagulant modulation are largely empiric. We reviewed the most recent evidence on these topics and explored other clinically relevant aspects, such as the promising role of dosing brain biomarkers, the strategies to assess the extent of anticoagulation, and the indications of reversals and tranexamic acid administration, in cases of mild TBI or as a bridge to neurosurgery. The appropriate timing of anticoagulant resumption was also discussed. Finally, we obtained an insight into the economic burden of TBI in patients on oral anticoagulants, and future directions on the management of this subpopulation of TBI patients were proposed. In this article, at the end of each section, a "take home message" is stated.

Hemostatic Efficacy and Safety of 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate in Doac-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background: Factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor use has increased over the last decade and though associated rates of major bleeding are lower compared to warfarin, outcomes from intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) are still significant. Targeted FXa inhibitor reversal agent became available in 2018, however use of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for FXa inhibitor-associated ICH continues at many institutions. Objective: Evaluate the safety and hemostatic efficacy of 4F-PCC for FXa inhibitor-associated ICH. Methods: Single-center, retrospective study of patients who received 4F-PCC for FXa inhibitor-associated ICH. The primary efficacy endpoint was hemostasis and thrombosis was the main safety endpoint. Secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality and discharge disposition. Results: 76 patients on apixaban or rivaroxaban were included. Good or excellent hemostasis was achieved in 80.3% of patients. Five patients experienced a thrombotic event. Favorable discharge disposition and lower in-hospital mortality was more likely in patients who achieved excellent hemostasis. Conclusion: 4F-PCC is safe and effective for FXa inhibitor associated ICH.

Andexanet Alfa versus Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for the Reversal of Factor Xa (FXa) Inhibitor-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review of Retrospective Studies

Background/Objectives: There are limited data on the risks and benefits of using Andexanet alfa (AA) compared with four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for the reversal of factor Xa inhibitor-associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Our aim was to describe a compilation of the information available in the literature to date. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until December 2023. Following the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)" guidelines, our systematic literature review included studies that were retrospective in design and evaluated both drugs to control bleeding and complications (death and thromboembolic events). Two researchers re-examined the studies for relevance, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. No meta-analyses were performed for the results. Results: In this limited patient sample, we found no differences between published articles in terms of neuroimaging stability or thrombotic events. However, some studies show significant differences in mortality, suggesting that one of the AAs may be superior to 4F-PCC. Conclusions: Our qualitative analysis shows that AA has a better efficacy profile compared with 4F-PCC. However, further studies monitoring these patients and a multicenter collaborative network dedicated to this topic are needed.

Is there a role for the laboratory monitoring in the management of specific antidotes of direct oral anticoagulants?

Given the growing number of patients receiving direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), patients requiring rapid neutralization is also increasing in case of major bleedings or urgent surgery/procedures. Idarucizumab is commercialized as a specific antidote to dabigatran while andexanet alfa has gained the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency approval as an oral anti-factor Xa inhibitors antidote. Other antidotes or hemostatic agents are still under preclinical or clinical development, the most advanced being ciraparantag. DOAC plasma levels measurement allows to appropriately select patient for antidote administration and may prevent unnecessary prescription of expensive molecules in some acute clinical settings. However, these tests might be inconclusive after some antidote administration, namely andexanet alfa and ciraparantag. The benefit of laboratory monitoring following DOAC reversal remains unclear. Here, we sought to provide an overview of the key studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of DOAC reversal using the most developed/commercialized specific antidotes, to discuss the potential role of the laboratory monitoring in the management of patients receiving DOAC specific antidotes and to highlight the areas that deserve further investigations in order to establish the exact role of laboratory monitoring in the appropriate management of DOAC specific antidotes.

Andexanet alfa versus PCC products for factor Xa inhibitor bleeding: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Previous meta-analyses assessed andexanet alfa (AA) or prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) products for the treatment of Factor Xa inhibitor (FXaI)-associated major bleeding. However, they did not include recent studies or assess the impact of the risk of bias. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis on the effectiveness of AA versus PCC products for FXaI-associated major bleeding, inclusive of the studies' risk of bias. PubMed and Embase were searched for comparative studies assessing major bleeding in patients using FXaI who received AA or PCC. We used the Methodological Index for NOn-Randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist and one question from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal of Case Series tool to assess the risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to provide a pooled estimate for the effect of AA versus PCC products on hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and thrombotic events. Low-moderate risk of bias studies were meta-analyzed separately, as well as combined with high risk of bias studies. Eighteen comparative evaluations of AA versus PCC were identified. Twenty-eight percent of the studies (n = 5) had low-moderate risk and 72% (n = 13) had a high risk of bias. Studies with low-moderate risk of bias suggested improvements in hemostatic efficacy [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.72 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.15-6.44); one study], lower in-hospital mortality [OR 0.48 (95% CI: 0.38-0.61); three studies], and reduced 30-day mortality [OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.30-0.80); two studies] when AA was used versus PCC products. When studies were included regardless of the risk of bias, pooled effects showed improvements in hemostatic efficacy [OR 1.36 (95% CI: 1.01-1.84); 12 studies] and reductions in 30-day mortality [OR 0.53 (95% CI: 0.37-0.76); six studies] for AA versus PCC. The difference in thrombotic events with AA versus PCC was not statistically significant in the low-moderate, high, or combined risk of bias groups. The evidence from low-moderate quality real-world studies suggests that AA is superior to PCC in enhancing hemostatic efficacy and reducing in-hospital and 30-day mortality. When studies are assessed regardless of the risk of bias, the pooled hemostatic efficacy and 30-day mortality risk remain significantly better with AA versus PCC.

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.

Reversal and resumption of anticoagulants in patients with anticoagulant-associated intracerebral hemorrhage

The use of anticoagulants has become more frequent due to the progressive aging population and increased thromboembolic events. Consequently, the proportion of anticoagulant-associated intracerebral hemorrhage (AAICH) in stroke patients is gradually increasing. Compared with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients without coagulopathy, patients with AAICH may have larger hematomas, worse prognoses, and higher mortality. Given the need for anticoagulant reversal and resumption, the management of AAICH differs from that of conventional medical or surgical treatments for ICH, and it is more specific. Understanding the pharmacology of anticoagulants and identifying agents that can reverse their effects in the early stages are crucial for treating life-threatening AAICH. When patients transition beyond the acute phase and their vital signs stabilize, it is important to consider resuming anticoagulants at the right time to prevent the occurrence of further thromboembolism. However, the timing and strategy for reversing and resuming anticoagulants are still in a dilemma. Herein, we summarize the important clinical studies, reviews, and related guidelines published in the past few years that focus on the reversal and resumption of anticoagulants in AAICH patients to help implement decisive diagnosis and treatment strategies in the clinical setting.

Antidote vs. unspecific hemostatic agents for the management of direct oral anticoagulant-related bleeding in trauma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The advent of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) marks a significant milestone in anticoagulant treatment. However, DOACs can exacerbate bleeding, which is challenging for the treating clinician, especially when combined with traumatic injury.

RECENT FINDINGS

In major bleeding associated with DOACs, rapid reversal of the anticoagulant effects is crucial. Recent observational and nonrandomized interventional trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of the specific antidotes andexanet alfa and idarucizumab as well as the unspecific prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) to counteract the anticoagulant effects of DOACs. The European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care guideline for severe perioperative bleeding and the European trauma guideline propose divergent recommendations for the use of andexanet alfa and PCC to obtain hemostasis in Factor Xa inhibitor-related bleeding. The conflicting recommendations are due to limited evidence from clinical studies and the potential increased risk of thromboembolic complications after the administration of andexanet. Regarding dabigatran-associated major bleeding, both guidelines recommend the specific reversal agent idarucizumab as first-line therapy.

SUMMARY

Current guidelines recommend specific antidots and PCCs in DOAC-related major bleeding. Prospective randomized trials comparing specific vs. nonspecific hemostatic agents in the perioperative setting are needed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the hemostatic agents.

The use of andexanet alfa vs. 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrates in the setting of life-threatening intracranial hemorrhage

OBJECTIVE

Andexanet alfa is a targeted reversal agent for life threatening hemorrhage associated with direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but there is uncertainty regarding the benefit when compared to 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for this indication. We investigated the clinical outcomes and cost associated with reversal of DOACs in the setting of life-threatening intracranial hemorrhage (ICH).

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation was conducted to evaluate patients with ICH in the setting of anticoagulation with DOAC from 9/1/2013 to 4/30/2020. Patients were included in the study if they received reversal with either andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients were included in the study. There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day mortality between patients who received andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC (52% vs. 35%, P  = 0.14). Radiographic stability of bleed was identified in 57% of patients receiving andexanet alfa vs. 58% of patients receiving 4F-PCC ( P  = 0.93). Median length of stay was not different between the andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC populations (7 days [IQR 6 - 12] vs. 6 days [IQR 3-12], P  = 0.66). Median cost of reversal agent was higher in patients receiving andexanet alfa compared to 4F-PCC ($15 000 [IQR 15 000-$27 000] vs. $11 650 [IQR $8567-$14 149]).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with life-threatening intracranial hemorrhage in the setting of DOAC therapy, no clinical differences were observed with respect to selection of reversal agent. Prothrombin complex concentrates remain a viable alternative to reversal of DOAC therapy though multicenter, randomized, prospective studies are needed to further evaluate the role of 4F-PCC in the reversal of DOAC therapy.

Clinical Pathways and Outcomes of Andexanet Alfa Administration for the Reversal of Critical Bleeding in Patients on Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibitors

Background  Andexanet is U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for the reversal of critical bleeding from factor Xa inhibitors and off-label for surgical reversal. Data are lacking on andexanet administration processes. Methods  We retrospectively studied patients at a 23-hospital system who received andexanet from November 2019 to March 2023. Abstractors coded demographics, comorbidities, anticoagulant use, andexanet indication, and process times. The primary outcome was presentation-to-andexanet time; diagnosis, ordering, and administration times were calculated. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital postandexanet major thromboembolism/bleeding and mortality. Results  In total, 141 patients were analyzed. Andexanet indications were predominantly neurologic bleeding (85.8%). Twenty-four patients (17.0%) were transferred from nontertiary/academic centers to tertiary/academic centers. The median presentation-to-administration time was 192.5 minutes (interquartile range [IQR]: 108.0-337.0 minutes). Components were as follows: 72.5 minutes (IQR: 39.0-137.5 minutes) for bleeding diagnosis; 35.5 minutes (IQR: 0-96.5 minutes) for andexanet ordering; and 53.0 minutes (IQR: 38.5-78.5 minutes) for administration, which was longer at tertiary/academic hospitals (ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-2.0, p  = 0.002). Gastrointestinal or other critical bleeding (ratio 2.59, 95% CI: 1.67-4.02, p  < 0.001), and tertiary/academic center treatment (ratio 1.58, 95% CI: 1.15-2.18, p  = 0.005), were associated with increased time. Major thromboembolism, bleeding, and mortality occurred in 10.6, 12.0, and 22.9% of patients, respectively. Conclusions  In our cohort, the median presentation-to-administration time was over 3 hours. Cumulative times were longer at tertiary/academic hospitals and for gastrointestinal/other bleeding. Postandexanet major thromboembolism/bleeding occurred more at tertiary/academic hospitals, possibly related to transfers. Prospective studies may elucidate clinical decision-making bottlenecks.

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus andexanet alfa for direct oral anticoagulant reversal

BACKGROUND

Optimal reversal agent for direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)-associated major bleeding has not been described. Before the approval of andexanet alfa (AA) in 2018, 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) was recommended by major guidelines. Currently, AA is recommended as the first-line agent by most guidelines. With a paucity of literature comparing the 2 agents, there is clinical value in assessing hemostatic efficacy and safety of the 2 agents.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate hemostatic efficacy and safety of AA and 4F-PCC in all DOAC-associated major bleedings.

METHODS

A multicenter, retrospective chart review was performed of adult subjects who were admitted for a DOAC-associated major bleeding and received 4F-PCC from February 2018 to May 2019 or AA from May 2019 to September 2021. Some of the exclusion criteria included not receiving a DOAC, receiving multiple reversal agents during the same hospitalization, receiving reversal for any nonmajor bleeding indication, and not receiving the full dose of a reversal agent. The primary outcome was hemostatic efficacy 24 hours after the end of the reversal agent administration. Secondary outcomes included time to administration, hospital mortality, length of stay, need for surgery, and need for additional blood product. Safety outcome was incidence of thrombotic events.

RESULTS

There were 99 subjects included in the 4F-PCC group and 84 subjects in the AA group. Hemostatic efficacy was achieved in 69 subjects (69.7%) in the 4F-PCC group and 63 subjects (75%) in the AA group (P = 0.927). In-hospital mortality was seen in 20 subjects (20.2%) in the 4F-PCC group and 10 subjects (11.9%) in the AA group. Thrombotic events were seen in 7 subjects (7.1%) in the 4F-PCC group and 6 subjects (7.1%) in the AA group.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, and number of thrombotic events between 4F-PCC and AA.

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus andexanet alfa for the reversal of traumatic brain injuries

BACKGROUND

Andexanet alfa was approved in 2018 for reversal of direct oral anticoagulants but due to issues of cost and access, four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) continues to be used for this indication. The objective of this study is to evaluate outcomes of reversal with these agents in patients with isolated traumatic brain injuries (TBI).

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 35 trauma centres from 2014 to 2021. Patients were included with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS)>2 for head and having received andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC within 24 hours of admission. Patients were excluded if P2Y12 inhibitor use or AIS>2 outside of head. Primary outcome includes rate of mortality/hospice at hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes include a composite of serious hospital complications. A subgroup analysis of severe TBI patients (AIS head 4 or 5) was completed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to account for differences in comorbidities and TBI severity.

RESULTS

4F-PCC was given to 265 patients with another 59 receiving andexanet alfa. Patients in the andexanet alfa group were more likely to have an AIS head score of 5 (47.5% vs 26.1%; p<0.005). After adjusting for severity of TBI and comorbidities with regard to tomortality/hospice, there were 15 (25.4%) patients in the andexanet alfa group and 49 (18.5%) in the 4F-PCC group (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.67 to 2.71). This remained consistent when looking at severe patients with TBI with 12 (28.6%) andexanet alfa patients and 37 (28.7%) 4F-PCC patients (OR 0.93 (95% CI 0.40 to 2.16)). Severe hospital complications were also similar between groups with 5 (8.5%) andexanet alfa patients as compared with 21 (7.9%) 4F-PCC patients (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.88).

CONCLUSION

There was no firm conclusion on the treatment effect in mortality/hospice or serious complications among isolated TBI patients reversed with 4F-PCC as compared with andexanet alfa.

The current status of reversal therapy in Japan for elderly patients with head injury treated with antithrombotic agents: A prospective multicenter observational study

Background

Acute exacerbation of head injury in elderly patients due to use of antithrombotic agents has become a concern in countries with aging populations. Reversal agents are recommended for treatment, but its usage is unclear. Therefore, we conducted a prospective observational study in this patient population to monitor usage of reversal therapy.

Methods

The subjects were 721 elderly patients aged ≥65 years old who were hospitalized in 15 centers from December 2019 to May 2021. Patients were divided into groups who did not receive antithrombotic agents (Group A), who received antithrombotic agents, but did not receive reversal therapy (Group B), and were treated with antithrombotic agents and reversal therapy (Group C). Age, gender, mechanism of injury, neurologic and imaging findings on admission, clinical course after admission and surgery, outcomes and complications were compared among these groups. Time from injury to reversal therapy was examined based on outcomes to investigate trends in the timing of administration of the reversal agent.

Results

Acute exacerbation during the clinical course occurred in 9.8 %, 15.8 % and 31.0 % of cases in Groups A, B and C, respectively, and differed significantly among the groups. On head CT, the incidences of hematoma were 35.7 %, 36.5 % and 60.4 %, respectively, with this incidence being significantly higher in Group C; and the respective rates of craniotomy were 18.8 %, 14.0 % and 50.9 %, again with this rate being significantly higher in Group C. The good outcome and mortality rates were 57.1 %, 52.5 % and 35.8 %, and 14.5 %, 18.0 % and 24.5 %, respectively, and both were poorest in Group C. Times from injury to treatment with a reversal agent were significantly shorter in patients without compared to those with acute exacerbation (405.9 vs. 880.8 min) and in patients with favorable outcomes compared to those with unfavorable outcomes (261.9 vs. 543.4 min).

Conclusion

Similarly to previous studies, the incidence of acute exacerbation was increased by use of antithrombotic agents. These results suggest that patients in Japan who require hematoma evacuation due to symptom exacerbation tend to be treated with reversal agents. Although it is difficult to assess the efficacy of reversal therapy from this study, earlier treatment with reversal agents before the occurrence of acute exacerbation may be useful to improve outcomes.

Prothrombin Complex Concentrate vs Conservative Management in ICH Associated With Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Importance

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) associated with direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use carries extremely high morbidity and mortality. The clinical effectiveness of hemostatic therapy is unclear.

Objective

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of DOAC-associated ICH treated with prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) vs conservative management.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this population-based, propensity score-weighted retrospective cohort study, patients who developed DOAC-associated ICH from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2021, in Hong Kong were identified. The outcomes of patients who received 25 to 50 IU/kg PCC with those who received no hemostatic agents were compared. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was modified Rankin scale of 0 to 3 or returning to baseline functional status at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were mortality at 90 days, in-hospital mortality, and hematoma expansion. Weighted logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association of PCC with study outcomes. In unweighted logistic regression models, factors associated with good neurological outcome and hematoma expansion in DOAC-associated ICH were identified.

Results

A total of 232 patients with DOAC-associated ICH, with a mean (SD) age of 77.2 (9.3) years and 101 (44%) female patients, were included. Among these, 116 (50%) received conservative treatment and 102 (44%) received PCC. Overall, 74 patients (31%) patients had good neurological recovery and 92 (39%) died within 90 days. Median (IQR) baseline hematoma volume was 21.7 mL (3.6-66.1 mL). Compared with conservative management, PCC was not associated with improved neurological recovery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.33-1.16; P = .14), mortality at 90 days (aOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.70-1.53; P = .88), in-hospital mortality (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.69-1.79; P = .66), or reduced hematoma expansion (aOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.38-2.31; P = .90). Higher baseline hematoma volume, lower Glasgow coma scale, and intraventricular hemorrhage were associated with lower odds of good neurological outcome but not hematoma expansion.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, Chinese patients with DOAC-associated ICH had large baseline hematoma volumes and high rates of mortality and functional disability. PCC treatment was not associated with improved functional outcome, hematoma expansion, or mortality. Further studies on novel hemostatic agents as well as neurosurgical and adjunctive medical therapies are needed to identify the best management algorithm for DOAC-associated ICH.

Real-World Reversal of Factor Xa Inhibition in the Setting of Major Life-Threatening Bleeding or Urgent Surgery

Background: Management of major life-threatening bleeding with factor Xa (FXa) inhibition poses complex challenges involving novel direct reversal agents competing with non-specific preexisting strategies. The recent availability of andexanet alfa (AA) led to a health-system guideline incorporating its use alongside the most commonly used historic agent, four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC). Objectives: The objective was to characterize the use and efficacy of AA and 4F-PCC for reversal of FXa inhibition after implementation of the health-system guideline. Methods: This multi-hospital, retrospective cohort study included patients aged >18 years administered either AA or 4F-PCC between October 2018 to June 2020 with the indication for urgent reversal of FXa inhibitor-induced coagulopathy. The primary outcome assessed hemostatic efficacy between treatment groups. Secondary outcomes evaluated adjunct blood product administration, incidence of repeat pharmacologic reversal, incidence of thromboembolism, intensive care unit and hospital length of stays, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Eighty-five patients were included; 33 patients received AA and 52 patients received 4F-PCC. Effective hemostasis was achieved at similar rates in both treatment groups (84.8% vs 76.9%; P = .373). Thrombotic events occurring during the observed hospitalization were more frequent among the AA treated group (18% vs 3.8%, P = .027). No differences were observed for other secondary outcomes. Conclusion: Guideline use resulted in similar rates of effective hemostasis with a higher incidence of VTE in patients receiving AA. Further exploration with a larger, prospective study to evaluate these findings is warranted.

Retrospective Observational Study of Patients With Subdural Hematoma Treated With Idarucizumab

Use of anticoagulants is increasing with the aging of societies. The safe first-line drug is likely to be a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), but outcomes of treatment of traumatic brain injury (TBI) with anticoagulants are uncertain. Therefore, we examined the clinical effect of idarucizumab as reversal therapy in elderly patients with TBI who were treated with dabigatran. A retrospective multi-center observational study was performed in patients ≥65 years of age who developed acute traumatic subdural hematoma during treatment with dabigatran and underwent reversal therapy with idarucizumab. The items examined included patient background, neurological and imaging findings at arrival, course after admission, complications, and outcomes. A total of 23 patients were enrolled in the study. The patients had a mean age of 78.9 years. Cause of TBI was fall in 60.9% of the subjects. Mean Glasgow Coma Scale score at arrival was 8.7; anisocoria was present in 31.8% of cases. Exacerbation of consciousness was found in 30.4%, but only in 13.3% of subjects treated with idarucizumab before consciousness and imaging findings worsened. Dabigatran was discontinued in 81.8% of cases after hematoma development, with a mean withdrawal period of 12.1 days. The favorable outcome rate was 21.7%, and mortality was 39.1%. In multi-variate analysis, timing of idarucizumab administration was associated with a favorable outcome. There were ischemic complications in 3 cases (13.1%), and all three events occurred ≥7 days after administration of idarucizumab. These findings suggest that in cases that develop hematoma during treatment with dabigatran, it is important to administer idarucizumab early and restart dabigatran after conditions stabilize.

Clinical Relevance of Preclinical and Clinical Studies of Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Treatment of Bleeding Related to Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are widely used for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism and stroke. When emergency reversal of DOAC-related anticoagulation is required, specific DOAC reversal agents are recommended, including idarucizumab for dabigatran reversal and andexanet alfa for apixaban and rivaroxaban reversal. However, specific reversal agents are not always available, andexanet alfa has not been approved for urgent surgery, and clinicians need to know the patient's anticoagulant medication before administering these treatments. Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (4F-PCCs) are recognized as nonspecific, alternative hemostatic agents for treatment of DOAC-related bleeding. Evidence from preclinical and clinical studies shows that they may reduce the anticoagulant effects of DOACs and may help control DOAC-related bleeding. However, randomized controlled trials are lacking, and most data are from retrospective or single-arm prospective studies in bleeding associated with activated factor X inhibitors. There are no clinical data showing the efficacy of 4F-PCC for the treatment of bleeding in dabigatran-treated patients. This review focuses on the current evidence of 4F-PCC use in controlling bleeding associated with DOACs and provides an expert opinion on the relevance of these data for clinical practice. The current treatment landscape, unmet needs, and future directions are also discussed.

Lower mortality with andexanet alfa vs 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for factor Xa inhibitor-related major bleeding in a U.S. hospital-based observational study

Background

Well-designed studies with sufficient sample size comparing andexanet alfa vs 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in routine clinical practice to evaluate clinical outcomes are limited.

Objectives

To compare in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized with rivaroxaban- or apixaban-related major bleeding who were treated with andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC.

Methods

An observational cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05548777) was conducted using electronic health records between May 2018 and September 2022 from 354 U.S. hospitals. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, inpatient admission with diagnosis code D68.32 (bleeding due to extrinsic anticoagulation), a record of use of the factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban or apixaban, andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC treatment during index hospitalization, and a documented discharge disposition. Multivariable logistic regression on in-hospital mortality with andexanet alfa vs 4F-PCC was performed. The robustness of the results was assessed via a supportive propensity score-weighted logistic regression.

Results

The analysis included 4395 patients (andexanet alfa, n = 2122; 4F-PCC, n = 2273). There were 1328 patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), 2567 with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeds, and 500 with critical compartment or other bleed types. In the multivariable analysis, odds of in-hospital mortality were 50% lower for andexanet alfa vs 4F-PCC (odds ratio [OR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.65; P < .01) and were consistent for both ICH (OR, 0.55; [0.39-0.76]; P < .01) and GI bleeds (OR, 0.49 [0.29-0.81]; P = .01). Similar results were obtained from the supporting propensity score-weighted logistic regression analyses.

Conclusion

In this large observational study, treatment with andexanet alfa in patients hospitalized with rivaroxaban- or apixaban-related major bleeds was associated with 50% lower odds of in-hospital mortality than 4F-PCC. The magnitude of the risk reduction was similar in ICH and GI bleeds.

Case Report: Extended Duration Andexanet Alfa Infusion in a Surgical Trauma Patient

Background: Andexanet alfa (andexanet) is the only FDA-approved medication for reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban anticoagulation for life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding. Infusion modifications may be required in surgical patients undergoing prolonged operative intervention but have not previously been described. Case Report: A 78-year-old woman on rivaroxaban for atrial fibrillation was admitted to the trauma service for a mechanical fall, sustaining a T4 burst fracture with severe canal stenosis and spinal cord edema resulting in loss of strength and sensation in her legs. Clinically relevant rivaroxaban activity was verified with an elevated low molecular weight heparin anti-factor Xa assay, and laboratory confirmed coagulopathy was demonstrated by a prolonged prothrombin time, thromboelastography (TEG) R-time, and activated clotting time (ACT). The patient required urgent surgical intervention for spinal fixation. Given the expected prolonged duration of the procedure, standard dose andexanet was initiated with a prolonged infusion at half the standard rate during the operation. The procedure was successful and intraoperative TEGs demonstrated normalization of R-time and ACT throughout the procedure. The patient did not experience any complications postoperatively and successfully discharged to inpatient rehabilitation. Conclusion: Modifications to the andexanet infusion may be required in surgical patients requiring rivaroxaban reversal for a prolonged procedure. Further data are needed to determine the optimal approach to infusion modification.

Deterioration free discharge comparison of andexanet-alfa and prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) for reversal of factor Xa inhibitor associated bleeds

Given the paucity of comparative efficacy data and the difference in cost between andexanet-alfa and prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC), debates continue regarding optimal cost-effective therapy for patients who present with major bleeding associated with oral factor Xa inhibitors. Available literature comparing the cost-effectiveness of the reversal agents is limited, and the large difference in price between therapy options has led many health systems to exclude andexanet-alfa from their formularies. To evaluate the clinical outcomes and cost of PCC compared to andexanet-alfa for patients with factor Xa inhibitor associated bleeds. We performed a quasi-experimental, single health system study of patients treated with PCC or andexanet-alfa from March 2014 to April 2021. Deterioration-free discharge, thrombotic events, length of stay, discharge disposition, and cost were reported. 170 patients were included in the PCC group and 170 patients were included in the andexanet-alfa group. Deterioration-free discharge was achieved in 66.5% of PCC-treated patients compared to 69.4% in the andexanet alfa-treated patients. 31.8% of PCC-treated patients were discharged home compared to 30.6% in the andexanet alfa-treated patients. The cost per deterioration-free discharge was $20,773.62 versus $5230.32 in the andexanet alfa and 4 F-PCC group, respectively. Among patients that experienced a bleed while taking a factor Xa inhibitor, there was no difference in clinical outcomes for patients treated with andexanet-alfa compared to PCC. Although there was no difference in the clinical outcomes, there was a significant difference in cost with andexanet-alfa costing approximately four times as much as PCC per deterioration-free discharge.

Andexanet Alfa to Reverse the Effect of Factor Xa Inhibitors in Intracranial Hemorrhage

Andexanet alfa (AA) is a recombinant factor Xa competing for binding with factor Xa inhibitors, thereby reversing their anticoagulation effects. Since 2019, it has been approved for individuals under apixaban or rivaroxaban therapy suffering from life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding. Apart from the pivotal trial, real-world data on the use of AA in daily clinics are scarce. We reviewed the current literature on patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and summarized the available evidence regarding several outcome parameters. On the basis of this evidence, we provide a standard operating procedure (SOP) for routine AA application. We searched PubMed and additional databases through 18 January 2023 for case reports, case series, studies, reviews, and guidelines. Data on hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, and thrombotic events were pooled and compared with the pivotal trial data. While hemostatic efficacy in world-wide clinical routine seems to be comparable to the pivotal trial, thrombotic events and in-hospital mortality appear to be substantially higher. Various confounding factors responsible for this finding such as exclusion and inclusion criteria resulting in a highly selected patient cohort within the controlled clinical trial have to be considered. The SOP provided should support physicians in patient selection for AA treatment as well as facilitate routine use and dosing. This review underlines the urgent need for more data from randomized trials to appreciate the benefit and safety profile of AA. Meanwhile, this SOP should help to improve frequency and quality of AA use in patients suffering from ICH while on apixaban or rivaroxaban treatment.

Real-world clinical outcomes among US Veterans with oral factor xa inhibitor-related major bleeding treated with andexanet alfa or 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate

Oral factor Xa (FXa) inhibitors significantly reduce incidence of stroke and thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism. Due to various factors and the lack of a randomized controlled trial comparing andexanet alfa to usual care, non-specific replacement agents including 4 F-PCC are still used off-label for FXa inhibitor bleed management. Clinical and mortality data were extracted from the inpatient medical data and Veteran Affairs (VA) vital status files over the time of March 2014 through December 2020. Propensity score-weighted models were used for this retrospective cohort study using data from the Veterans Affairs Informatics and Computing Infrastructure (VINCI). The study included 255 patients (85-andexanet alfa and 170-4 F-PCC) exposed to an oral factor Xa inhibitor and hospitalized with an acute major, gastrointestinal (GI), intracranial (ICH) or other bleed. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in the andexanet alfa cohort compared to the 4 F-PCC cohort (10.6% vs. 25.3%, p = 0.01). Propensity score-weighted Cox models reveal a 69% lower hazard of in-hospital mortality for those treated with andexanet alfa (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14-0.71) compared to those treated with 4 F-PCC. Additionally, those treated with andexanet alfa had a lower 30-day mortality rate and lower 30-day hazard of mortality in the weighted Cox model (20.0% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.055; HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30-0.98) compared to those treated with 4 F-PCC. Among 255 US veterans with major bleeding in the presence of an oral factor Xa inhibitor, treatment with andexanet alfa was associated with lower in-hospital and 30-day mortality than treatment with 4 F-PCC.

Emergent external ventricular drain placement in patients with factor Xa inhibitor-associated intracerebral hemorrhage after reversal with andexanet alfa

BACKGROUND

Andexanet alfa (AA), a factor Xa-inhibitor (FXi) reversal agent, is given as a bolus followed by a 2-hour infusion. This long administration time can delay EVD placement in intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients. We sought to evaluate the safety of EVD placement immediately post-AA bolus compared to post-AA infusion.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that included adult patients admitted with FXi-associated ICH who received AA and underwent EVD placement The primary outcome was the occurrence of a new hemorrhage (tract, extra-axial, or intraventricular hemorrhage). Secondary outcomes included mortality, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and discharge modified Rankin Score. The primary safety outcome was documented thrombotic events.

RESULTS

Twelve patients with FXi related ICH were included (EVD placement post-AA bolus, N = 8; EVD placement post-AA infusion, N = 4). Each arm included one patient with bilateral EVD placed. There was no difference in the incidence of new hemorrhages, with one post-AA bolus patient had small, focal, nonoperative extra-axial hemorrhage. Morbidity and mortality were higher in post-AA infusion patients (mRS, post-AA bolus, 4 [4-6] vs. post-AA infusion 6 [5,6], p = 0.24 and post-AA bolus, 3 (37.5 %) vs. post-AA infusion, 3 (75 %), p = 0.54, respectively). One patient in the post-AA bolus group had thrombotic event. There was no difference in hospital LOS (post-AA bolus, 19 days [12-26] vs. post-AA infusion, 14 days [9-22], p = 0.55) and ICU LOS (post-AA bolus, 10 days [6-13] vs. post-AA infusion, 11 days [5-21], p = 0.86).

CONCLUSION

We report no differences in the incidence of tract hemorrhage, extra-axial hemorrhage, or intraventricular hemorrhage post-AA bolus versus post-AA infusion. Larger prospective studies to validate these results are warranted.

The use of andexanet alfa and 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate in intracranial hemorrhage

OBJECTIVE

to describe the clinical and safety outcomes between andexanet alfa (AA) and 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for the reversal of apixaban or rivaroxaban in the setting of an intracranial hemorrhage (ICH).

METHODS

A retrospective, multicentered descriptive study was conducted in hospitalized patients 18 years of age or older from June 2018 to October 2019 who received AA or 4F-PCC for the reversal of apixaban or rivaroxaban in the setting of ICH. Patients were excluded if they had received 4F-PCC prior to AA after its addition to the institution wide formulary. Other exclusion criteria were history or presence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia or disseminated intravascular coagulation, estimated hematoma volume of >60 mL, Glasgow Coma Scores <7, or no repeat CT head scan. Information was collected from the electronic medical records. The primary outcome was the achievement of excellent or good hemostatic efficacy upon the repeat computer tomography (CT) scan performed after the infusion of study drugs. Secondary outcomes included disposition, survival to hospital discharge, 30-day readmission, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, incidence of thromboembolic events.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients were included in the study, of which 9 received AA and 15 received 4F-PCC. The achievement of excellent or good hemostatic efficacy upon repeat CT scan occurred in 7 (77.8%) patients in the AA group and in 14 (93.3%) patients in the 4-F PCC group. All patients in the AA group survived to hospital discharge with no 30-day morality and 86.7% patients in the 4F-PCC group.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that real-world clinical and safety outcomes between andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC for the reversal of factor Xa inhibitors in the setting of ICH are similar to ones reported in clinical trials.

Retrospective review of Andexanet Alfa versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for reversal of DOAC-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage

 Background: Mortality of oral anticoagulation-associated ICH is around 60%, with oral anticoagulation increasing the risk of ICH seven to ten-fold compared to no anticoagulation. Current guidelines recommend DOACs (direct oral anticoagulants) as first-line therapy in the treatment of VTE (Venous Thromboembolism) due to their more favorable safety profile. There are two agents available for DOAC reversal, Coagulation Factor Xa (recombinant), inactivated-zhzo (andexanet alfa, Andexxa®) and 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4FPCC). There is little data comparing the two agents in real-life clinical settings.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to determine if there was a difference in hemostatic efficacy of andexanet alfa and 4FPCC in patients with a factor Xa inhibitor-related intracranial hemorrhage.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study conducted in adult patients admitted at a quaternary academic medical center from September 2017 to March 2021. Adults with a diagnosis of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) were included if they received either 4FPCC or andexanet alfa for reversal of apixaban or rivaroxaban. In addition to hemostatic efficacy per imaging, we assessed disposition location, cerebral performance score, blood product consumption, and the development of a new thrombus.

RESULTS

A total of 46 patients were included in this study, 15 received 4FPCC (32%) and 31 received andexanet alfa (68%). There was no difference in the proportion of patients with excellent (4FPCC 9 [60%] vs. andexanet alfa 16 [51.6%], p = 0.61), good (4FPCC 2 [13.3%] vs. andexanet alfa 7 [22.6%]), or poor (4FPCC 1 [6.7%] vs. andexanet alfa 5 [16.1%]) hemostasis after administration of each agent. There were no significant differences in any secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Our study found no difference in hemostatic efficacy between andexanet alfa and 4FPCC. At this time, clinicians should choose an agent based on individual patient presentation and resource availability. Further research will help clarify the role of each agent in the management of DOAC-related intracranial hemorrhage.

Comparison of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate and andexanet alfa for reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban in the setting of intracranial hemorrhage

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare clinical outcomes in patients who experienced intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) while taking apixaban or rivaroxaban and were reversed with four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (4F-PCC) or andexanet alfa (AA). This retrospective cohort included adult patients that received 4F-PCC or AA for the initial management of an apixaban- or rivaroxaban-associated ICH. A primary outcome of excellent or good hemostatic efficacy at 12 h post-reversal was assessed. Secondary outcomes evaluated were change in hematoma volume size at 12 h, functional status at discharge, need for surgical intervention or additional hemostatic agents post-reversal, new thrombotic event within 28 days, 28-day all-cause mortality, discharge disposition, and hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay. A total of 70 patients were included (4F-PCC, n = 47; AA, n = 23). For the primary outcome analysis, 21 patients were included in the 4F-PCC group and 12 in the AA group. The rate of effective hemostasis was similar between the 4F-PCC and AA groups (66.7% vs 75%, p = 0.62). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for secondary outcomes, including 28-day mortality (40.4% vs 39.1%, p = 0.92) and thrombotic complications within 28 days of reversal (17.0% vs 21.7%, p = 0.63). In patients who experienced an ICH while taking apixaban or rivaroxaban, 4F-PCC and AA were found to have similar rates of excellent or good hemostatic efficacy.

Contemporary Perioperative Management of Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have rapidly emerged as popular alternatives to warfarin in the setting of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism, and secondary prevention of arterial thrombosis. It is now estimated that more patients in the United States take DOACs than warfarin for approved indications. Studies to date have shown that these drugs are similarly efficacious with perhaps a lower bleeding risk than warfarin. The purpose of this review is to provide insight into the currently available DOACs and discuss the management and reversal strategies for patients in the perioperative period.

Reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban with andexanet alfa prior to invasive or surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

Outcomes following andexanet alfa reversal of factor Xa inhibitors in patients requiring urgent or emergent invasive procedures are lacking. This study aimed to describe efficacy and safety outcomes following andexanet alfa administration within 24 h of an invasive procedure.

METHODS

This single-center, observational, retrospective study included patients who received andexanet alfa within 24 h of an invasive or surgical procedure. The primary outcome was hemostatic efficacy graded as excellent, good, or poor using similar definitions to the ANNEXA-4 criteria. Secondary outcomes included hospital discharge disposition, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, 30-day mortality, 30-day thromboischemic event rates, and serum coagulation assay changes pre- and postreversal.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients met inclusion criteria; of these, 27 (62.8%) received apixaban and 16 (37.2%) were treated with rivaroxaban prior to admission. The indications for reversal were categorized as intracranial (n = 20 [45.5%]) or extracranial (n = 24 [54.5%]) sites. Majority of patients required emergent operative procedures (18 [40.9%]), followed by invasive device placement (10 [22.7%]) or arterial embolization (9 [20.5%]). Thirty-eight (86.4%) patients were able to be adequately graded for hemostatic efficacy. Overall, 30 (78.9%) patients achieved excellent or good hemostasis within 24 h after periprocedural administration of andexanet alfa (19 [82.6%] apixaban vs. 11 [78.6%] rivaroxaban; 12 [80.0%] intracranial events vs. 18 [78.3%] extracranial events). Discharge disposition was most often to a short- or long-term care facilities (27 [61.4%]). Thirty-day mortality and thromboischemic complications occurred in 15 (34.1%) and 12 (27.3%) patients, respectively. Prothrombin time and antifactor Xa assay results were significantly decreased after andexanet alfa administration (p < 0.05) while thromboelastogram assay values (reaction time, kinetic time, and activated clotting time) showed nonsignificant changes pre- versus postreversal.

CONCLUSION

Andexanet alfa may be used for urgent or emergent reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban peri-procedurally with promising hemostatic outcomes. Further prospective, comparative clinical research is warranted.

A Historical Perspective on the Reversal of Anticoagulants

There has been a landmark shift in the last several decades in the management and prevention of thromboembolic events. From the discovery of parenteral and oral agents requiring frequent monitoring as early as 1914, to the development of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) that do not require monitoring or dose adjustment in the late 20th century, great advances have been achieved. Despite the advent of these newer agents, bleeding continues to be a key complication, affecting 2 to 4% of DOAC-treated patients per year. Bleeding is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Although specific reversal agents for DOACs have lagged the release of these agents, idarucizumab and andexanet alfa are now available as antagonists. However, the efficacy of these reversal agents is uncertain, and complications, including thrombosis, have not been adequately explored. As such, guidelines continue to advise the use of nonspecific prohemostatic agents for patients requiring reversal of the anticoagulant effect of these drugs. As the indications for DOACs and the overall prevalence of their use expand, there is an unmet need for further studies to determine the efficacy of specific compared with nonspecific pro-hemostatic reversal agents. In this review, we will discuss the evidence behind specific and nonspecific reversal agents for both parenteral and oral anticoagulants.

Warfarin versus factor Xa inhibitors in the long-term treatment of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis a single-center retrospective analysis

Long-term anticoagulation in the treatment of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis (CVST) has revolved around the use of warfarin. The relatively recent introduction of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs), such as Factor Xa inhibitors, in treating CVSTs promises to offer numerous patient benefits. We aimed to examine the efficacy of Factor Xa inhibitors in comparison to warfarin in the long-term treatment of CVSTs. A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted in which 49 eligible patients having presented with a first-time CVST were identified. Long-term anticoagulation was achieved with Warfarin (n = 23) or Factor Xa Inhibitors (n = 26; Apixaban or Rivaroxaban). Outcomes of interest were improvements in patient functional status, modified Ranking Scores (mRS), and radiographic improvement/resolution in sinus thromboses. Secondary comparisons included complication rates, particularly recurring venous thrombotic events. Patient mRS scores by 7-to-18-month follow-up all fell within the extremely favorable range of 0-1 regardless of the long-term anticoagulant (P-value = 0.3591). Proportion of patients with radiographic improvement/resolution of thrombosed sinuses trended towards being higher in the Factor Xa Inhibitor group at the <12-month period, 69.2%, compared to 33.3% with Warfarin (P-value = 0.0548). By the >12-month follow-up period, Warfarin and Factor Xa inhibitor groups had similar rates of radiographic sinus improvement - 76.9% versus 71.4%, respectively (P-value = 0.6298). No statistically significant differences were documented between groups regarding complications. Factor Xa inhibitors are equally as effective as Warfarin in the long-term treatment of CVSTs, whether it be restoring patient functional status, sinus thrombus burden reduction, or minimizing bleeding complications whilst preventing recurrent venous thrombosis.

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate administration after expanding intracranial hemorrhage status post administration of andexanet alfa

BACKGROUND

With respect to reversal of life threatening bleeds associated with the use of oral factor Xa inhibitors, current guidelines provide few recommendations for a preferred reversal agent. When the initial reversal agent fails to achieve the desired hemostatic response, there is little to no recommendations for the use of additional reversal agents.

CASE REPORT

An 86-year-old female on apixaban (ELIQUIS) for atrial fibrillation, presented from an outside hospital due to a spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Computed tomography (CT) scan revealed multifocal left sided sICH. Due to use of apixaban in the setting to sICH, patient received andexanet alfa (AA) for reversal. Patient was then transferred and upon arrival to receiving emergency department (ED), repeat CT scans showed an expanding sICH, progression of midline shift, and low-molecular weight heparin levels that were ≥ 2 international units (IU) per milliliter (mL), indicating therapeutic apixaban activity. The patient was subsequently given four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC). WHY AN EMERGENCY MEDICINE PHYSICIAN SHOULD BE AWARE OF THIS INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING KEY POINTS.

Andexanet-Alfa-Associated Heparin Resistance in the Context of Hemorrhagic Stroke

Background

With a growing number of patients on new oral anticoagulants, interest in reversal agents is rising. Andexanet alfa is used for reversal of factor Xa inhibitors in intracranial hemorrhage.

Methods

We provide a brief review on andexanet-alfa-associated heparin resistance and discuss potentially critical situations from different clinical perspectives.

Results

Case reports point out that andexanet alfa can cause unresponsiveness to heparin, leading to catastrophic events. As a result, regulatory bodies have issued warning notices to avoid heparinization parallel to the use of andexanet alfa.

Conclusions

Although well known to hematologists, the phenomenon is underrecognized among stroke clinicians. However, patients with intracranial hemorrhage frequently undergo endovascular or surgical interventions that require periprocedural administration of heparin.

Andexanet alfa versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the reversal of apixaban- or rivaroxaban-associated intracranial hemorrhage: a propensity score-overlap weighted analysis

BACKGROUND

Andexanet alfa is approved (FDA "accelerated approval"; EMA "conditional approval") as the first specific reversal agent for factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor-associated uncontrolled or life-threatening bleeding. Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (4F-PCC) are commonly used as an off-label, non-specific, factor replacement approach to manage FXa inhibitor-associated life-threatening bleeding. We evaluated the effectiveness and safety of andexanet alfa versus 4F-PCC for management of apixaban- or rivaroxaban-associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH).

METHODS

This two-cohort comparison study included andexanet alfa patients enrolled at US hospitals from 4/2015 to 3/2020 in the prospective, single-arm ANNEXA-4 study and a synthetic control arm of 4F-PCC patients admitted within a US healthcare system from 12/2016 to 8/2020. Adults with radiographically confirmed ICH who took their last dose of apixaban or rivaroxaban < 24 h prior to the bleed were included. Patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score < 7, hematoma volume > 60 mL, or planned surgery within 12 h were excluded. Outcomes were hemostatic effectiveness from index to repeat scan, mortality within 30 days, and thrombotic events within five days. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using propensity score-overlap weighted logistic regression.

RESULTS

The study included 107 andexanet alfa (96.6% low dose) and 95 4F-PCC patients (79.3% receiving a 25 unit/kg dose). After propensity score-overlap weighting, mean age was 79 years, GCS was 14, time from initial scan to reversal initiation was 2.3 h, and time from reversal to repeat scan was 12.2 h in both arms. Atrial fibrillation was present in 86% of patients. Most ICHs were single compartment (78%), trauma-related (61%), and involved the intracerebral and/or intraventricular space(s) (53%). ICH size was ≥ 10 mL in volume (intracerebral and/or ventricular) or ≥ 10 mm in thickness (subdural or subarachnoid) in 22% of patients and infratentorial in 15%. Andexanet alfa was associated with greater odds of achieving hemostatic effectiveness (85.8% vs. 68.1%; OR 2.73; 95% CI 1.16-6.42) and decreased odds of mortality (7.9% vs. 19.6%; OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.13-0.98) versus 4F-PCC. Two thrombotic events occurred with andexanet alfa and none with 4F-PCC.

CONCLUSIONS

In this indirect comparison of patients with an apixaban- or rivaroxaban-associated ICH, andexanet alfa was associated with better hemostatic effectiveness and improved survival compared to 4F-PCC. Trial registration NCT02329327; registration date: December 31, 2014.

Andexanet Alfa for Reversal of Factor Xa Inhibitors in Intracranial Hemorrhage: Observational Cohort Study

Background: Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is associated with high mortality and morbidity, especially in patients under anticoagulative treatment. Andexanet alfa (AA) is a modified recombinant form of human factor Xa (FXa) developed for reversal of FXa-inhibitors, e.g., in the event of ICH, but experience is still limited. Methods: This monocentric retrospective observational cohort study included 46 patients with acute FXa-inhibitor-associated non-traumatic ICH (FXa-I-ICH) of whom 23 were treated with AA within 12 h after symptom onset, compared to 23 patients with usual care (UC). Volumetrically analyzed hematoma expansion (HE) in brain imaging, clinical outcome and incidence of adverse events were analyzed. Results: All patients (mean age 79.8 ± 7.2 years) were effectively anticoagulated. The cohort included severely ill patients with large hematoma volumes (median 20.4, IQR 7.8−39.0 mL). Efficacy, as assessed by HE in imaging, was very good in the AA-group. There was no (0.0%) relevant HE (>33%) in contrast to UC-group (26.1%). Nevertheless, we observed a high incidence of thromboembolic events (30.4% vs. 4.4%) and non-favorable outcomes (death/palliative condition) in 43.5% vs. 26.1%. Conclusions: There was no HE in the volumetric neuroimaging assessment in the AA-group, but clinical outcomes remained often worse. Large randomized trials for the use of AA in patients with acute FXa-inhibitor-associated ICH are needed to investigate the clinical outcome in consideration of the rates of thromboembolism.

A Review of Direct-acting Oral Anticoagulants and Their Use in Solid Organ Transplantation

Direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use has increased dramatically since their introduction because of the growing evidence of proven efficacy and enhanced safety compared with warfarin and the low-molecular-weight heparins in the general population. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of quality data regarding the safety and efficacy of the DOACs in patients awaiting organ transplant and those who received a solid organ transplant. This review aims to evaluate the available literature and considerations regarding anticoagulation use in transplant recipients, focusing on preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative DOAC use.

Andexanet alfa after 4-factor PCC administration for intracranial hemorrhage: a case series

The ongoing controversy regarding optimal reversal agent for factor Xa-inhibitors is mainly due to lack of comparative data of andexanet alfa (AA) to 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC), institutional formulary restrictions, and navigation of clinical scenarios involving patients clinically worsen despite initial reversal efforts. The combination use of 4F-PCC and AA has not been evaluated in clinical trials and the outcomes of such patients with FXA-inhibitor associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) are unknown. A total of five patients, including four outside hospital transfers, received 4F-PCC prior to AA for FXa-inhibitor associated ICH (n = 3 apixaban, n = 2 rivaroxaban; n = 4 ICH, n = 1 TBI). The doses of 4F-PCC ranged from 25 to 60 units/kg and were administered within a range of 1.5-4.2 h prior to AA. One patient required surgical intervention with craniotomy and three patients underwent external ventricular drain placement. Two of the five patients developed an ischemic or thromboembolic complication within one week from 4F-PCC and AA administration. This case series discusses multiple unique patient cases in which 4F-PCC and AA were both administered for FXa-inhibitor associated ICH. The results highlight the potentially increased thrombotic risk associated with combination use. Ongoing post-marketing data collection of real patient case scenarios are essential to the establishment of consensus guidelines on how to prioritize initial reversal efforts and manage these patients during the course of their bleed.

The Use of Prothrombin Complex Concentrates: Results of a Nationwide Survey of Critical Care Pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) are frequently used.

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate practices and perceptions of proprietary and nonproprietary PCCs use.

METHODS

An electronic pretested cross-sectional survey e-mailed thrice to 1 critical care pharmacist at 1170 US institutions. Questions addressed hospital and pharmacy characteristics, use of PCCs, and perceptions of effectiveness and safety.

RESULTS

429 (39.5%) of 1086 eligible institutions completed the questionnaire. PCCs were used several times per month to several times per week (62.6%). An order set was routinely or always used to direct PCCs usage at 66.4% of institutions. Four-factor PCCs were preferred by 93% of institutions. The most common perceived indications for 4-factor PCCs were hemorrhage related to warfarin (92.1%) or oral Xa inhibitors (81.8%), intracranial hemorrhage (78.4%), trauma hemorrhage (66.2%), surgical hemorrhage (61.1%), and refractory hemorrhage (57.3%). The most common perceived contraindications were heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (42%), disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (39.2%), and active thromboembolism (38.9%). Most institutions considered patient weight (78.8%), indication (77.6%), and International Normalized Ratio (76.9%) when dosing PCCs. Only 43.8% of institutions used fixed dose, only 19.6% compounded PCCs at the bedside, and only 11.9% administered PCCs by rapid infusion. Compared to standard blood products, respondents believed PCCs acted more rapidly, were less likely to cause volume issues, and were more expensive. Respondents were neutral about PCCs acting longer, being more effective at preventing or treating hemorrhage, or causing thromboembolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Off-label use of PCCs is common. Differing perceptions surrounding indications, contraindications, and comparisons to blood products/procoagulants likely contribute to variable practices.

Thirty-day mortality with andexanet alfa compared with prothrombin complex concentrate therapy for life-threatening direct oral anticoagulant-related bleeding

Objective

Compare 30-day mortality among patients receiving the specific reversal agent andexanet alfa versus replacement prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) in the management of direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC)-related bleeds.

Methods

Two patient-level datasets were used: ANNEXA-4, a prospective, single-arm trial of patients taking apixaban or rivaroxaban who received andexanet alfa and ORANGE, a prospective, observational study of anticoagulated patients in UK hospitals, some of whom received PCC. Patients were propensity score matched based on demographic and clinical characteristics. Subgroup analyses were performed by bleed type (intracranial hemorrhage [ICH], gastrointestinal [GI], other). Relative risk (RR) of all-cause 30-day mortality was calculated.

Results

322 ANNEXA-4 patients treated with andexanet alfa (mean age = 77.7 years; 64.9% ICH) were matched with 88 ORANGE patients treated with PCC (mean age = 74.9 years, 67.1% ICH). Adjusted 30-day mortality for patients treated with andexanet alfa (14.6%) was lower than patients treated with PCC (34.1%; RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.29-0.63). In the ICH subgroup, patients treated with andexanet alfa had lower mortality (15.3%) than patients treated with PCC (48.9%; RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.20-0.48). Mortality risk was lowest for patients in the GI subgroup but did not differ significantly by treatment (12.2% for andexanet alfa vs 25.0% for PCC; RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.21-1.16).

Conclusions

In this propensity score-matched comparison across 2 independent datasets, adjusted 30-day mortality rates were lower for patients treated with andexanet alfa than in matched patients receiving PCC. This indirect comparison was limited in that it could not account for several highly predictive variables including GCS score, hematoma volume, and expected survival. Further research is warranted to confirm the mortality differences between reversal/replacement agents for DOAC-related bleeding.

Cost-effectiveness of andexanet alfa versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the treatment of oral factor Xa inhibitor-related intracranial hemorrhage in the US

AIM

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) on the use of andexanet alfa for the treatment of factor Xa inhibitor-related intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) from the US third-party payer and societal perspectives.

METHODS

CEA compared andexanet alfa to prothrombin complex concentrate for the treatment of patients receiving factor Xa inhibitors admitted to hospital inpatient care with an ICH. The model comprised two linked phases. Phase 1 utilized a decision tree to model the acute treatment phase (admission of a patient with ICH into intensive care for the first 30 days). Phase 2 modeled long-term costs and outcomes using three linked Markov models comprising the six health states defined by the modified Rankin score.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that the strategy of using andexanet alfa for the treatment of factor Xa inhibitor-related ICH is cost-effective, with incremental cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life-year gained of $35,872 from a third-party payer perspective and $40,997 from a societal perspective over 20 years.

LIMITATIONS

(1) Absence of head-to-head trials comparing therapies included in the economic model, (2) lack of comparative long-term data on treatment efficacy, and (3) bias resulting from the study designs of published literature.

CONCLUSION

Given these results, the use of andexanet alfa for the reversal of anticoagulation in patients with factor Xa inhibitor-related ICH may improve quality of life and is likely to be cost-effective in a US context.

Efficacy and Safety of Andexanet Alfa for Bleeding Caused by Factor Xa Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) including factor Xa inhibitors are associated with bleeding events which can lead to severe morbidity and mortality. Reversal agents like andexanet alfa (AA) and 4F-PCC (Four-factor prothrombin concentrate complex) are available for treating bleeding that occurs with DOAC therapy but a comparison on their efficacy is lacking. In this study, we analyzed the efficacy and safety of patients treated with andexanet alfa for bleeding events from DOAC. Databases were searched for relevant studies where AA was used to determine efficacy and safety in bleeding patients who were on factor Xa inhibitors. Published papers were screened independently by two authors. RevMan 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020) was used for data synthesis. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) was used to estimate the outcome with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Among 1245 studies were identified after a thorough database search and three studies were included for analysis. AA resulted in lower odds of mortality compared to 4F- PCC (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.20-0.71) among patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. There was no difference in thrombotic events between patients receiving AA and 4F-PCC (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 0.36-15.84). No differences in length of hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay were seen between patients receiving AA and 4F-PCC. In conclusion, andexanet alfa reduced in-hospital mortality in patients who had bleeding due to factor Xa inhibitors compared to 4F-PCC. However, there were no differences in thrombotic events, length of ICU, and hospital stay between patients treated with AA and 4F-PCC.