Monitoring of low molecular weight heparin anticoagulation during haemodialysis with a Sonoclot Analyzer

Anticoagulation for people receiving long-term haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Haemodialysis (HD) requires safe and effective anticoagulation to prevent clot formation within the extracorporeal circuit during dialysis treatments to enable adequate dialysis and minimise adverse events, including major bleeding. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) may provide a more predictable dose, reliable anticoagulant effects and be simpler to administer than unfractionated heparin (UFH) for HD anticoagulation, but may accumulate in the kidneys and lead to bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation strategies (including both heparin and non-heparin drugs) for long-term HD in people with kidney failure. Any intervention preventing clotting within the extracorporeal circuit without establishing anticoagulation within the patient, such as regional citrate, citrate enriched dialysate, heparin-coated dialysers, pre-dilution haemodiafiltration (HDF), and saline flushes were also included.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to November 2023 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled studies (quasi-RCTs) evaluating anticoagulant agents administered during HD treatment in adults and children with kidney failure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool and extracted data. Treatment effects were estimated using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 113 studies randomising 4535 participants. The risk of bias in each study was adjudicated as high or unclear for most risk domains. Compared to UFH, LMWH had uncertain effects on extracorporeal circuit thrombosis (3 studies, 91 participants: RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.42; I2 = 8%; low certainty evidence), while major bleeding and minor bleeding were not adequately reported. Regional citrate anticoagulation may lower the risk of minor bleeding compared to UFH (2 studies, 82 participants: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.85; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). No studies reported data comparing regional citrate to UFH on risks of extracorporeal circuit thrombosis and major bleeding. The effects of very LMWH, danaparoid, prostacyclin, direct thrombin inhibitors, factor XI inhibitors or heparin-grafted membranes were uncertain due to insufficient data. The effects of different LMWH, different doses of LMWH, and the administration of LMWH anticoagulants using inlet versus outlet bloodline or bolus versus infusion were uncertain. Evidence to compare citrate to another citrate or control was scant. The effects of UFH compared to no anticoagulant therapy or different doses of UFH were uncertain. Death, dialysis vascular access outcomes, blood transfusions, measures of anticoagulation effect, and costs of interventions were rarely reported. No studies evaluated the effects of treatment on non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke and hospital admissions. Adverse events were inconsistently and rarely reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulant strategies, including UFH and LMWH, have uncertain comparative risks on extracorporeal circuit thrombosis, while major bleeding and minor bleeding were not adequately reported. Regional citrate may decrease minor bleeding, but the effects on major bleeding and extracorporeal circuit thrombosis were not reported. Evidence supporting clinical decision-making for different forms of anticoagulant strategies for HD is of low and very low certainty, as available studies have not been designed to measure treatment effects on important clinical outcomes.

Anticoagulant profile of subcutaneous enoxaparin in healthy dogs

Our study objective was to identify a subcutaneous enoxaparin dosage that provided a consistent anticoagulant intensity in dogs. Our hypotheses were that a dose of 0.8 mg/kg would provide inconsistent anticoagulation, a higher dose would provide consistent anticoagulation over a greater duration of time, and viscoelastometry would effectively monitor the anticoagulant status. Six healthy dogs received two subcutaneous enoxaparin doses (0.8 and 2 mg/kg) for anti-Xa activity determinations and pharmacokinetic modeling. Based on calculations derived from these results, 1.3 mg/kg, SC, q8 h was administered for seven doses. Target ranges for anticoagulant intensity were defined as anti-Xa activity of 0.5-1 U/ml, and change from baseline of two viscoelastometric parameters: activated clotting time (ΔACT; ≥40 s), and clot rate (CRpost; ≤20 U/min). Following an initial injection at 1.3 mg/kg, anti-Xa activity of 5/6 dogs reached or exceeded the target range. Following the final dose, anti-Xa activity reached or exceeded the target range in all dogs, and ΔACT and CRpost values exceeded target for 2-6 and 4-12 h, respectively. At an enoxaparin dosage of 1.3 mg/kg, SC, q8 h, anti-Xa activity was consistently above the minimum threshold of the target range; however, the safety of this dosage remains to be determined.

Establishment of reference intervals and transfusion criterion for Sonoclot analysis

Sonoclot analyzer has been widely used in many countries. But the reference intervals provided by the manufacturer were derived from only 45 participants, and there was no cut-off value for transfusion for Sonoclot analysis. This study aimed to establish reference intervals and transfusion criterion for Sonoclot analysis. Volunteers were recruited from healthy Chinese adults and patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Blood samples were withdrawn from forearm vein and measured for activated clotting time (ACT), clot rate (CR), platelet function (PF), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen concentration (FIB), and platelet count (PLT). The reference intervals were determined by the nonparametric method. Cut-off values were determined by the receiver operating characteristics curve. A total of 135 healthy volunteers and 281 patients were enrolled. The 95% reference intervals were 96-195 s, 22-51 signal U/min, >1.6 for ACT, CR, PF respectively. In the 281 patients, the results of APTT, FIB, PLT, ACT, CR, and PF ranged from 20.5-300.0 s, 0.28-4.11 g/L, (19.0-387.3)×109/L, 80-514 s, 2.9-74 signal U/min, and 0.1-5.1 respectively. The cut-off values for transfusion were >208, ≤14, and ≤1.3 for ACT, CR, PF respectively. The cut-off values of Sonoclot analysis were within the manufacturer's reference intervals, while they were outside the reference intervals established in this study. The results suggested that the manufacturer's reference intervals were not suitable for Chinese. The reference intervals and cut-off values established in this study will be helpful to Chinese patients.

Thromboelastometry versus free-oscillation rheometry and enoxaparin versus tinzaparin: an in-vitro study comparing two viscoelastic haemostatic tests' dose-responses to two low molecular weight heparins at the time of withdrawing epidural catheters from ten patients after major surgery

Background

Monitoring low molecular weight heparins (LMWH’s) in the perioperative period is prudent in patients at high risk of coagulative complications, especially when the patient has an epidural catheter requiring withdrawal, which is associated with the risk of spinal haematoma. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vitro dose-responses of two different LMWH’s on two different viscoelastic haemostatic tests, using blood sampled from patients with normal routine coagulation parameters, on the day after major surgery when their epidural catheters were due to be withdrawn.

Methods

Enoxaparin or tinzaparin were added in vitro to blood from ten patients who had undergone oesophageal resection, to obtain plasma concentrations of approximately 0, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 IU/mL. Coagulation was monitored using thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) using the InTEM® activating reagent; and free oscillation rheometry (FOR: ReoRox®), activated using thromboplastin. Clot initiation was measured using ROTEM-CT, ReoRox-COT1 and ReoRox–COT2. Clot propagation was measured using ROTEM-CFT, ROTEM-Alpha Angle and ReoRox-Slope. Clot stability was measured using ROTEM-MCF and ReoRox-G’max, and clot lysis was measured using ROTEM-ML and ReoRox-ClotSR.

Results

Clot initiation time assessed by thromboelastometry and FOR was prolonged by increasing concentrations of both LMWH’s (P < 0.01). Equivalent doses of tinzaparin in international units (anti-FXa units) per millilitre prolonged clot initiation more than enoxaparin (P < 0.05). There was significant inter-individual variation – the ranges of CT and COT1 at LMWH-concentrations of 0 and 1.5 IU/mL overlapped. None of the tests reflecting clot formation rate or stability showed a dose–response to either LMWH but clot lysis showed a tentative negative dose–response to the LMWH’s.

Conclusions

Clot initiation time’s dose-dependent prolongation by LMWH’s in this study agrees with previous research, as does tinzaparin’s stronger anti-coagulative effect than enoxaparin at equivalent levels of anti-FXa activity. This casts doubt on the validity of using anti-FXa assays alone to guide dosage of LMWH’s. The significant inter-individual variation in dose–response suggests that the relationship between dose and effect in the postoperative period is complicated. While both ROTEM and FOR may have some role in postoperative monitoring, more research is needed before any conclusion can be made about their clinical usefulness.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-015-0145-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Anticoagulation in Chronic Hemodialysis: Progress Toward an Optimal Approach

Appropriate anticoagulation for hemodialysis (HD) requires a subtle balance between under- and over-heparinization to prevent extracorporeal circuit (ECC) clotting and bleeding, respectively. We discuss five key issues relating to anticoagulation therapy for chronic HD in adults following a review of relevant literature published since 2002: (i) options for standardization of anticoagulation in HD settings. The major nephrology societies have issued low evidence level recommendations on this subject. Interventional studies have generally investigated novel low-molecular weight heparins and provided data on safety of dosing regimens that cannot readily be extrapolated to clinical practice; (ii) identification of clinical and biological parameters to aid individualization of anticoagulation treatment. We find that use of clinical and biological monitoring of anticoagulation during HD sessions is currently not clearly defined in routine clinical practice; (iii) role of ECC elements (dialysis membrane and blood lines), dialysis modalities, and blood flow in clotting development; (iv) options to reduce or suppress systemic heparinization during HD sessions. Alternative strategies have been investigated, especially when the routine mode of anticoagulation was not suitable in patients at high risk of bleeding or was contraindicated; (v) optimization of anticoagulation therapy for the individual patient. We conclude by proposing a standardized approach to deliver anticoagulation treatment for HD based on an individualized prescription prepared according to the patient's profile and needs.