The Use of Low-Dose Warfarin as Prophylaxis for Central Venous Catheter Thrombosis in Patients With Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

ESPEN guideline on chronic intestinal failure in adults - Update 2023

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In 2016, ESPEN published the guideline for Chronic Intestinal Failure (CIF) in adults. An updated version of ESPEN guidelines on CIF due to benign disease in adults was devised in order to incorporate new evidence since the publication of the previous ESPEN guidelines.

METHODS

The grading system of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) was used to grade the literature. Recommendations were graded according to the levels of evidence available as A (strong), B (conditional), 0 (weak) and Good practice points (GPP). The recommendations of the 2016 guideline (graded using the GRADE system) which were still valid, because no studies supporting an update were retrieved, were reworded and re-graded accordingly.

RESULTS

The recommendations of the 2016 guideline were reviewed, particularly focusing on definitions, and new chapters were included to devise recommendations on IF centers, chronic enterocutaneous fistulas, costs of IF, caring for CIF patients during pregnancy, transition of patients from pediatric to adult centers. The new guideline consist of 149 recommendations and 16 statements which were voted for consensus by ESPEN members, online in July 2022 and at conference during the annual Congress in September 2022. The Grade of recommendation is GPP for 96 (64.4%) of the recommendations, 0 for 29 (19.5%), B for 19 (12.7%), and A for only five (3.4%). The grade of consensus is "strong consensus" for 148 (99.3%) and "consensus" for one (0.7%) recommendation. The grade of consensus for the statements is "strong consensus" for 14 (87.5%) and "consensus" for two (12.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

It is confirmed that CIF management requires complex technologies, multidisciplinary and multiprofessional activity, and expertise to care for the underlying gastrointestinal disease and to provide HPN support. Most of the recommendations were graded as GPP, but almost all received a strong consensus.

Venous thromboembolism associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer: From pathophysiology to thromboprophylaxis, areas for future studies

Symptomatic catheter related thrombosis (CRT) occurs in 4%-8% of cancer patients. The mean incidence of CRT, detected either by echography or Doppler ranges between 12 and 14% with a high negative predictive value of about 95%, allowing the subsequent occurrence of CRT (symptomatic and asymptomatic) to be safely excluded. Despite its frequency and its medico-economic consequences, no thromboprophylaxis has been validated to date. In most patients, CRT occurs immediately after catheter insertion, most often within the first week and almost all within the first month after insertion. Meta analyses show a reduction of asymptomatic and symptomatic CRT incidence by about 55%-60% using either vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins without an increased risk of major bleeding. This pharmacological prophylaxis is only effective when started before the central venous catheter insertion at prophylactic doses and thereafter continued at subtherapeutic doses. Since no population at high risk of CRT has been identified, this review focuses on pathophysiology, epidemiology and clinical supportive data that could lead to a new CRT prophylaxis strategy.

Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with Malignancies: Daily Practice Recommendations by the Hemostasis Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO), the Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research (GTH), and the Austrian Society of Hematology and Oncology (ÖGHO)

Patients with cancer, both hematologic and solid malignancies, are at increased risk for thrombosis and thromboembolism. In addition to general risk factors such as immobility and major surgery, shared by non-cancer patients, cancer patients are exposed to specific thrombotic risk factors. These include, among other factors, cancer-induced hypercoagulation, and chemotherapy-mediated endothelial dysfunction as well as tumor-cell-derived microparticles. After an episode of thrombosis in a cancer patient, secondary thromboprophylaxis to prevent recurrent thromboembolism has long been established and is typically continued as long as the cancer is active or actively treated. On the other hand, primary prophylaxis, even though firmly established in hospitalized cancer patients, has only recently been studied in ambulatory patients. This recent change is mostly due to the emergence of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). DOACs have a shorter half-life than vitamin K antagonists (VKA), and they overcome the need for parenteral application, the latter of which is associated with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) and can be difficult for the patient to endure in the long term. Here, first, we discuss the clinical trials of primary thromboprophylaxis in the population of cancer patients in general, including the use of VKA, LMWH, and DOACs, and the potential drug interactions with pre-existing medications that need to be taken into account. Second, we focus on special situations in cancer patients where primary prophylactic anticoagulation should be considered, including myeloma, major surgery, indwelling catheters, or immobilization, concomitant diseases such as renal insufficiency, liver disease, or thrombophilia, as well as situations with a high bleeding risk, particularly thrombocytopenia, and specific drugs that may require primary thromboprophylaxis. We provide a novel algorithm intended to aid specialists but also family practitioners and nurses who care for cancer patients in the decision process of primary thromboprophylaxis in the individual patient.

Association Between the Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis, the Warfarin Maintenance Dose, and CYP2C9*3, CYP2D6*10, and CYP3A5*3 Genetic Polymorphisms: A Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVE

This study explored the association between the CYP2C9*3/CYP2D6*10/CYP3A5*3 genetic polymorphisms with lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LEDVT) and the warfarin maintenance dose.

METHODS

Five hundred thirty-six patients who were pathologically diagnosed with LEDVT after surgery were included in the LEDVT group. At the same time, 540 patients without LEDVT who underwent surgery were recruited as the control group. Patients were given warfarin at an initial dose of 2.5-3.0 mg. Blood samples were collected to detect the initial and stable international normalized ratio (INR) values. The warfarin maintenance dose was obtained if the INR remained within a range of 2.0-3.0 for 3 consecutive days. The genotype distribution and haplotype analysis of the CYP2C9*3/CYP2D6*10/CYP3A5*3 alleles were analyzed using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) testing and SHEsis software, respectively. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk and protective factors for LEDVT.

RESULTS

The A/G genotypes, G/G genotypes, and G allele of CYP3A5*3 in the LEDVT group were observed with increased frequency compared with the control group. The LEDVT group displayed a higher ACG haplotype frequency, and lower ACA and ATA haplotype frequencies than the control group. Age, diabetes, low-density lipoprotein, CYP3A5*3 and the ACG haplotype were independent risk factors for LEDVT. High-density lipoprotein and the ACA haplotype were independent protective factors for LEDVT. The genotype distributions of the CYP2C9*3, CYP2D6*10, and CYP3A5*3 genetic polymorphisms were associated with the warfarin maintenance dose.

CONCLUSION

The CYP3A5*3 genetic polymorphism may be an important risk factor for LEDVT. Moreover, CYP2C9*3, CYP2D6*10, and CYP3A5*3 are associated with the warfarin maintenance dose.

ESPEN guidelines on chronic intestinal failure in adults

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Chronic Intestinal Failure (CIF) is the long-lasting reduction of gut function, below the minimum necessary for the absorption of macronutrients and/or water and electrolytes, such that intravenous supplementation is required to maintain health and/or growth. CIF is the rarest organ failure. Home parenteral nutrition (HPN) is the primary treatment for CIF. No guidelines (GLs) have been developed that address the global management of CIF. These GLs have been devised to generate comprehensive recommendations for safe and effective management of adult patients with CIF.

METHODS

The GLs were developed by the Home Artificial Nutrition & Chronic Intestinal Failure Special Interest Group of ESPEN. The GRADE system was used for assigning strength of evidence. Recommendations were discussed, submitted to Delphi rounds, and accepted in an online survey of ESPEN members.

RESULTS

The following topics were addressed: management of HPN; parenteral nutrition formulation; intestinal rehabilitation, medical therapies, and non-transplant surgery, for short bowel syndrome, chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction, and radiation enteritis; intestinal transplantation; prevention/treatment of CVC-related infection, CVC-related occlusion/thrombosis; intestinal failure-associated liver disease, gallbladder sludge and stones, renal failure and metabolic bone disease. Literature search provided 623 full papers. Only 12% were controlled studies or meta-analyses. A total of 112 recommendations are given: grade of evidence, very low for 51%, low for 39%, moderate for 8%, and high for 2%; strength of recommendation: strong for 63%, weak for 37%.

CONCLUSIONS

CIF management requires complex technologies, multidisciplinary and multiprofessional activity, and expertise to care for both the underlying gastrointestinal disease and to provide HPN support. The rarity of the condition impairs the development of RCTs. As a consequence, most of the recommendations have a low or very low grade of evidence. However, two-thirds of the recommendations are considered strong. Specialized management and organization underpin these recommendations.

Canadian consensus recommendations on the management of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Part 1: prophylaxis

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (vte). Anticoagulation therapy has been shown to prevent vte; however, unique clinical circumstances in patients with cancer can often complicate the decisions surrounding the administration of prophylactic anticoagulation. No national Canadian guidelines on the prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis have been published. We therefore aimed to develop a consensus-based, evidence-informed guideline on the topic. PubMed was searched for clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 2002 and 2013. Reference lists of key articles were hand-searched for additional publications. Content experts from across Canada were assembled to review the evidence and make recommendations. Low molecular weight heparin can be used prophylactically in cancer patients at high risk of developing vte. Direct oral anticoagulants are not recommended for vte prophylaxis at this time. Specific clinical scenarios, including renal insufficiency, thrombocytopenia, liver disease, and obesity can warrant modifications in the administration of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy. There is no evidence to support the monitoring of anti-factor Xa levels in clinically stable cancer patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulation; however, factor Xa levels could be checked at baseline and periodically in patients with renal insufficiency. The use of anticoagulation therapy to prolong survival in cancer patients without the presence of risk factors for vte is not recommended.

Central venous catheter care for the patient with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To develop an evidence-based guideline on central venous catheter (CVC) care for patients with cancer that addresses catheter type, insertion site, and placement as well as prophylaxis and management of both catheter-related infection and thrombosis.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library (1980 to July 2012) identified relevant articles published in English.

RESULTS

The overall quality of the randomized controlled trial evidence was rated as good. There is consistency among meta-analyses and guidelines compiled by other groups as well.

RECOMMENDATIONS

There is insufficient evidence to recommend one CVC type or insertion site; femoral catheterization should be avoided. CVC should be placed by well-trained providers, and the use of a CVC clinical care bundle is recommended. The use of antimicrobial/antiseptic-impregnated and/or heparin-impregnated CVCs is recommended to decrease the risk of catheter-related infections for short-term CVCs, particularly in high-risk groups; more research is needed. The prophylactic use of systemic antibiotics is not recommended before insertion. Data are not sufficient to recommend for or against routine use of antibiotic flush/lock therapy; more research is needed. Before starting antibiotic therapy, cultures should be obtained. Some life-threatening infections require immediate catheter removal, but most can be treated with antimicrobial therapy while the CVC remains in place. Routine flushing with saline is recommended. Prophylactic use of warfarin or low-molecular weight heparin is not recommended, although a tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) is recommended to restore patency to occluded catheters. CVC removal is recommended when the catheter is no longer needed or if there is a radiologically confirmed thrombosis that worsens despite anticoagulation therapy.

International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of thrombosis associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Although long-term indwelling central venous catheters (CVCs) may lead to pulmonary embolism (PE) and loss of the CVC, there is lack of consensus on management of CVC-related thrombosis (CRT) in cancer patients and heterogeneity in clinical practices worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

To establish common international Good Clinical Practices Guidelines (GCPG) for the management of CRT in cancer patients.

METHODS

An international working group of experts was set up to develop GCPG according to an evidence-based medicine approach, using the GRADE system.

RESULTS

For the treatment of established CRT in cancer patients, we found no prospective randomized studies, two non-randomized prospective studies and one retrospective study examining the efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) plus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). One retrospective study evaluated the benefit of CVC removal and two small retrospective studies were on thrombolytic drugs. For the treatment of symptomatic CRT, anticoagulant treatment (AC) is recommended for a minimum of 3 months; in this setting, LMWHs are suggested. VKAs can also be used, in the absence of direct comparisons of these two types of anticoagulants in this setting [Guidance]. The CVC can be kept in place if it is functional, well-positioned and non-infected and there is good resolution under close surveillance; whether the CVC is kept or removed, no standard approach in terms of AC duration has been established [Guidance]. For the prophylaxis of CRT in cancer patients, we found six randomized studies investigating the efficacy and safety of VKA vs. placebo or no treatment, one on the efficacy and safety of unfractionnated heparin, six on the value of LMWH, one double-blind randomized and one non randomized study on thrombolytic drugs and six meta-analyses of AC and CVC thromboprophylaxis. Type of catheter (open-ended like the Hickman(®) catheter vs. closed-ended catheter with a valve like the Groshong(®) catheter), its position (above, below or at the junction of the superior vena cava and the right atrium) and method of placement may influence the onset of CRT on the basis of six retrospective trials, four prospective non-randomized trials, three randomized trials and one meta-analysis. In light of these data: use of AC for routine prophylaxis of CRT is not recommended [1A]; a CVC should be inserted on the right side, in the jugular vein, and distal extremity of the CVC should be located at the junction of the superior vena cava and the right atrium [1A].

CONCLUSION

Dissemination and implementation of these international GCPG for the prevention and treatment of CRT in cancer patients at each national level is a major public health priority, needing worldwide collaboration.

2008 SOR guidelines for the prevention and treatment of thrombosis associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer: report from the working group

BACKGROUND

In view of the lack of recommendations on central venous catheter (CVC)-associated thrombosis in cancer patients, we established guidelines according to the well-standardized Standards, Options and Recommendations methodology.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature review (1990-2007) on CVC-associated thrombosis was carried out. The guidelines were developed on the basis of the corresponding levels of evidence derived from analysis of the 36 of 175 publications selected. They were then peer reviewed by 65 independent experts.

RESULTS

For the prevention of CVC-associated thrombosis, the distal tip of the CVC should be placed at the junction between the superior cava vein and right atrium; anticoagulants are not recommended. Treatment of CVC-associated thrombosis should be based on the prolonged use of low-molecular weight heparins. Maintenance of the catheter is justified if it is mandatory, functional, in the right position, and not infected, with a favorable clinical evolution under close monitoring; anticoagulant treatment should then be continued as long as the catheter is present.

CONCLUSIONS

Several rigorous studies do not support the use of anticoagulants for the prevention of CVC-associated thrombosis. Treatment of CVC-associated thrombosis relies on the same principles as those applied in the treatment of established thrombosis in cancer patients.

[Venous thromboembolism associated with long-term use of central venous catheters in cancer patients]

Increased incidence of cancers and the development of totally implanted venous access devices that contain their own port to deliver chemotherapy will lead to a greater than before numbers of central venous catheter-related thrombosis (CVCT). Medical consequences include catheter dysfunction and pulmonary embolism. Vessel injury caused by the procedure of CVC insertion is the most important risk factor for development of CVCT. This event could cause the formation of a fresh thrombus, which is reversible in the large majority of patients. In some cases, thrombus formation is not related to catheter insertion. The incidence of CVC-related DVT assessed by venography has been reported to vary from 30 to 60% but catheter-related DVT in adult patients is symptomatic in only 5% of cases. The majority of patients with CVC-related DVT is asymptomatic or has nonspecific symptoms: arm or neck swelling or pain, distal paresthesias, headache, congestion of subcutaneous collateral veins. In the case of clinical suspicion of CVC-related deep venous thrombosis (DVT), compressive ultrasonography (US), especially with doppler and color imaging, currently is first used to confirm the diagnosis. Consequently, contrast venography is reserved for clinical trials and difficult diagnostic situations. There is no consensus on the optimal management of patients with CVC-related DVT. Treatment of CVC-related VTE requires a five- to seven-day course of adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) followed by oral anticoagulants. Long-term LMWH that has been shown to be more effective than oral anticoagulant in cancer patients with lower limb DVT, could be used in these patients. The efficacy and safety of pharmacologic prophylaxis for CVC related thrombosis is not established and the last recommendations suggest that clinicians not routinely use prophylaxis to try to prevent thrombosis related to long-term indwelling CVCs in cancer patients. Additional studies performed in high risk populations with appropriate dosage and timing will help to define which patients could benefit from prophylaxis.