Predictors of bleeding and thrombotic events among patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer: insights from the ACTION randomized clinical trial

Therapeutic anticoagulation showed inconsistent results in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and selection of the best patients to use this strategy still a challenge balancing the risk of thrombotic and hemorrhagic outcomes. The present post-hoc analysis of the ACTION trial evaluated the variables independently associated with both bleeding events (major bleeding or clinically relevant non-major bleeding) and the composite outcomes thrombotic events (venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, or major adverse limb events). Variables were assessed one by one with independent logistic regressions and final models were chosen based on Akaike information criteria. The model for bleeding events showed an area under the curve of 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53 to 0.73), while the model for thrombotic events had an area under the curve of 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.79). Non-invasive respiratory support was associated with thrombotic but not bleeding events, while invasive ventilation was associated with both outcomes (Odds Ratio of 7.03 [95 CI% 1.95 to 25.18] for thrombotic and 3.14 [95% CI 1.11 to 8.84] for bleeding events). Beyond respiratory support, creatinine level (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.01 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02 for every 1.0 mg/dL) and history of coronary disease (OR 3.67; 95% CI 1.32 to 10.29) were also independently associated to the risk of thrombotic events. Non-invasive respiratory support, history of coronary disease, and creatinine level may help to identify hospitalized COVID-19 patients at higher risk of thrombotic complications.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04394377.

Dapagliflozin in patients with critical illness: rationale and design of the DEFENDER study

BACKGROUND

Critical illness is a major ongoing health care burden worldwide and is associated with high mortality rates. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors have consistently shown benefits in cardiovascular and renal outcomes. The effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in acute illness have not been properly investigated.

METHODS

DEFENDER is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in 500 adult participants with acute organ dysfunction who are hospitalized in the intensive care unit. Eligible participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive dapagliflozin 10mg plus standard of care for up to 14 days or standard of care alone. The primary outcome is a hierarchical composite of hospital mortality, initiation of kidney replacement therapy, and intensive care unit length of stay, up to 28 days. Safety will be strictly monitored throughout the study.

CONCLUSION

DEFENDER is the first study designed to investigate the use of a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor in general intensive care unit patients with acute organ dysfunction. It will provide relevant information on the use of drugs of this promising class in critically ill patients.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRY

NCT05558098.

Erratum: Evaluation of the characteristics of infection prevention and control programs and infection control committees in Brazilian hospitals: A countrywide cross-sectional study - CORRIGENDUM

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/ash.2023.136.].

Evaluation of the characteristics of infection prevention and control programs and infection control committees in Brazilian hospitals: A countrywide cross-sectional study

Objective

Data are scarce regarding hospital infection control committees and compliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) recommendations in Brazil, a country of continental dimensions. We assessed the main characteristics of infection control committees (ICCs) on healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in Brazilian hospitals.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted in ICCs of public and private hospitals distributed across all Brazilian regions. Data were collected directly from the ICC staff by completing an online questionnaire and during on-site visits through face-to-face interviews.

Results

In total, 53 Brazilian hospitals were evaluated from October 2019 to December 2020. All hospitals had implemented the IPC core components in their programs. All centers had protocols for the prevention and control of ventilator-associated pneumonia as well as bloodstream, surgical site, and catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Most hospitals (80%) had no budget specifically allocated to the IPC program; 34% of the laundry staff had received specific IPC training; and only 7.5% of hospitals reported occupational infections in healthcare workers.

Conclusions

In this sample, most ICCs complied with the minimum requirements for IPC programs. The main limitation regarding ICCs was the lack of financial support. The findings of this survey support the development of strategic plans to improve IPCs in Brazilian hospitals.

IMPACTO-MR: a Brazilian nationwide platform study to assess infections and multidrug resistance in intensive care units

OBJECTIVE

To describe the IMPACTO-MR, a Brazilian nationwide intensive care unit platform study focused on the impact of health care-associated infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria.

METHODS

We described the IMPACTO-MR platform, its development, criteria for intensive care unit selection, characterization of core data collection, objectives, and future research projects to be held within the platform.

RESULTS

The core data were collected using the Epimed Monitor System® and consisted of demographic data, comorbidity data, functional status, clinical scores, admission diagnosis and secondary diagnoses, laboratory, clinical, and microbiological data, and organ support during intensive care unit stay, among others. From October 2019 to December 2020, 33,983 patients from 51 intensive care units were included in the core database.

CONCLUSION

The IMPACTO-MR platform is a nationwide Brazilian intensive care unit clinical database focused on researching the impact of health care-associated infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria. This platform provides data for individual intensive care unit development and research and multicenter observational and prospective trials.

IMPACTO-MR: a Brazilian nationwide platform study to assess infections and multidrug resistance in intensive care units

OBJECTIVE

To describe the IMPACTO-MR, a Brazilian nationwide intensive care unit platform study focused on the impact of health care-associated infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria.

METHODS

We described the IMPACTO-MR platform, its development, criteria for intensive care unit selection, characterization of core data collection, objectives, and future research projects to be held within the platform.

RESULTS

The core data were collected using the Epimed Monitor System® and consisted of demographic data, comorbidity data, functional status, clinical scores, admission diagnosis and secondary diagnoses, laboratory, clinical, and microbiological data, and organ support during intensive care unit stay, among others. From October 2019 to December 2020, 33,983 patients from 51 intensive care units were included in the core database.

CONCLUSION

The IMPACTO-MR platform is a nationwide Brazilian intensive care unit clinical database focused on researching the impact of health care-associated infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria. This platform provides data for individual intensive care unit development and research and multicenter observational and prospective trials.

Therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration (ACTION): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state leading to adverse clinical outcomes. Whether therapeutic anticoagulation improves outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 is unknown. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation in this population.

METHODS

We did a pragmatic, open-label (with blinded adjudication), multicentre, randomised, controlled trial, at 31 sites in Brazil. Patients (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, and who had COVID-19 symptoms for up to 14 days before randomisation, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation. Therapeutic anticoagulation was in-hospital oral rivaroxaban (20 mg or 15 mg daily) for stable patients, or initial subcutaneous enoxaparin (1 mg/kg twice per day) or intravenous unfractionated heparin (to achieve a 0·3-0·7 IU/mL anti-Xa concentration) for clinically unstable patients, followed by rivaroxaban to day 30. Prophylactic anticoagulation was standard in-hospital enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin. The primary efficacy outcome was a hierarchical analysis of time to death, duration of hospitalisation, or duration of supplemental oxygen to day 30, analysed with the win ratio method (a ratio >1 reflects a better outcome in the therapeutic anticoagulation group) in the intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding through 30 days. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04394377) and is completed.

FINDINGS

From June 24, 2020, to Feb 26, 2021, 3331 patients were screened and 615 were randomly allocated (311 [50%] to the therapeutic anticoagulation group and 304 [50%] to the prophylactic anticoagulation group). 576 (94%) were clinically stable and 39 (6%) clinically unstable. One patient, in the therapeutic group, was lost to follow-up because of withdrawal of consent and was not included in the primary analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was not different between patients assigned therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation, with 28 899 (34·8%) wins in the therapeutic group and 34 288 (41·3%) in the prophylactic group (win ratio 0·86 [95% CI 0·59-1·22], p=0·40). Consistent results were seen in clinically stable and clinically unstable patients. The primary safety outcome of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 26 (8%) patients assigned therapeutic anticoagulation and seven (2%) assigned prophylactic anticoagulation (relative risk 3·64 [95% CI 1·61-8·27], p=0·0010). Allergic reaction to the study medication occurred in two (1%) patients in the therapeutic anticoagulation group and three (1%) in the prophylactic anticoagulation group.

INTERPRETATION

In patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, in-hospital therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or enoxaparin followed by rivaroxaban to day 30 did not improve clinical outcomes and increased bleeding compared with prophylactic anticoagulation. Therefore, use of therapeutic-dose rivaroxaban, and other direct oral anticoagulants, should be avoided in these patients in the absence of an evidence-based indication for oral anticoagulation.

FUNDING

Coalition COVID-19 Brazil, Bayer SA.

High Residual Platelet Reactivity during Aspirin Therapy in Patients with Non-St Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Comparison Between Initial and Late Phases

Background

High platelet reactivity (HPR) during therapy with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is a poor prognostic factor in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The prevalence of HPR during ACS is greater than that reported in stable diseases. However, it is unclear whether this prevalence of HPR is a transient phenomenon or a characteristic of this high-risk population.

Objective

The main objective is to compare the effects of ASA on platelet function in the initial and late phases of ACS in a single population. Secondary objectives are: correlation between the tests between themselves and the relationship between the tests and the variation of the inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein and interleukin-6).

Methods

Seventy patients with non-ST segment elevation (NSTE) ACS in use of 100-200 mg of ASA per day for at least 7 days were prospectively studied. Platelet function was assessed in the first 48 hours and subsequently after 3 months using four methods: VerifyNow™ (VFN), whole blood platelet aggregation (WBPA) with arachidonic acid (AA) and collagen as agonists, and platelet function analyzer (PFA). The level of statistical significance considered was < 0.05.

Results

According to the more specific methods (WBPA with AA and VFN), the incidence of HPR was significantly higher in the early phase than in the late phase: WBPA with AA: 31% versus 13%, p = 0.015; VFN: 32% versus 16%, p = 0.049. The other methods tested, which were less specific for ASA, did not show significant differences between phases. The correlation between the methods was weak or moderate (r ranging from 0.3 to 0.5, p < 0.05), and there were no significant associations between HPR and inflammatory markers.

Conclusion

The prevalence of HPR during AAS therapy, assessed by specific methods for cyclooxygenase 1 (COX-1), is higher during the acute phase than in the late phase of NSTE ACS.

Atorvastatin for high-risk statin-naïve patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: The Lowering the Risk of Operative Complications Using Atorvastatin Loading Dose (LOAD) randomized trial

Preliminary evidence suggests that statins may prevent major perioperative vascular complications.

METHODS

We randomized 648 statin-naïve patients who were scheduled for noncardiac surgery and were at risk for a major vascular complication. Patients were randomized to a loading dose of atorvastatin or placebo (80 mg anytime within 18hours before surgery), followed by a maintenance dose of 40 mg (or placebo), started at least 12hours after the surgery, and then 40 mg/d (or placebo) for 7days. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, and stroke at 30days.

RESULTS

The primary outcome was observed in 54 (16.6%) of 326 patients in the atorvastatin group and 59 (18.7%) of 316 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% CI 0.60-1.26, P=.46). No significant effect was observed on the 30-day secondary outcomes of all-cause mortality (4.3% vs 4.1%, respectively; HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.53-2.47, P=.74), nonfatal myocardial infarction (3.4% vs 4.4%, respectively; HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.35-1.68, P=.50), myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (13.2% vs 16.5%; HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53-1.19, P=.26), and stroke (0.9% vs 0%, P=.25).

CONCLUSION

In contrast to the prior observational and trial data, the LOAD trial has neutral results and did not demonstrate a reduction in major cardiovascular complications after a short-term perioperative course of statin in statin-naïve patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. We demonstrated, however, that a large multicenter blinded perioperative statin trial for high-risk statin-naïve patients is feasible and should be done to definitely establish the efficacy and safety of statin in this patient population.