METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the clinical outcomes between intermediate/ therapeutic anticoagulation and prophylactic anticoagulation. Meta-analyses with random-effects models were used to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) for outcomes of interest at a 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials were included, with a total of 5405 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the odds of mortality (pooled OR = 0.92; 95% CI 0.71-1.19) but a statistically significant reduction in the odds of development of thrombotic events (pooled OR = 0.55; 95% CI 0.42-0.72), and significantly increased odds of development of major bleeding (pooled OR = 1.81; 95% CI 1.20-2.72) with the use of intermediate/therapeutic anticoagulation, relative to prophylactic anticoagulation. Subgroup analysis in patients with a severe course of COVID-19 observed a statistically significant reduction in the odds of development of thrombotic events (pooled OR = 0.66; 95% CI 0.45-0.98) but no significant difference in the odds of development of major bleeding events (pooled OR = 1.37; 95% CI 0.74-2.56), with the use of intermediate/therapeutic anticoagulation, relative to prophylactic anticoagulation.
CONCLUSION: There could be net clinical benefits with higher-intensity dosing of anticoagulation relative to prophylactic-dosing of anticoagulation among hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19.
AREAS COVERED: Literature was searched in different resources for eligible studies. The pooled risk ratio was measured using RevMan software, with p<0.05 (two-sided) set as statistically significant.
EXPERT OPINION: The ABCB1 C3435T homozygous mutant (TT) was associated with significantly increased risk of MACE compared to either wild type genotype (CC) or the combination of wild type and heterozygous genotypes (TT vs. CC: RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.06-1.68; p=0.02; TT vs. CC+CT: RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.10-1.60; p=0.004). Safety outcomes, i.e. bleeding events were not significantly different between the genetic models investigated (TT vs. CC: RR 1.93; 95% CI 0.86-4.35; p=0.11; TT vs. CC+CT: RR 1.36; 95% CI 0.89-2.09; p=0.16; CT+TT vs. CC: RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.59-2.44; p=0.61). It is suggested that ABCB1 C3435T genotype should be tested for ACS/CAD patients undergoing PCI to ensure optimum therapy of clopidogrel.
OBJECTIVE: We report end-of-trial efficacy and safety of N8-GP from pathfinder2.
METHODS: pathfinder2 main phase and extension phase part 1 results have been previously reported. During extension phase part 2, patients could switch from N8-GP prophylaxis 50 IU/kg every fourth day (Q4D) or 75 IU/kg once weekly (Q7D), depending on bleeding status. Extension phase part 2 collected long-term safety and efficacy data for all regimens until trial end (first patient in main phase, 30 January 2012; trial end, 10 December 2018).
RESULTS: Overall, 186 patients were exposed to N8-GP for up to 6.6 years (median 5.4 years). The estimated annualized bleeding rate (ABR) was 2.14 (median 0.84) for the Q4D prophylaxis arm and 1.31 (median 1.67) for the Q7D prophylaxis arm. Nearly 30% of patients experienced zero bleeds throughout the entire duration of the trial, the hemostatic response was 83.2% across all treatment arms, and patient-reported outcomes were maintained or slightly improved. No safety concerns were detected.
CONCLUSION: Data from the completed pathfinder2 trial, one of the largest and longest-running clinical trials to investigate treatment of severe hemophilia A, demonstrate the efficacy and safety of N8-GP in previously treated adolescent and adult patients.
OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this review was to investigate the effect of fibrinogen concentrate in postoperative blood loss in adult surgical patients.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES: Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched from their start date until July 2019.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All randomized clinical trials comparing intravenous fibrinogen concentrate and placebo in adult surgical patients were included, regardless of type of surgery. Observational studies, case reports, case series and non-systematic reviews were excluded.
RESULTS: Thirteen trials (n = 900) were included in this review. In comparison to placebo, fibrinogen concentrate significantly reduced the first 12-hour postoperative blood loss, with a mean difference of -134.6 ml (95% CI -181.9 to -87.4). It also significantly increased clot firmness in thromboelastometry (FIBTEM) with a mean difference of 2.5 mm (95%CI 1.1 to 3.8). No significant differences were demonstrated in the adverse events associated with fibrinogen concentrate use, namely incidence of thromboembolism, myocardial infarction and acute kidney injury.
CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of 13 randomized trials, low level of evidence and substantial heterogeneity with small sample size limit strong recommendation on the use of fibrinogen concentrate in adult surgical patients. However, its use is tolerable without any notable adverse events.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42019149164.
METHODS: Patient-level data from two all-comers observational studies (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02629575 and NCT02905214) were pooled and analyzed in terms of their primary endpoint. During the data verification process, we observed substantial deviations from DAPT guideline recommendations. To illuminate this gap between clinical practice and guideline recommendations, we conducted a post hoc analysis of DAPT regimens and clinical event rates for which we defined the net adverse event rate (NACE) consisting of target lesion revascularization (TLR, primary endpoint of all-comers observational studies) all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), and bleeding events. A logistic regression was utilized to determine predictors why ticagrelor was used in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients instead of the guideline-recommended clopidogrel.
RESULTS: For stable CAD, the composite endpoint of clinical, bleeding, and stent thrombosis, i.e., NACE, between the clopidogrel and ticagrelor treatment groups was not different (5.4% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.745). Likewise, in the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cohort, the NACE rates were not different between both DAPT strategies (9.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.927). There were also no differences in the accumulated rates for TLR, myocardial infarction ([MI], mortality, bleeding events, and stent thrombosis in elective and ACS patients. The main predictors for ticagrelor use in stable CAD patients were age
METHODS: In an international, randomized, single-blind trial, we compared polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents with polymer-free umirolimus-coated stents in patients at high bleeding risk. After PCI, patients were treated with 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy, followed by single antiplatelet therapy. The primary outcome was a safety composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis at 1 year. The principal secondary outcome was target-lesion failure, an effectiveness composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization. Both outcomes were powered for noninferiority.
RESULTS: A total of 1996 patients at high bleeding risk were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive zotarolimus-eluting stents (1003 patients) or polymer-free drug-coated stents (993 patients). At 1 year, the primary outcome was observed in 169 of 988 patients (17.1%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 164 of 969 (16.9%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.1; P = 0.01 for noninferiority). The principal secondary outcome was observed in 174 patients (17.6%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 169 (17.4%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.4; P = 0.007 for noninferiority).
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at high bleeding risk who received 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI, use of polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents was noninferior to use of polymer-free drug-coated stents with regard to safety and effectiveness composite outcomes. (Funded by Medtronic; ONYX ONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03344653.).
METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424.
METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease. Participants were randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole 40 mg daily or placebo, as well as rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily with aspirin 100 mg once daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily, or aspirin 100 mg alone. The primary outcome was time to first upper gastrointestinal event, defined as a composite of overt bleeding, upper gastrointestinal bleeding from a gastroduodenal lesion or of unknown origin, occult bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcer or ≥5 erosions, upper gastrointestinal obstruction, or perforation.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal events between the pantoprazole group (102 of 8791 events) and the placebo group (116 of 8807 events) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-1.15). Pantoprazole significantly reduced bleeding of gastroduodenal lesions (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.94; P = .03); this reduction was greater when we used a post-hoc definition of bleeding gastroduodenal lesion (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.74), although the number needed to treat still was high (n = 982; 95% confidence interval, 609-2528).
CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized placebo-controlled trial, we found that routine use of proton pump inhibitors in patients receiving low-dose anticoagulation and/or aspirin for stable cardiovascular disease does not reduce upper gastrointestinal events, but may reduce bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01776424.
METHODS: AIS patients treated with IV rt-PA from February 2012 to August 2016 were recruited. Demographic data, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores, timing and neuroradiological findings were recorded. Patients received a dose of 0.9 mg/kg IV rt-PA within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. mRS score was evaluated at discharge and three months, and good and poor clinical outcomes were defined as scores of 0-2 and 3-6, respectively. Baseline THRIVE scores were assessed.
RESULTS: 36 patients received IV rt-PA. 20 (55.6%) patients had an mRS score of 0-2 at three months. Based on THRIVE score, 86.1% had a good or moderately good prognosis. On univariate analysis, poor outcome was associated with NIHSS score before rt-PA (p = 0.03), THRIVE score (p = 0.02), stroke subtype (p = 0.049) and diabetes mellitus (DM; p = 0.06). Multiple logistic regression showed that outcome was significantly associated with NIHSS score before rt-PA (p = 0.032) and DM (p = 0.010).
CONCLUSION: Our newly developed Malaysian IV rt-PA service is safe, with similar outcomes to the published literature. Functional outcome after thrombolysis was associated with baseline NIHSS score and DM.
METHODS: POISE-2 was a blinded, randomized trial of patients having non-cardiac surgery. Patients were assigned to perioperative aspirin or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of death or myocardial infarction at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included: vascular occlusive complications (a composite of amputation and peripheral arterial thrombosis) and major or life-threatening bleeding.
RESULTS: Of 10 010 patients in POISE-2, 603 underwent vascular surgery, 319 in the continuation and 284 in the initiation stratum. Some 272 patients had vascular surgery for occlusive disease and 265 had aneurysm surgery. The primary outcome occurred in 13·7 per cent of patients having aneurysm repair allocated to aspirin and 9·0 per cent who had placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 1·48, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 3·09). Among patients who had surgery for occlusive vascular disease, 15·8 per cent allocated to aspirin and 13·6 per cent on placebo had the primary outcome (HR 1·16, 0·62 to 2·17). There was no interaction with the primary outcome for type of surgery (P = 0·294) or aspirin stratum (P = 0·623). There was no interaction for vascular occlusive complications (P = 0·413) or bleeding (P = 0·900) for vascular compared with non-vascular surgery.
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the overall POISE-2 results apply to vascular surgery. Perioperative withdrawal of chronic aspirin therapy did not increase cardiovascular or vascular occlusive complications. Registration number: NCT01082874 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
AREAS COVERED: A review of articles that evaluated the cost of prescribing conventional (e.g. vitamin K antagonists) and NOACs (e.g. direct thrombin inhibitors and direct factor Xa inhibitors) in older adults.
EXPERT COMMENTARY: While the use of NOACs significantly increases the cost of the initial treatment for thromboembolic disorders, they are still considered cost-effective relative to warfarin since they offer reduced risk of intracranial haemorrhagic events. The optimum anticoagulation with warfarin can be achieved by providing specialised care; clinics managed by pharmacists have been shown to be cost-effective relative to usual care. There are suggestions that genotyping the CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genes is useful for determining a more appropriate initial dose and thereby increasing the effectiveness and safety of warfarin.
METHODS: This was a randomized control, open-label trial. Women underwent major gynecological surgery were randomized to receive either subcutaneous 50 mg of Na-PPS twice daily or subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once daily. Fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily was given to Muslim women as an alternative to enoxaparin. The treatment was started 6 h postoperatively, for at least 3 days. All the patients received thromboembolic deterrent stockings. The primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism up to 3 days postsurgery. The main safety outcomes were minor and major bleeding.
RESULTS: Among 109 participants, there was no incidence of venous thromboembolism. None of the women developed major bleeding. Minor bleeding was observed in 28.3% (15/53) and 5.4% (3/56) of Na-PPS and standard thromboprophylaxis group, respectively (P = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Na-PPS was associated with increased risk of minor bleeding. There was insufficient data to conclude its efficacy as thromboprophylaxis. Further research is needed to evaluate Na-PPS safety as a standard thromboprophylactic agent.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library from inception to Feb 24th, 2017, to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that assessed interventions or strategies to improve oral anticoagulant use in AF patients.
RESULTS: Thirty-four systematic reviews were eligible for inclusion but only 11 were included in the qualitative analyses, corresponding to 40 unique meta-analyses, as the remaining systematic reviews had overlapping primary studies. There was insufficient evidence to support the efficacy of genotype-guided dosing and pharmacist-managed anticoagulation clinics for stroke prevention in AF patients. Conversely, patient's self-management and novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs), in general were superior to warfarin for preventing stroke and reducing mortality. All interventions showed comparable risk of major bleeding with warfarin.
CONCLUSION: Findings from this overview support the superiority of NOACs and patient's self-management for preventing stroke in AF patients. However, uncertainties remain on the benefits of genotype-guided dosing and pharmacist-managed anticoagulation clinics due to poor quality evidence, and future research is warranted.
METHODS: The pharmacy supply database and the medical records of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) receiving warfarin, dabigatran or rivaroxaban at two tertiary hospitals were reviewed. Patients who experienced an OAC-associated major or CRB event within 12 months of follow-up, or who have received OAC therapy for at least 1 year, were identified. The BRSs were fitted separately into patient data. The discrimination and the calibration of these BRSs as well as the factors associated with bleeding events were then assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 1017 patients with at least 1-year follow-up period, or those who developed a bleeding event within 1 year of OAC use, were recruited. Of which, 23 patients experienced a first major bleeding event, whereas 76 patients, a first CRB event. Multivariate logistic regression results show that age of 75 or older, prior bleeding and male gender are associated with major bleeding events. On the other hand, prior gastrointestinal bleeding, a haematocrit value of less than 30% and renal impairment are independent predictors of CRB events. All the BRSs show a satisfactory calibration for major and CRB events. Among these BRSs, only HEMORR2 HAGES (C-statistic = 0.71, 95% CI 0.60-0.82, P