Evidence is emerging that rates of adverse events in patients taking warfarin may vary with ethnicity. This study investigated the rates of bleeds and thromboembolic events, the international normalised ratio (INR) status and the relationship between INR and bleeding events in Malaysia. Patients attending INR clinic at the Heart Centre, Sarawak General Hospital were enrolled on an ad hoc basis from May 2010 and followed up for 1 year. At each routine visit, INR was recorded and screening for bleeding or thromboembolism occurred. Variables relating to INR control were used as predictors of bleeds in logistic regression models. 125 patients contributed to 140 person-years of follow-up. The rates of major bleed, thromboembolic event and minor bleed per 100 person-years of follow-up were 1.4, 0.75 and 34.3. The median time at target range calculated using the Rosendaal method was 61.6% (IQR 44.6–74.1%). Of the out-of-range readings, 30.0% were below range and 15.4% were above. INR variability, (standard deviation of individuals’ mean INR), was the best predictor of bleeding events, with an odds ratio of 3.21 (95% CI 1.10–9.38). Low rates of both major bleeds and thromboembolic events were recorded, in addition to a substantial number of INR readings under the recommended target range. This may suggest that the recommended INR ranges may not represent the optimal warfarin intensity for this population and that a lower intensity of therapy, as observed in this cohort, could be beneficial in preventing adverse events.
Study site: INR clinic at the Heart Centre, Sarawak General Hospital
Platelet activation induced by shear stresses and non-physiological flow field generated by bileaflet mechanical heart valves (BMHVs) leads to thromboembolism, which can cause fatal consequences. One of the causes of platelet activation could be intermittent regurgitation, which arises due to asynchronous movement and rebound of BMHV leaflets during the valve closing phase. In this numerical study, the effect of intermittent regurgitation on the platelet activation potential of BMHVs was quantified by modeling a BMHV in the straight and anatomic aorta at implantation tilt angles 0°, 5°, 10°, and 20°. A fully implicit Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian-based Fluid-Structure Interaction formulation was adopted with blood modeled as a multiphase, non-Newtonian fluid. Results showed that the intermittent regurgitation and consequently the platelet activation level increases with the increasing implantation tilt of BMHV. For the straight aorta, the leaflet of the 20° tilted BMHV underwent a rebound of approximately 20° after initially closing, whereas the leaflet of the 10°, 5°, and 0° tilted BMHVs underwent a rebound of 8.5°, 3°, and 0°, respectively. For the anatomic aorta, the leaflet of the 20° tilted BMHV underwent a rebound of approximately 24° after initially closing, whereas the leaflet of the 10°, 5°, and 0° tilted BMHVs underwent a rebound of 14°, 10°, and 7°, respectively. For all the implantation orientations of BMHVs, intermittent regurgitation and platelet activation were always higher in the anatomic aorta than in the straight aorta. The study concludes that the pivot axis of BMHV must be implanted parallel to the aortic root's curvature to minimize intermittent regurgitation and platelet activation.
Many aspects of care such as management of hypercoagulable state in COVID-19 patients, especially those admitted to intensive care units is challenging in the rapidly evolving pandemic of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We seek to systematically review the available evidence regarding the anticoagulation approach to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) among COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units. Electronic databases were searched for studies reporting venous thromboembolic events in patients admitted to the intensive care unit receiving any type of anticoagulation (prophylactic or therapeutic). The pooled prevalence (and 95% confidence interval [CI]) of VTE among patients receiving anticoagulant were calculated using the random-effects model. Subgroup pooled analyses were performed with studies reported prophylactic anticoagulation alone and with studies reported mixed prophylactic and therapeutic anticoagulation. We included twelve studies (8 Europe; 2 UK; 1 each from the US and China) in our systematic review and meta-analysis. All studies utilized LMWH or unfractionated heparin as their pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, either prophylactic doses or therapeutic doses. Seven studies reported on the proportion of patients with the previous history of VTE (range 0-10%). The pooled prevalence of VTE among ICU patients receiving prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation across all studies was 31% (95% CI 20-43%). Subgroup pooled analysis limited to studies reported prophylactic anticoagulation alone and mixed (therapeutic and prophylactic anticoagulation) reported pooled prevalences of VTE of 38% (95% CI 10-70%) and 27% (95% CI 17-40%) respectively. With a high prevalence of thromboprophylaxis failure among COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units, individualised rather than protocolised VTE thromboprophylaxis would appear prudent at interim.