Factor Xa inhibitors versus low-molecular-weight heparin for preventing coagulopathy following COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Amin L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11230789 | biostudies-literature | 2024 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6478064 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) remained common complication following surgical resection of esophageal cancer. In this prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial (NCT01267305), we aim to compare the safety and efficacy between low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) once-daily (QD) and twice-daily (BID) for the prophylaxis of VTE following esophagectomy.MethodsDuring August 2012 to July 2013, patients underwent esophagectomy were randomly assigned to nadroparin calcium QD (4,100 AxaIU qd + placebo qd, group QD), or nadroparin calcium BID (4,100 AxaIU q12h, group BID) in the prophylaxis of VTE. All patients received thrombelastography (TEG) before and 0/24/48/72 hours after operation. Daily vascular ultrasound of lower extremities was followed during the first 7 postoperative days to confirm the suspected deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Cumulatively postoperative chest drainage at 72 hours after the surgery was collected to identify the difference in volume and red blood cell (RBC) counts between the two groups. Any bleeding events and thromboembolic events were also documented.ResultsA total of 117 patients were enrolled in this study, and 111 eligible patients were randomly assigned (group QD: 55 patients; group BID: 56 patients). Patients' clinical features were close between the two groups. TEG analysis [R time, K time, alpha angel and maximum amplitude (MA)] before and instantly after operation showed nearly identical results. However, compared with group QD, all TEG measurements of 24/48/72 hours postoperatively showed significantly prolonged R time and K time, and decreased alpha angel in group BID. In ultrasound follow-ups, a total of four cases of DVT (four cases in group QD and no case in group BID) were found in this cohort (7.27% versus 0%, P=0.046), and one case of pulmonary embolism (PE) (in group QD) was observed. The incidence of VTE was lower in group BID (9.09% versus 0%, P=0.032). At 72 hours after surgery, the cumulative volume of chest drainage were close between these two groups (1,001.39±424.58 versus 1,133.61±513.93 mL, P=0.406). RBC counts in chest drainage were also identical between two groups [(2.56±1.98)×10(5) versus (2.71±4.67)×10(5), P=0.61]. No patient died due to VTE or bleeding events.ConclusionsFor the prophylaxis of VTE, BID LMWH provided more potent efficacy and equal safety when compared to QD LMWH in patients undergoing selective esophagectomy. Further study based on larger population is required to confirm these findings.
| S-EPMC4522502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimSepsis is a syndromic response to infection and is associated with high mortality, thus imposing a significant global burden of disease. Although low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has been recommended to prevent venous thromboembolism, its anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory effects in sepsis remain controversial. Owing to the modification of the Sepsis-3 definition and diagnostic criteria, further evaluation of the efficacy and benefit population of LMWH is required.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study to assess whether LMWH improved the inflammation, coagulopathy, and clinical outcomes against Sepsis-3 and to identify the target patients. All patients diagnosed with sepsis at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University (the largest general hospital in northwest China) from January 2016 to December 2020 were recruited and re-evaluated using Sepsis-3 criteria.ResultsAfter 1:1 propensity score matching, 88 pairs of patients were categorized into the treatment and control groups based on subcutaneous LMWH administration. Compared with the control group, a significantly lower 28-day mortality was observed in the LMWH group (26.1 vs. 42.0%, p = 0.026) with a comparable incidence of major bleeding events (6.8 vs. 8.0%, p = 0.773). Cox regression analysis showed that LMWH administration was the independent protective factor for septic patients (aHR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.29-0.81; p = 0.006). Correspondingly, the LMWH treatment group showed a significant improvement in inflammation and coagulopathy. Further subgroup analysis showed that LMWH therapy was associated with favorable outcomes in patients younger than 60 years and diagnosed with sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC), ISTH overt DIC, non-septic shock, or non-diabetics and in patients included in the moderate-risk group (APACHE II score 20-35 or SOFA score 8-12).ConclusionOur study results showed that LMWH improves 28-day mortality by improving inflammatory response and coagulopathy in patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria. The SIC and ISTH overt DIC scoring systems can better identify septic patients who are likely to benefit more from LMWH administration.
| S-EPMC10289000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveUncertainty surrounds the risk-benefit of low-molecular-weight heparin to prevent postpartum venous thromboembolism (VTE). Data from randomised clinical trials (RCT) are critically needed, but recent feasibility studies in North America yielded low participation rates, with <1 enrolment per month per centre. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of a trial of postpartum short-term enoxaparin in Europe.DesignPragmatic, open-label pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT).SettingSwiss tertiary hospital.PopulationPostpartum women, within 48 h of delivery, deemed at intermediate risk of VTE with at least one major risk factor (morbid obesity, thrombophilia, emergency caesarean section, pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery, intrauterine growth restriction or systemic peripartum infection) and/or at least two minor risk factors.MethodsParticipants were randomised to enoxaparin 40-60 mg once daily for 10 days or no treatment, with a 90-day follow-up.Main outcome measuresParticipation rate and study acceptance (randomised participants among women in whom informed consent was sought).ResultsRecruitment was open for 25 weeks in 2022. Among 1504 postpartum women, 480 were eligible and 77 were randomised. The recruitment rate was 3.1 per week (13.3 per month) and the study acceptance was 23.8%. At 3 months, there was no VTE event, but one major, one nonmajor obstetrical bleeding and one surgical site complication, all in the enoxaparin group.ConclusionsThis pilot RCT of postpartum thromboprophylaxis set in Switzerland yielded greater participation rate and acceptance than previous attempts in North America. It calls for a large, international, collaborative trial to guide this important clinical decision.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT05878899 and NCT04153760.
| S-EPMC11612613 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8053597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveDuring the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, management of anticoagulation therapy in hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) was simplified to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) followed by oral anticoagulation, mainly owing to the risk of drug-drug interactions. However, not all oral anticoagulants carry the same risk.MethodsObservational, retrospective, and multicenter study that consecutively included hospitalized patients with AF anticoagulated with LMWH followed by oral anticoagulation or edoxaban concomitantly with empirical COVID-19 therapy. Time-to-event (mortality, total bleeds, and admissions to ICU) curves, using an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression model adjusted for potential confounders were constructed.ResultsA total of 232 patients were included (80.3 ± 7.7 years, 50.0% men, CHA2DS2-VASc 4.1 ± 1.4; HAS-BLED 2.6 ± 1.0). During hospitalization, patients were taking azithromycin (98.7%), hydroxychloroquine (89.7%), and ritonavir/lopinavir (81.5%). The mean length of hospital stay was 14.6 ± 7.2 days, and total follow-up was 31.6 ± 13.4 days; 12.9% of patients required admission to ICU, 18.5% died, and 9.9% had a bleeding complication (34.8% major bleeding). Length of hospital stay was longer in patients taking LMWH (16.0 ± 7.7 vs 13.3 ± 6.5 days; P = .005), but mortality and total bleeds were similar in patients treated with edoxaban and those treated with LMWH followed by oral anticoagulation.ConclusionsMortality rates, arterial and venous thromboembolic complications, and bleeds did not significantly differ between AF patients receiving anticoagulation therapy with edoxaban or LMWH followed by oral anticoagulation. However, the duration of hospitalization was significantly lower with edoxaban. Edoxaban had a similar therapeutic profile to LMWH followed by oral anticoagulation and may provide additional benefits.
| S-EPMC10259115 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLow-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) and heparinoids are anticoagulants that may have more powerful antithrombotic effects than standard unfractionated heparin (UFH) but a lower risk of bleeding complications. This is an update of the original Cochrane Review of these agents, first published in 2001 and last updated in 2008.ObjectivesTo determine whether antithrombotic therapy with LMWHs or heparinoids is associated with a reduction in the proportion of people who are dead or dependent for activities in daily living compared with UFH.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched February 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL: the Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2017), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2017), and Embase (1980 to February 2017). We also searched trials registers to February 2017: ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials Register, Stroke Trials Registry, ISRCTN Registry and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.Selection criteriaUnconfounded randomised trials comparing LMWH or heparinoids with standard UFH in people with acute ischaemic stroke, in which participants were recruited within 14 days of stroke onset.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently chose studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and trial quality, extracted and analysed the data. Differences were resolved by discussion.Main resultsWe included nine trials involving 3137 participants. We did not identify any new trials for inclusion in this updated review. None of the studies reported data on the primary outcome in sufficient detail to enable analysis for the review. Overall, there was a moderate risk of bias in the included studies. Compared with UFH, there was no evidence of an effect of LMWH or heparinoids on death from all causes during the treatment period (96/1616 allocated LMWH/heparinoid versus 78/1486 allocated UFH; odds ratio (OR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.47; 8 trials, 3102 participants, low quality evidence). LMWH or heparinoid were associated with a significant reduction in deep vein thrombosis (DVT) compared with UFH (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.70, 7 trials, 2585 participants, low quality evidence). However, the number of the major clinical events such as pulmonary embolism (PE) and intracranial haemorrhage was too small to provide a reliable estimate of the effects.Authors' conclusionsTreatment with a LMWH or heparinoid after acute ischaemic stroke appears to decrease the occurrence of DVT compared with standard UFH, but there are too few data to provide reliable information on their effects on other important outcomes, including functional outcome, death and intracranial haemorrhage.
| S-EPMC6478133 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare inpatient mortality rates for patients with operatively treated closed femoral shaft fractures (AO/OTA 32 A-C) who received venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis with either low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of a national database of patients presenting to Level I through IV trauma centers in the United States. All patients ≥18 years of age who sustained an operatively treated closed femoral shaft fracture were included. The primary outcome of inpatient mortality was compared between two groups: those who received LMWH or unfractionated heparin for VTE prophylaxis. Secondary outcomes were complications including VTE and bleeding events. Groups were compared using a multivariate regression model.ResultsThere were 2058 patients included in the study. Patients who received VTE prophylaxis with LMWH had lower odds of inpatient mortality compared to patients who received VTE prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.68, p = 0.011).ConclusionsVTE prophylaxis with LMWH is associated with lower inpatient mortality compared to VTE prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin for patients undergoing operative treatment of closed femoral shaft fractures. To our knowledge this is the first study to report these associations for a specific subset of orthopedic trauma patients.
| S-EPMC9304763 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Seven pharmaceutical heparins were investigated by oligosaccharide mapping by digestion with heparin lyase 1, 2, or 3, followed by high performance liquid chromatography analysis. The structure of one of the prepared mapping standards, ?UA-Gal-Gal-Xyl-O-CH(2)CONHCH(2)COOH (where ?UA is 4-deoxy-?-l-threo-hex-4-eno-pyranosyluronic acid, Gal is ?-d-galactpyranose, and Xyl is ?-d-xylopyranose) released from the linkage region using either heparin lyase 2 or heparin lyase 3 digestion, is reported for the first time. A size-dependent susceptibility of site cleaved by heparin lyase 3 was also observed. Heparin lyase 3 acts on the undersulfated domains of the heparin chain and does not cleave the linkages within heparin's antithrombin III binding site. Thus, a novel low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is afforded on heparin lyase 3 digestion of heparin due to this unique substrate specificity, which has anticoagulant activity comparable to that of currently available LMWH.
| S-EPMC3024469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntravenous unfractionated heparin (IVUFH) and low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) are first line anticoagulants for the management of acutely unwell patients. The decision to prescribe either IVUFH or an LMWH is complex with minimal direction from clinical guidelines. The aim of this study was to explore individual prescribers' perceptions on prescribing IVUFH or LMWH in patients' acute management.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with purposively selected senior medical officers who were from specialities including cardiology, cardiothoracic surgery, respiratory, emergency, vascular surgery, nephrology, neurology and general medicine, identified as those that routinely prescribe IVUFH or LMWH. An interview tool with seven questions and four hypothetical case scenarios guided interview discussions. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and inductively coded for thematic analysis.ResultsTwelve doctors participated in interviews between February and October 2022. Mean interview duration was 24 min; data saturation was achieved. Most were senior doctors: one was a registrar and others were staff specialists. Three key themes emerged: (1) rationale for the choice of heparinoid, (2) patient safety considerations and (3) resources required. The themes and subthemes identified the complexity of issues to consider when choosing between IVUFH and LMWH. Multiple factors were considered by participants which were based on previous experiences and institutional capabilities rather than evidence-based medicine.ConclusionFuture interventions should focus on highlighting LMWH as the preferred heparinoid in most clinical scenarios. The use of IVUFH should be reserved for specific patient cohorts where the benefit of IVUFH outweighs the additional risks.
| S-EPMC11578413 | biostudies-literature