Dataset Information

Risk of major bleeding associated with aspirin use in non-surgical critically ill patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We aimed to evaluate the risk of major bleeding in non-surgical critically ill patients who received aspirin in conjunction with therapeutic anticoagulation (concomitant therapy) compared to those who received therapeutic anticoagulation alone.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients initiated on therapeutic anticoagulation at a large academic medical center from 2007 to 2016. The exposure of interest was aspirin therapy during anticoagulation. The primary outcome was the incidence of major bleeding during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, hospital free days, and new myocardial infarction or stroke.

Results

5507 (73.2%) patients received anticoagulation alone and 2014 (26.8%) received concomitant therapy; major bleeding occurred in 19.0% and 22.2%, respectively. There was no increased risk of major bleeding [OR 1.10 (95% CI: 0.93-1.30); p = .27] or mortality [OR 0.93 (95% CI: 0.77-1.11); p = .43] with concomitant therapy. Patients receiving concomitant therapy had fewer hospital-free days (mean decrease of 0.73 [1.36, 0.09]; p = .03) and were more likely to experience new myocardial infarction or stroke [OR 2.61 (95% CI: 1.72-3.98); p < .001].

Conclusions

In non-surgical critically ill patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation, concomitant use of aspirin was not associated with an increased risk of bleeding or in-hospital mortality.

SUBMITTER: Subat YW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7321912 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThrombosis and inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19.MethodsIn an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized clinical trial, critically ill patients with severe Covid-19 were randomly assigned to a pragmatically defined regimen of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in accordance with local usual care. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge.ResultsThe trial was stopped when the prespecified criterion for futility was met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Data on the primary outcome were available for 1098 patients (534 assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and 564 assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis). The median value for organ support-free days was 1 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and was 4 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis (adjusted proportional odds ratio, 0.83; 95% credible interval, 0.67 to 1.03; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 99.9%). The percentage of patients who survived to hospital discharge was similar in the two groups (62.7% and 64.5%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.64 to 1.11). Major bleeding occurred in 3.8% of the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 2.3% of those assigned to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.ConclusionsIn critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin did not result in a greater probability of survival to hospital discharge or a greater number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support than did usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. (REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a, and ATTACC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT04372589.).

Project description:IntroductionAlthough patients with severe COVID-19 are known to be at high risk of developing thrombotic events, the effects of anticoagulation (AC) dose and duration on in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients remain poorly understood and controversial. The goal of this study was to investigate survival of critically ill COVID-19 patients who received prophylactic or therapeutic dose AC and analyze the mortality rate with respect to detailed demographic and clinical characteristics.Materials and methodsWe conducted a retrospective, observational study of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU at Stony Brook University Hospital in New York who received either prophylactic (n = 158) or therapeutic dose AC (n = 153). Primary outcome was in-hospital death assessed by survival analysis and covariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazard model.ResultsFor the first 3 weeks of ICU stay, we observed similar survival curves for prophylactic and therapeutic AC groups. However, after 3 or more weeks of ICU stay, the therapeutic AC group, characterized by high incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), had markedly higher death incidence rates with 8.6 deaths (95% CI = 6.2-11.9 deaths) per 1,000 person-days and about 5 times higher risk of death (adj. HR = 4.89, 95% CI = 1.71-14.0, p = 0.003) than the prophylactic group (2.4 deaths [95% CI = 0.9-6.3 deaths] per 1,000 person-days). Among therapeutic AC users with prolonged ICU admission, non-survivors were characterized by older males with depressed lymphocyte counts and cardiovascular disease.ConclusionsOur findings raise the possibility that prolonged use of high dose AC, independent of thrombotic events or clinical background, might be associated with higher risk of in-hospital mortality. Moreover, AKI, age, lymphocyte count, and cardiovascular disease may represent important risk factors that could help identify at-risk patients who require long-term hospitalization with therapeutic dose AC treatment.

Project description:BackgroundAcute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) may be a severe condition in immunocompromised patients and may require intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We aimed to describe the clinical spectrum of critically ill immunocompromised patients with GIB and identify risk factors associated with mortality and severe GIB defined by hemorrhagic shock, hyperlactatemia and/or the transfusion of more than 5 red blood cells units. Finally, we compared this cohort with a control population of non-immunocompromised admitted in ICU for GIB.ResultsRetrospective study in 3 centers including immunocompromised patients with GIB admitted in ICU from January, 1st 2010 to December, 31rd 2019. Risk factors for mortality and severe GIB were assessed by logistic regression. Immunocompromised patients were matched with a control group of patients admitted in ICU with GIB. A total of 292 patients were analyzed in the study, including 141 immunocompromised patients (compared to a control group of 151 patients). Among immunocompromised patients, upper GIB was more frequent (73%) than lower GIB (27%). By multivariate analysis, severe GIB was associated with male gender (OR 4.48, CI95% 1.75-11.42, p = 0.00), upper GIB (OR 2.88, CI95% 1.11-7.46, p = 0.03) and digestive malignant infiltration (OR 5.85, CI95% 1.45-23.56, p = 0.01). Conversely, proton pump inhibitor treatment before hospitalization was significantly associated with decreased risk of severe GIB (OR 0.25, IC95% 0.10-0.65, p < 0.01). Fifty-four patients (38%) died within 90 days. By multivariate analysis, mortality was associated with hemorrhagic shock (OR 2.91, IC95% 1.33-6.38, p = 0 .01), upper GIB (OR 4.33, CI95% 1.50-12.47, p = 0.01), and long-term corticosteroid therapy before admission (OR 2.98, CI95% 1.32-6.71, p = 0.01). Albuminemia (per 5 g/l increase) was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.54, IC95% 0.35-0.84, p = 0.01). After matching with a control group of non-immunocompromised patients, severity of bleeding was increased in immunocompromised patients, but mortality was not different between the 2 groups.ConclusionMortality is high in immunocompromised patients with GIB in ICU, especially in patients receiving long term corticosteroids. Mortality of GIB is not different from mortality of non-immunocompromised patients in ICU. The prophylactic administration of proton pump inhibitors should be considered in this population.

Project description:Objective: Bleeding can be a severe complication of critical illness, but its true epidemiologic impact on children has seldom been studied. Our objective is to describe the epidemiology of bleeding in critically ill children, using a validated clinical tool, as well as the hemostatic interventions and clinical outcomes associated with bleeding. Design: Prospective observational cohort study. Setting: Tertiary pediatric critical care unit Patients: All consecutive patients (1 month to 18 years of age) admitted to a tertiary pediatric critical care unit Measurements and Main Results: Bleeding events were categorized as minimal, moderate, severe, or fatal, according to the Bleeding Assessment Scale in Critically Ill Children. We collected demographics and severity at admission, as evaluated by the Pediatric Index of Mortality. We used regression models to compare the severity of bleeding with outcomes adjusting for age, surgery, and severity. Over 12 months, 902 critically ill patients were enrolled. The median age was 64 months (IQR 17; 159), the median admission predicted risk of mortality was 0.5% (IQR 0.2; 1.4), and 24% were post-surgical. Eighteen percent of patients experienced at least one bleeding event. The highest severity of bleeding was minimal for 7.9% of patients, moderate for 5.8%, severe for 3.8%, and fatal for 0.1%. Adjusting for age, severity at admission, medical diagnosis, type of surgery, and duration of surgery, bleeding severity was independently associated with fewer ventilator-free days (p < 0.001) and fewer PICU-free days (p < 0.001). Adjusting for the same variables, bleeding severity was independently associated with an increased risk of mortality (adjusted odds ratio for each bleeding category 2.4, 95% CI 1.5; 3.7, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our data indicate bleeding occurs in nearly one-fifth of all critically ill children, and that higher severity of bleeding was independently associated with worse clinical outcome. Further multicenter studies are required to better understand the impact of bleeding in critically ill children.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Previous studies have suggested that prediction models for mortality should be adjusted for additional risk factors beyond the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) score. Our objective was to identify risk factors independent of APACHE II score and construct a prediction model to improve the predictive accuracy for hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. METHODS:We used data from a multicenter randomized controlled trial (PROTECT, Prophylaxis for Thromboembolism in Critical Care Trial) to build a new prediction model for hospital and ICU mortality. Our primary outcome was all-cause 60-day hospital mortality, and the secondary outcome was all-cause 60-day ICU mortality. RESULTS:We included 3746 critically ill non-trauma medical-surgical patients receiving heparin thromboprophylaxis (43.3 % females) in this study. The new model predicting 60-day hospital mortality incorporated APACHE II score (main effect: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.97 for per-point increase), body mass index (BMI) (main effect: HR = 0.92 for per-point increase), medical admission versus surgical (HR = 1.67), use of inotropes or vasopressors (HR = 1.34), acetylsalicylic acid or clopidogrel (HR = 1.27) and the interaction term between APACHE II score and BMI (HR = 1.002 for per-point increase). This model had a good fit to the data and was well calibrated and internally validated. However, the discriminative ability of the prediction model was unsatisfactory (C index < 0.65). Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of these findings. Similar results were observed in the new prediction model for 60-day ICU mortality which included APACHE II score, BMI, medical admission and invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSION:Compared with the APACHE II score alone, the new prediction model increases data collection, is more complex but does not substantially improve discriminative ability. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00182143.