Dataset Information

Management of therapeutic unfractionated heparin in COVID-19 patients: A retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection are at risk for thrombotic complications necessitating use of therapeutic unfractionated heparin (UFH). Full-dose anticoagulation limits requirements for organ support interventions in moderately ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given this benefit, it is important to evaluate response to therapeutic anticoagulation in this population.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess therapeutic UFH infusions and associated bleeding risk in patients with COVID-19.

Patients/methods

This retrospective cohort study includes patients at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, receiving weight-based nursing-nomogram titrated UFH infusion during a 10-week surge in COVID-19 hospitalizations. Of 358 patients on therapeutic UFH during this interval, 97 (27.1%) had confirmed COVID-19. Patient characteristics, laboratory values, and information regarding UFH infusion and bleeding events were obtained from the electronic medical record.

Results

Patients who were COVID-19 positive had fewer therapeutic activatrd partial thromboplastin times (aPTTs) compared to COVID-19-negative patients (median rate, 40.0% vs 53.1%; P < .0005). Both major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were increased in COVID-19-positive patients, with major bleeding observed in 10.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.7%-17.9%) of patients who were COVID-19 positive and 3.1% (95% CI, 1.6%-5.9%) of patients who were COVID-19 negative (P < .005). In logistic regression, bleeding events were associated with receiving UFH for longer than 7 days, but not platelet count, coagulation, or inflammatory measurements.

Conclusions

Our data indicate a higher incidence of bleeding complications in patients with COVID-19 receiving weight-based nursing-nomogram titrated UFH infusions despite a higher prevalence of subtherapeutic aPTTs in this population. These data underscore the need for prospective studies aimed at improving the quality and safety of therapeutic anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Weeks LD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8114028 | 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:BackgroundThrombosis and inflammation may contribute to the risk of death and complications among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in noncritically ill patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19.MethodsIn this open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and who were not critically ill (which was defined as an absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment) to receive pragmatically defined regimens of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. 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. This outcome was evaluated with the use of a Bayesian statistical model for all patients and according to the baseline d-dimer level.ResultsThe trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation were met. Among 2219 patients in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation increased organ support-free days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 98.6% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27; 95% credible interval, 1.03 to 1.58). The adjusted absolute between-group difference in survival until hospital discharge without organ support favoring therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.0 percentage points (95% credible interval, 0.5 to 7.2). The final probability of the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation over usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 97.3% in the high d-dimer cohort, 92.9% in the low d-dimer cohort, and 97.3% in the unknown d-dimer cohort. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% of the patients receiving therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 0.9% of those receiving thromboprophylaxis.ConclusionsIn noncritically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. (ATTACC, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04372589, NCT04505774, NCT02735707, and NCT04359277.).

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic remains an immediate and present concern, yet as of now there is still no approved therapeutic available for the treatment of COVID-19.This study aimed to investigate and report evidence concerning demographic characteristics and currently-used medications that contribute to the ultimate outcomes of COVID-19 ICU patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted among all COVID-19 patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Asir Central Hospital in Saudi Arabia between the 1st and 30th of June 2020. Data extracted from patients' medical records included their demographics, home medications, medications used to treat COVID-19, treatment durations, ICU stay, hospital stay, and ultimate outcome (recovery or death).Descriptive statistics and regression modelling were used to analyze and compare the results. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committees at both Asir Central Hospital and King Khalid University.ResultsA total of 118 patients with median age of 57 years having definite clinical and disease outcomes were included in the study. Male patients accounted for 87% of the study population, and more than 65% experienced at least one comorbidity. The mean hospital and ICU stay was 11.4 and 9.8 days, respectively. The most common drugs used were tocilizumab (31.4%), triple combination therapy (45.8%), favipiravir (56.8%), dexamethasone (86.7%), and enoxaparin (83%). Treatment with enoxaparin significantly reduced the length of ICU stay (p = 0.04) and was found to be associated with mortality reduction in patients aged 50-75 (p = 0.03), whereas the triple regimen therapy and tocilizumab significantly increased the length of ICU stay in all patients (p = 0.01, p = 0.02 respectively).ConclusionCOVID-19 tends to affect males more significantly than females. The use of enoxaparin is an important part of COVID-19 treatment, especially for those above 50 years of age, while the use of triple combination therapy and tocilizumab in COVID-19 protocols should be reevaluated and restricted to patients who have high likelihood of benefit.

Project description:Background:No therapy is approved for COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to assess the role of tocilizumab in reducing the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation and death in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who received standard of care treatment. Methods:This retrospective, observational cohort study included adults (?18 years) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who were admitted to tertiary care centres in Bologna and Reggio Emilia, Italy, between Feb 21 and March 24, 2020, and a tertiary care centre in Modena, Italy, between Feb 21 and April 30, 2020. All patients were treated with the standard of care (ie, supplemental oxygen, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, antiretrovirals, and low molecular weight heparin), and a non-randomly selected subset of patients also received tocilizumab. Tocilizumab was given either intravenously at 8 mg/kg bodyweight (up to a maximum of 800 mg) in two infusions, 12 h apart, or subcutaneously at 162 mg administered in two simultaneous doses, one in each thigh (ie, 324 mg in total), when the intravenous formulation was unavailable. The primary endpoint was a composite of invasive mechanical ventilation or death. Treatment groups were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis after adjusting for sex, age, recruiting centre, duration of symptoms, and baseline Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. Findings:Of 1351 patients admitted, 544 (40%) had severe COVID-19 pneumonia and were included in the study. 57 (16%) of 365 patients in the standard care group needed mechanical ventilation, compared with 33 (18%) of 179 patients treated with tocilizumab (p=0·41; 16 [18%] of 88 patients treated intravenously and 17 [19%] of 91 patients treated subcutaneously). 73 (20%) patients in the standard care group died, compared with 13 (7%; p<0·0001) patients treated with tocilizumab (six [7%] treated intravenously and seven [8%] treated subcutaneously). After adjustment for sex, age, recruiting centre, duration of symptoms, and SOFA score, tocilizumab treatment was associated with a reduced risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (adjusted hazard ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·40-0·92; p=0·020). 24 (13%) of 179 patients treated with tocilizumab were diagnosed with new infections, versus 14 (4%) of 365 patients treated with standard of care alone (p<0·0001). Interpretation:Treatment with tocilizumab, whether administered intravenously or subcutaneously, might reduce the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Funding:None.