Dataset Information

Comparison of 4F‐PCC in obese and nonobese patients with life‐threatening bleeding or requiring emergent surgery

ABSTRACT: Abstract

Background

Four‐factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F‐PCC) dosing is based on INR and actual body weight (ABW), with maximum doses not to exceed the dose used in patients weighing >100 kg (Kcentra PI). There are limited data comparing the efficacy of 4F‐PCC between patients with low body weight ≤100 kg (LoWT) and high body weight >100 kg (HiWT).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients on warfarin who received 4F‐PCC for life‐threatening major bleeding or requiring emergent surgery between January 2015 to June 2018 at three academic medical centers. These data were combined with a dataset from 2 randomized Phase 3b clinical trials.

Results

We included 388 patients who received 4F‐PCC, 318 (82%) were LoWT, and 70 (18%) were HiWT. Indication for 4F‐PCC for life‐threatening bleeding and emergent surgery was 266 (69%) and 122 (31%) patients, respectively. The most common bleeding type was intracranial hemorrhage (41%), followed by gastrointestinal (36%). The median dose was 2283 units (25 units/kg), and 2.1% of patients required a repeat dose.

Conclusion

In those >100 kg, we found no difference in achieving international normalized ratio (INR) ≤1.3, hemostasis in intracranial hemorrhage, or thrombosis. In‐hospital mortality occurred 15% in LoWt versus 6% in HiWT (CI 1.8%–17%, p = 0.034). Achievement of INR ≤ 1.5 was significantly lower in the LoWT group compared to the HiWT group (80% versus 91%, CI −20% to −2.5%, p = 0.03).

SUBMITTER: Rimsans J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8626605 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Few diseases truly require emergency surgery today. We investigated the relationship between access to operating room (OR) and outcomes for patients with life-threatening emergency general surgery (LT-EGS) diseases at US hospitals. METHODS:In 2015, we surveyed 2,811 US hospitals on EGS practices, including how OR access is assured (e.g., OR staffing, block time). There were 1,690 (60%) hospitals that responded. We anonymously linked survey data to 2015 Statewide Inpatient Sample data (17 states) using American Hospital Association identifiers. Adults admitted with life-threatening diagnoses (e.g., necrotizing fasciitis, perforated viscus) who underwent operative intervention the same calendar day as hospital admission were included. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses, clustered by treating hospital and adjusted for patient factors, were performed to examine hospital-level OR access variables. RESULTS:Overall, 3,620 patients were admitted with LT-EGS diseases. The median age was 63 years (interquartile range, 51-75), with half having three or more comorbidities (50%). Thirty-four percent had one or more major systemic complication, and 5% died. The majority got care at hospitals with less than 1 day of EGS block time but with policies to ensure emergency access to the OR. After adjusting for age, sex, race, insurance status, comorbidities, systemic complications, and surgical complications, we found that less presence of an in-house EGS surgeon, compared with around the clock, was associated with increased mortality (rarely/never in-house surgeon: odds ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.1-5.3; sometimes in-house surgeon: odds ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3). In addition, after controlling for other factors, on-call overnight recovery room nurse, compared with in-house, was associated with an increased mortality (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.5-3.1). CONCLUSION:Round-the-clock availability of personnel, specifically emergency general surgeons and recovery room nurses, is associated with decreased mortality. These findings have implications for the creation of EGS patient triage criteria and Acute Care Surgery Centers of Excellence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic, level III.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Acute coronary syndrome patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy who need emergent or urgent cardiac surgery are at high risk of major bleeding, which can impair postoperative outcomes. CytoSorb®, a blood purification technology based on adsorbent polymer, has been demonstrated to remove ticagrelor from blood during on-pump cardiac surgery. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost utility of intraoperative removal of ticagrelor using CytoSorb versus usual care among patients requiring emergent or urgent cardiac surgery in the UK. METHODS:A de novo decision analytic model, based on current treatment pathways, was developed to estimate the short- and long-term costs and outcomes. Results from randomised clinical trials and national standard sources such as National Health Service (NHS) reference costs were used to inform the model. Costs were estimated from the NHS and Personal Social Services perspective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) explored the uncertainty surrounding the input parameters. RESULTS:In emergent cardiac surgery, intraoperative removal of ticagrelor using CytoSorb was less costly (£12,933 vs. £16,874) and more effective (0.06201vs. 0.06091 quality-adjusted life-years) than cardiac surgery without physiologic clearance of ticagrelor over a 30-day time horizon. For urgent cardiac surgery, the use of CytoSorb was less costly than any of the three comparators-delaying surgery for natural washout without adjunctive therapy, adjunctive therapy with short-acting antiplatelet agents, or adjunctive therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin. Results from the PSAs showed that CytoSorb has a high probability of being cost saving (99% in emergent cardiac surgery and 53-77% in urgent cardiac surgery, depending on the comparators). Cost savings derive from fewer transfusions of blood products and re-thoracotomies, and shorter stay in the hospital/intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS:The implementation of CytoSorb as an intraoperative intervention for patients receiving ticagrelor undergoing emergent or urgent cardiac surgery is a cost-saving strategy, yielding improvement in perioperative and postoperative outcomes and decreased health resource use.