[Angiology and hemostasis : what's new in 2022]. / Angiologie et hémostase : ce qui a changé en 2022.

In this article, we have selected four topics that particularly caught our attention during the year 2022, and which are related to anticoagulation, its bleeding complications, and hemophilia. Thus, we discuss the issue of the treatment with rivaroxaban of atrial fibrillation associated with rheumatic valvulopathy, which has been studied in a randomized trial, the intensity of thromboprophylaxis in COVID outpatients and inpatients, and the bleeding risk of anticoagulation in patients with cerebral tumors. Finally, recent data on gene therapy in severe hemophilia A, an upcoming treatment, are discussed.

Dans cet article, nous avons sélectionné 4 sujets qui ont particulièrement retenu notre attention durant l'année 2022, en lien avec l'anticoagulation, ses complications hémorragiques et l'hémophilie. Ainsi, nous abordons le traitement par rivaroxaban de la fibrillation atriale associée à une valvulopathie rhumatismale qui a fait l'objet d'une étude randomisée, l'intensité de la thromboprophylaxie chez les patients hospitalisés ou traités en ambulatoire avec un Covid dont les données se sont bien étoffées, le risque associé à l'anticoagulation chez les patients avec une néoplasie cérébrale et, finalement, la thérapie génique dans l'hémophilie A sévère qui devrait apparaître sur le marché très prochainement.

COVID-19 patients often show high-titer non-platelet-activating anti-PF4/heparin IgG antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a severe adverse reaction to heparin caused by heparin-dependent, platelet-activating anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies. Heparin is a cornerstone of treatment in critically ill COVID-19 patients. HIT antibodies can be detected by antigen tests and functional tests. Often strong reactivity in the antigen test is used as a surrogate marker for the presence of clinically relevant, platelet-activating antibodies. We observed an unexpectedly high percentage of COVID-19 patients, clinically suspected to have HIT, with high titer anti-PF4/heparin antibodies, but a negative functional test. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether in COVID-19 patients a serum-derived factor inhibits the heparin-induced platelet activation test (HIPA). METHODS AND RESULTS: Twelve COVID-19 patients with suspected HIT were tested. Three samples tested negative in all assays; nine samples tested positive by antigen tests, among which only three tested also positive by HIPA. When we spiked COVID-19 serum or control serum with the human HIT antibody like monoclonal antibody 5B9, reactivity of 5B9 remained the same. Also, the purified IgG fractions of COVID-19 sera testing strongly positive in the PF4/heparin antigen test but negative in the functional test did not show increased reactivity in the functional test in comparison to the original serum. Both results make a functionally inhibitory factor in the serum/plasma of COVID-19 patients highly unlikely. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients often present with strong reactivity in PF4/heparin antigen tests without the presence of platelet-activating antibodies. Diagnosis of HIT requires confirmation of heparin-dependent, platelets activating antibodies to avoid overdiagnosis and overtreatment with non-heparin anticoagulants.

Venous thromboembolism in COVID-19: systematic review of reported risks and current guidelines.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Many centres have noticed a high number of venous thromboembolism (VTE) events among critically ill inpatients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The aims of this study were (1) to summarise the reported risk of VTE associated with COVID-19 infections and (2) to summarise guidance documents on thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 patients, in a systematic review. METHODS: We systematically searched for peer-reviewed evidence on the risk of VTE in patients with COVID-19, in PubMed, Embase and Twitter, and for guidelines or guidance documents for thromboprophylaxis, from international or national societies relevant to the field of thrombosis and haemostasis, up to April 30 2020. RESULTS: We found 11 studies (1 clinical trial, 7 retrospective cohorts and 3 prospective cohorts), which included a range of 16 to 388 in patients with COVID-19 (total of 1369 inpatients). The diagnoses of COVID-19 and VTE were of high quality, but the follow-up was often unclear. Most studies reported universal in-hospital thromboprophylaxis. Among all inpatients and among intensive care unit (ICU) inpatients with COVID-19, reported risks of VTE were 4.4–8.2% (three studies) and 0–35.3% (six studies), respectively. Two studies at least partially screened for VTE in ICU inpatients with COVID-19, and found risks of 24.7–53.8%. We found 12 guidelines for thromboprophylaxis of COVID-19 patients. The majority suggested universal pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in all COVID-19 inpatients, but there was heterogeneity in the suggested intensity of thromboprophylaxis: seven advised considering intensified doses of heparin according to the clinical or biological severity of the disease, especially in the ICU setting. CONCLUSIONS: Venous thromboembolism very commonly complicates the clinical course of inpatients with COVID-19, despite thromboprophylaxis. The risk appears highest among critically ill inpatients. We found no estimates of risks among outpatients. Many questions remain unresolved, as delineated by the heterogeneity of national and international guidelines. This situation calls for fast randomised clinical trials, comparing different schemes of thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 inpatients.