Assessment of Jordanian physicians' knowledge about venous thromboembolism risk and management among COVID-19 patients

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess Jordanian physicians' awareness about venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk among COVID-19 patients and its treatment protocol. Method(s): This was a cross-sectional-based survey that was conducted in Jordan in 2020. During the study period, a convenience sample of physicians working in various Jordanian hospitals were invited to participate in this study. Physicians' knowledge was evaluated and physicians gained one point for each correct answer. Then, a knowledge score out of 23 was calculated for each. Key Findings: In this study, 102 physicians were recruited. Results from this study showed that most of the physicians realize that all COVID-19 patients need VTE risk assessment (n = 69, 67.6%). Regarding VTE prophylaxis, the majority of physicians (n = 91, 89.2%) agreed that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the best prophylactic option for mild-moderate COVID-19 patients with high VTE risk. Regarding severe/critically ill COVID-19 patients, 75.5% of physicians (n = 77) recognized that LMWH is the correct prophylactic option in this case, while 80.4% of them (n = 82) knew that mechanical prevention is the preferred prophylactic option for severe/critically ill COVID-19 patients with high bleeding risk. Moreover, 77.5% of physicians (n = 79) knew that LMWH is the treatment of choice for COVID-19 patients diagnosed with VTE. Finally, linear regression analysis showed that consultants had an overall higher knowledge score about VTE prevention and treatment in COVID-19 patients compared with residents (P = 0.009). Conclusion(s): All physicians knew about VTE risk factors for COVID-19 patients. However, consultants showed better awareness of VTE prophylaxis and treatment compared with residents. We recommend educational workshops be conducted to enhance physicians' knowledge and awareness about VTE thromboprophylaxis and management in COVID-19 patients.Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. All rights reserved.

Coagulation Abnormalities in Patients with COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging infectious disease. Bilateral pneumonia, acute respiratory failure, systemic inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and coagulation activation have been described as key features of severe COVID-19. Fibrinogen and D-dimer are typically increased. Moreover, the risk for venous thromboembolism is markedly increased, especially in patients in the intensive care unit, often despite prophylactic-dose anticoagulation. Pulmonary microvascular thrombosis has also been described and the risk for arterial thrombotic diseases also appears to be increased. Bleeding is less common than thrombosis but can occur. Evaluation for venous thromboembolism may be challenging because symptoms of pulmonary embolism overlap with COVID-19, and imaging studies may not be feasible in all cases. All inpatients should receive thromboprophylaxis unless contraindicated. In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, prophylactic dosing rather than more intensive (intermediate or therapeutic) dosing are suggested. On the other hand, therapeutic dose of anticoagulation is always appropriate to treat deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, unless contraindicated. This article reviews evaluation and management of coagulation abnormalities in individuals with COVID-19. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.

A trial emulation comparing thromboprophylaxis versus no thromboprophylaxis among ward-based patients with covid-19

209 Figure 1Kaplan-Meier curves displaying cumulative all-cause mortality[Figure omitted. See PDF]Conflict of InterestNo conflicts of interest

Pharmacological Agents Targeting Coagulopathy in COVID-19: A Review

Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and the resultant syndrome COVID-19 has wrecked the entire world. The disease mostly manifests as mild viral pneumonia but in a small proportion of patients it can produce an intense inflammatory and prothrombotic state leading to multiorgan failure and even death. Varying incidences of venous thromboembolism (VTE) have been found in COVID-19 patients. This review describes the role of various pharmacological agents used prophylactically as well as therapeutically for thromboembolism in such patients. The anticoagulants which are administered as antithrombotic therapy can be used parenterally (heparin and direct thrombin inhibitors) or orally (direct oral thrombin inhibitors). The mechanism of action, pharmacology, usage, and adverse effects of such agents has been discussed especially in the context of ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. As a result of various completed and ongoing clinical trials, scientific community has collected promising evidence and formulated guidelines regarding the role of anticoagulants in COVID-19 patients. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021.

ISTH guidelines for antithrombotic treatment in COVID-19: Endorsement by the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine.

The Clinical Practice Committee of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine endorses the ISTH guidelines for antithrombotic treatment in COVID-19. This evidence-based guideline serves as a useful decision aid for Nordic anaesthesiologists caring for patients with COVID-19.

Impact of thromboprophylaxis on hospital acquired thrombosis following discharge in patients admitted with COVID-19: Multicentre observational study in the UK.

Post-discharge thromboprophylaxis in patients admitted with COVID-19 remains controversial. We aimed to determine the impact of thromboprophylaxis on hospital acquired thrombosis (HAT) in patients (≥18 years) discharged following admission for COVID-19 in an observational study across 26 NHS Trusts in the UK (01.04.2020-31.12.2021). Overall, 8895 patients were included to the study: 971 patients were discharged with thromboprophylaxis and propensity score matched (PSM) with a desired ratio of 1:1, from patients discharged without thromboprophylaxis. Patients with heparin induced thrombocytopenia, major bleeding during admission and pregnant women were excluded. As expected from 1:1 PSM, no difference was observed in parameters between the two groups, including duration of hospital stay, except the thromboprophylaxis group had a significantly higher proportion who had received therapeutic dose anticoagulation during admission. There were no differences in the laboratory parameters especially D-dimers between the two groups at admission or discharge. Median duration of thromboprophylaxis following discharge from hospital was 4 weeks (1-8 weeks). No difference was found in HAT in patients discharged with TP versus no TP (1.3% vs. 0.92%, p = 0.52). Increasing age and smoking significantly increased the risk of HAT. Many patients in both cohorts had raised D-dimer at discharge but D-dimer was not associated with increased risk of HAT.

Improving guideline-concordant thromboprophylaxis prescribing for children admitted to hospital with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE) in hospitalized children has increased by 130%-200% over the last two decades. Given this increase, many centers utilize electronic clinical decision support (CDS) to prognosticate VTE risk and recommend prophylaxis. SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) is a risk factor for VTE; however, CDS developed before the COVID-19 pandemic may not accurately prognosticate VTE risk in children with COVID-19. This study's objective was to identify areas to improve thromboprophylaxis recommendations for children with COVID-19. METHODS: Inpatients with a positive COVID-19 test at admission were identified at a quaternary-care pediatric center between March 1, 2020 and January 20, 2022. The results of the institution's automated CDS thromboprophylaxis recommendations were compared to institutional COVID-19 thromboprophylaxis guidelines and to the actual thromboprophylaxis received. CDS optimization was performed to improve adherence to COVID-19 thromboprophylaxis recommendations. RESULTS: Of the 329 patients included in this study, 106 (28.2%) were prescribed pharmaco-prophylaxis, 167 (50.8%) were identified by the institutional COVID-19 guidelines as requiring pharmaco-prophylaxis, and 45 (13.2%) were identified by the CDS as needing pharmaco-prophylaxis. On univariate analysis, only age 12 years or more was associated with recipient of appropriate prophylaxis (OR 1.78, 95% CI: 1.13-2.82, p = .013). Five patients developed VTEs; three had symptoms at presentation, two were identified as high risk for VTE by both the automated and best practice assessments but were not prescribed pharmaco-prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: Automated thromboprophylaxis recommendations developed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic may not identify all COVID-19 patients needing pharmaco-prophylaxis. Existing CDS tools need to be updated to reflect COVID-19-specific risk factors for VTEs.

Treatment of MIS-C in Children and Adolescents.

Purpose of Review: Different treatment approaches have been described for the management of COVID-19-related multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), the pathogenesis of which has not yet been fully elucidated. Here, we comprehensively review and summarize the recommendations and management strategies that have been published to date. Recent Findings: MIS-C patients are treated with different regimens, mostly revolving around the use of immunomodulatory medications, including IVIG and glucocorticoids as first-tier therapy. Refractoriness to IVIG and glucocorticoids warrants a step-up of immunomodulatory therapy to biologic agents such as anakinra, tocilizumab, and infliximab. Summary: We review the current evidence regarding the use of monotherapy versus combination therapy, as well as the current recommendations for assessing thrombotic risk and administering antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy. We anticipate that future studies will provide evidence for management plans that maximize short- and long-term outcomes. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40124-021-00259-4.

Hemostasis in COVID-19.

Patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia are at high risk of thrombotic complications related to coagulopathy induced by CoV-2-SARS, which worsens their prognosis. The pathophysiological mechanisms of this coagulopathy include endothelial dysfunction partly explained by a hyperinflammatory state and the resulting activation of coagulation. Current methods for assessing hemostasis do not seem to be enough to evaluate this thrombotic over-risk and the thromboprophylaxis goals probably needs to be increased.Copyright © SRLF 2021.

Case Report of Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in a Burn Patient With COVID-19.

The recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has worse medical consequences, especially when affecting people with comorbidities such as diabetes, lung disease, hypertension, burn and trauma. The pathophysiology of COVID-19 infection includes thromboembolic events that were described in previous studies as a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This risk is higher in burn patients, especially in the electrical type, which is generally attributed to their hypercoagulable state. This article reviews a detailed history, examination, and investigations of a 38-year-old male hospitalized burn patient with COVID-19 infection. Although on chemical thromboembolic prophylaxis, the patient developed extensive pulmonary embolism (PE) and, more interestingly, had atypical PE signs and symptoms. The present case aims to develop a special venous thromboembolism prophylaxis protocol between prophylactic and therapeutic dosages for COVID-19 burn patients.

COVID-19-associated coagulopathy in children: A multicenter observational cohort study.

SARS-CoV-2 infection (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) induces a stark procoagulant state, with many hospitalized adults developing thrombosis despite prophylactic anticoagulation. This study aimed to characterize hemostatic parameters and associated clinical outcomes of COVID-19, such as thrombosis and bleeding, in children and to assess thromboprophylaxis use. This multicenter observational cohort study included 79 patients aged up to 18 years admitted to all pediatric hospitals in Québec, Canada, with SARS-CoV-2 infection during a 5-month period. D-dimers were elevated in 18/19 patients (94.7%) and fibrinogen in 15/26 patients (60%). Eleven patients (13.9%) received anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. One thrombotic event and one major bleed were observed.

Safety and Efficacy of Different Anticoagulant Doses for Patients with COVID-19 in the ICU: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Critically ill COVID-19 patients have a high incidence of thromboembolic events, which significantly influence the risk of mortality. Anticoagulant therapy is generally recommended to these patients but the optimal dosing regimens require further investigations. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of prophylactic, intermediate and therapeutic dose anticoagulation in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. A systematic search for original prospective observational studies and clinical trials was performed in online databases from 2020 to 2022. A total of 13 studies (3239 patients) were included. The type of anticoagulant dosing showed no significant influence on short-term mortality (p = 0.84), deep vein thrombosis (p = 0.66), arterial thrombosis (p = 0.44), major bleeding (p = 0.35) and minor bleeding incidence (p = 0.46). An anticoagulation regimen significantly influenced pulmonary embolism occurrence (16% for prophylactic dose vs. 4% for therapeutic dose, p = 0.02), but the number of studies in the analysis was relatively low. In conclusion, the results of this meta-analysis suggest that critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted in the ICU have no benefit from therapeutic doses of anticoagulants and that all three thromboprophylaxis regimes have a comparable effect on short term mortality and venous thromboembolism incidence but for pulmonary embolism, for which the results were inconclusive.

Incidence of deep venous thrombosis in COVID-19 critically ill patients treated with intermediate-dose of heparin for thromboprophylaxis: The COVIDOP-DVT observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The high prevalence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) would justify systematic screening of these patients or higher therapeutic dose of heparin for thromboprophylaxis. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We performed a systematic echo-Doppler of the lower limb proximal veins during the first 48 h (visit 1) and from 7 to 9 days after visit 1 (visit 2) in consecutive patients admitted to the ICU of a university-affiliated tertiary hospital for severe proven COVID-19 during the second wave. All patients received intermediate-dose heparin (IDH). The primary objective was to determine DVT incidence on venous Doppler ultrasound. Secondary objectives were to determine whether the presence of DVT modifies the anticoagulation regimen, the incidence of major bleeding according to International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) criteria, and the mortality rate of patients with and without DVT. RESULTS: We included 48 patients (30 [62.5%] men) with a median age of 63 years [IQR, 54-70]. The prevalence of proximal deep vein thrombosis was 4.2% (2/48). In these two patients, after DVT diagnosis, anticoagulation was changed from intermediate to curative dose. Two patients (4.2%) had a major bleeding complication according to ISTH criteria. Among the 48 patients, 9 (18.8%) died before hospital discharge. No DVT or pulmonary embolism was diagnosed in these deceased patients during their hospital stay. CONCLUSION: In critically ill patients with COVID-19, management with IDH results in a low incidence of DVT. Although our study is not designed to demonstrate any difference in outcome, our results do not suggest any signal of harm when using intermediate-dose heparin (IDH) COVID-19 with a frequency of major bleeding complications less than 5%.

The Effectiveness of the Intermediate and Therapeutic Doses of Enoxaparin in COVID-19 Patients: A Comparative Study of Factor Xa Inhibition.

BACKGROUND: Management of anticoagulant therapy in COVID-19 patients is critical. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) thromboprophylaxis is already recommended, and anti-Factor Xa (anti-FXa) monitoring has been used to titrate LMWH doses. METHODS: Through a cross-sectional study, we evaluated anti-FXa activity in patients admitted to the ICU, receiving intermediate dose (30, 40, 50 mg, subcutaneously [SC], twice daily) or therapeutic dose (1 mg/kg, SC, Q12h) of enoxaparin to find whether the patients in these two groups achieved anti-FXa levels in the accepted thromboprophylaxis range. RESULTS: The occurrence of deep vein thrombosis was 26% in the therapeutic-dose group and 17% in the intermediate-dose group. D-dimer values were nearly 3.5-fold higher in those who received a therapeutic dose of anticoagulants than in those who received intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis. Patients in the therapeutic-dose group had significantly higher IL-6 levels (p ≤ 0.001). More than one-third of the patients in the therapeutic-dose group (n = 8; 42.18%) and approximately half of the patients in the intermediate-dose group (n = 12; 52.2%) achieved the target range level of anti-FXa. Patients who received therapeutic doses were more likely to have anti-FXa levels above the expected range (47.4 vs 13% in the intermediate-dose group; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Therapeutic dose of enoxaparin in critically ill COVID-19-infected patients did not reduce the incidence of thromboembolic events and, on the other hand, may predispose these patients to increased risk of bleeding by increasing anti-FXa activity above the desired level. Administration of intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis is suggested to achieve anti-FXa levels in the accepted thromboprophylaxis range.

Thromboprophylaxis in Pregnant Women with COVID-19: An Unsolved Issue.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women is of growing interest due to controversy over the use of antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant drugs during pregnancy and postpartum. Pregnant women are susceptible to develop severe forms of viral infections due to pregnancy-related immune alterations, changes in lung functions, and hypercoagulability. The association of pregnancy with SARS-CoV-2 infection can cause an increased incidence of thrombotic complications, especially in the case of patients with some genetic variants that favor inflammation and thrombosis. Compared to the general population, pregnant women may be at increased risk of thrombotic complications related to COVID-19. The lack of extensive clinical trials on thromboprophylaxis and extrapolating data from non-pregnant patients lead to major discrepancies in treating pregnant women with COVID-19. Currently, a multidisciplinary team should determine the dose and duration of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy for these patients, depending on the disease severity, the course of pregnancy, and the estimated due date. This narrative review aims to evaluate the protective effect of thromboprophylaxis in pregnant women with COVID-19. It is unknown at this time whether antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy initiated at the beginning of pregnancy for various diseases (preeclampsia, intrauterine growth restriction, thrombophilia) offers a degree of protection. The optimal scheme for thromboprophylaxis in pregnant women with COVID-19 must be carefully established through an individualized decision concerning gestational age and the severity of the infection.

Thromboembolic and bleeding events in ICU patients with COVID-19: A nationwide, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. We describe the occurrence of thromboembolic and bleeding events in all ICU patients with COVID-19 in Denmark during the first and second waves of the pandemic. METHODS: This was a sub-study of the Danish Intensive Care Covid database, in which all patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to Danish ICUs from 10th March 2020 to 30th June 2021 were included. We registered coagulation variables at admission, and all thromboembolic and bleeding events, and the use of heparins during ICU stay. Variables associated with thrombosis and bleeding and any association with 90-day mortality were estimated using Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: We included 1369 patients in this sub-study; 158 (12%, 95% confidence interval 10-13) had a thromboembolic event in ICU and 309 (23%, 20-25) had a bleeding event, among whom 81 patients (6%, 4.8-7.3) had major bleeding. We found that mechanical ventilation and increased D-dimer were associated with thrombosis and mechanical ventilation, low platelet count and presence of haematological malignancy were associated with bleeding. Most patients (76%) received increased doses of thromboprophylaxis during their ICU stay. Thromboembolic events were not associated with mortality in adjusted analysis (hazard ratio 1.35 [0.91-2.01, p = .14], whereas bleeding events were 1.55 [1.18-2.05, p = .002]). CONCLUSIONS: Both thromboembolic and bleeding events frequently occurred in ICU patients with COVID-19. Based on these data, it is not apparent that increased doses of thromboprophylaxis were beneficial.

Acute Limb Ischemia among COVID-19 Patients in Hospital Kuala Lumpur

BACKGROUND: Acute arterial thromboembolism among the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients is worrying as it can result in significant thrombotic events. AIM: The research aimed to determine the clinical results of COVID-19-infected patients who had acute limb ischemia (ALI) during the COVID-19 epidemic. METHOD(S): ALI patients who had a positive COVID-19 were included in the observational cohort study, which was conducted at a single center. The primary outcomes were 30 days mortality, limb salvage, and successful revascularization. RESULT(S): From May to October 2021, data from 21 ALI subjects who had positive COVID-19 were analyzed. Of the 21 included subjects, 10 were male (48%). Their mean age was 65 +/- 5 years. In 9 subjects (42%), revascularization was done. Four (19%) of the 21 persons died while they were hospitalized. Twelve patients underwent major amputation, and among them, one patient died after a month of hospitalization for COVID-19-related pneumonia. Among the 12 patients that underwent amputation, 10 of them presented with ALI during the 1st week of COVID-19 illness. Only one patient developed acute limb ischemia despite being on heparin thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSION(S): Despite attempts at revascularization, ALI associated with COVID-19 has high mortality and high rates of limb loss. In our experience, major amputation is required in up to a third of patients. This poor result appears to confirm that these infected individuals have a marked hypercoagulable condition. However, adhering to the treatment protocol of heparin thromboprophylaxis confers a benefit in this patient group. Copyright © 2022 Karthigesu Aimanan, Nurul Nadiah Nazurah Mohd Ali, Mohd Nurhisham Azmi Abdul Rahman, Putra Mas Pian, Kumaraguru V. K. Pillay, Firdaus Hayati, Hanif Hussein.

Management of Spontaneous Neck Hematoma in Patients on Anticoagulant Therapy: Our Experience from a Tertiary Care Center.

Spontaneous neck hematoma is a rare but life threatening condition which poses a challenge in clinical decision making. With the unsupervised outpatient use of oral anticoagulants, including newer generation ones and the thromboprophylaxis in  Covid-19 treatment protocol, the risk of developing spontaneous neck hematoma is high. In this context, our case series aimed at studying the clinicopathological profile, treatment options and outcome in patients presented with spontaneous neck hematoma in a tertiary care center. A retrospective chart review was done between the years 2010-2021, and three cases of spontaneous neck hematoma associated with anticoagulation therapy were identified. Based on our experience, we recommend a custom tailored approach to management of spontaneous neck hematoma.

Anticoagulant Use During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Using Heparin and Direct Thrombin Inhibitors in COVID-19 and ARDS Patients.

Coagulopathies develop in patients supported with the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and can be hemorrhagic and/or thrombophilic in spite of the use of systemic anticoagulation. The purpose this study was to examine the use of heparin and direct thrombin inhibitors (DTI) in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) on ECMO, with a subset analysis by disease state. Following IRB approval, 570 consecutive records were reviewed of adult patients on venovenous ECMO between May 2020 and December 2021. Patients were grouped by anticoagulant use: Heparin Only (n = 373), DTI Only (bivalirudin or argatroban, n = 90), or DTI after Heparin (n = 107). The effect of anticoagulant grouping was assessed using Bayesian mixed-effects logistic regression adjusting for age, body mass index (BMI), gender, days of mechanical ventilation prior to ECMO, indication for ECMO support, hepatic and renal failure, hours on ECMO, hours off anticoagulation, coagulation monitoring target, and hospital. The primary endpoint was circuit failure requiring change-out with secondary endpoints of organ failure and mortality. Regression-adjusted probability of circuit change-outs were as follows: DTI after Heparin patients-32.7%, 95% Credible Interval [16.1-51.9%]; DTI Only patients-23.3% [7.5-40.8%]; and Heparin Only patients-19.8% [8.1-31.3%]. The posterior probability of difference between groups was strongest for DTI after Heparin vs. Heparin Only (97.0%), moderate for DTI after Heparin vs. DTI Only (88.2%), and weak for DTI Only vs. Heparin only (66.6%). The occurrence of both hepatic and renal failure for DTI Only and DTI after Heparin patients was higher than that of Heparin Only patients. Unadjusted mortality was highest for DTI after Heparin (64.5%) followed by DTI Only (56.7%), and Heparin Only (50.1%, p = 0.027). DTI after Heparin was associated with an increased likelihood of circuit change-out. Unadjusted hepatic failure, renal failure, and mortality were more frequent among DTI patients than Heparin Only patients.