The endothelium is the main target of coronavirus infection

Background. The world currently has a wealth of clinical experience in the treatment of SARS-Co-2. However, more and more work is emerging that opens up new data on the manifestations of this viral disease and its consequences, which can affect both the change in its clinical picture and the quality of life of patients with COVID-19. Therefore, this work was aimed to summarize the results of literature research and our experience of intensive care of endothelial dysfunction in coronavirus infection. Material and methods. The work is based on the results of a study on the Internet search engines Google and PubMed, with the keywords: intensive care SARS-CoV-2, pathophysiological changes in coronavirus in- fection, endothelial dysfunction. Results. This review presents the pathogenetic links of COVID-19, mechanisms of viral endothelial damage, mechanisms of hypercoagulopathy, the main directions of prevention and treatment of endothelial dysfunction. Conclusions. The examination convincingly showed that SARS-CoV-2 infection promotes the development of endotheliitis in various organs as a result of viral infection. The presence of COVID-19-induced endotheliitis can explain the systemic microcirculation disorders in various vascular channels and their clinical consequences. © 2022. The Authors.

Inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) for the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19: A randomised controlled pilot study.

There is a strong scientific rationale to use nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) in treating patients with COVID-19. This pilot study investigated whether nebulised UFH was safe and had any impact on mortality, length of hospitalisation and clinical progression, in the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19. This parallel group, open label, randomised trial included adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to two hospitals in Brazil. One hundred patients were planned to be randomised to either "standard of care" (SOC) or SOC plus nebulized UFH. The trial was stopped after randomisation of 75 patients due to falling COVID-19 hospitalisation rates. Significance tests were 1-sided test (10% significance level). The key analysis populations were intention to treat (ITT) and modified ITT (mITT) which excluded (from both arms) subjects admitted to ITU or who died within 24 h of randomisation. In the ITT population (n = 75), mortality was numerically lower for nebulised UFH (6 out of 38 patients; 15.8%) versus SOC (10 out of 37 patients; 27.0%), but not statistically significant; odds ratio (OR) 0.51, p = 0.24. However, in the mITT population, nebulised UFH reduced mortality (OR 0.2, p = 0.035). Length of hospital stay was similar between groups, but at day 29, there was a greater improvement in ordinal score following treatment with UFH in the ITT and mITT populations (p = 0.076 and p = 0.012 respectively), while mechanical ventilation rates were lower with UFH in the mITT population (OR 0.31; p = 0.08). Nebulised UFH did not cause any significant adverse events. In conclusion, nebulised UFH added to SOC in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was well tolerated and showed clinical benefit, particularly in patients who received at least 6 doses of heparin. This trial was funded by The J.R. Moulton Charity Trust and registered under REBEC RBR-8r9hy8f (UTN code: U1111-1263-3136).

Use of nafamostat mesilate for anticoagulation during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) represents an advanced option for supporting refractory respiratory and/or cardiac failure. Systemic anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin (UFH) is routinely used. However, patients with bleeding risk and/or heparin-related side effects may necessitate alternative strategies: among these, nafamostat mesilate (NM) has been reported. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search (PubMed and EMBASE, updated 12/08/2021), including all studies reporting NM anticoagulation for ECMO. We focused on reasons for starting NM, its dose and the anticoagulation monitoring approach, the incidence of bleeding/thrombosis complications, the NM-related side effects, ECMO weaning, and mortality. RESULTS: The search revealed 11 relevant findings, all with retrospective design. Of these, three large studies reported a control group receiving UFH, the other were case series (n = 3) or case reports (n = 5). The main reason reported for NM use was an ongoing or high risk of bleeding. The NM dose varied largely as did the anticoagulation monitoring approach. The average NM dose ranged from 0.46 to 0.67 mg/kg/h, but two groups of authors reported larger doses when monitoring anticoagulation with ACT. Conflicting findings were found on bleeding and thrombosis. The only NM-related side effect was hyperkalemia (n = 2 studies) with an incidence of 15%-18% in patients anticoagulated with NM. Weaning and survival varied across studies. CONCLUSION: Anticoagulation with NM in ECMO has not been prospectively studied. While several centers have experience with this approach in high-risk patients, prospective studies are warranted to establish the optimal space of this approach in ECMO.

Specific Changes in Hemostasis System Parameters during Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Patients with a Novel Coronavirus Infection

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a method that makes it possible to compensate for critical changes caused by acute respiratory failure, with the ineffectiveness of treatment with rigid modes of artificial lung ventilation (ventilator) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in intensive care units. The search for the optimal state of the hemostasis system is one of the main tasks in the treatment of critical patients in ECMO conditions. The objective: to study changes in hemostatic parameters in patients with COVID-19 undergoing ECMO and determine the need for their correction. Subjects and Methods. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 100 patients were included in the study: 72 men and 28 women aged 26 to 75 years old, the median age made 55 years [47;60]. VV-ECMO was performed in all observations. In 100% of cases, the cause of respiratory failure which required VV-ECMO was COVID-19-associated pneumonia. Results. 49 episodes of hemorrhagic complications and 76 episodes of thrombotic complications were recorded from the 1st to the 7th day from the moment of ECMO initiation. We found that the chance of developing thrombosis decreased by an average of 0.3% with an increase in the activity of antithrombin-3 by 1%. A statistically significant association of thrombosis risk was also found for prothrombin and prothrombin time. Conclusion. During the first 7 days of ECMO, patients with COVID-19 demonstrate the increase in APTT, prothrombin time and a decrease in the number of platelets, prothrombin activity, and fibrinogen concentration. The risk of thrombosis in this group of patients significantly decreases with the increasing activity of antithrombin-3 and prothrombin and increases with rising need of the higher dose of unfractionated heparin. The tactics of restrictive anticoagulant therapy when using unfractionated heparin can be taken into account as a way to reduce the risk of thrombosis and requires further research. © 2022 The authors.

Comparison between unfractionated heparin (UFH) and fondaparinux on platelets and D-dimer level in COVID-19 patients with hypercoagulation

Introduction: This study aimed to compare the clinical effects between UFH and fondaparinux in COVID-19 patients with hypercoagulation. Material(s) and Method(s): This was a prospective cohort study. Samples were taken consecutively from hospitalized COVID-19 patients with hypercoagulation who received UFH or fondaparinux based on the standardized guidelines. A total of 71 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients were evaluated for platelet and D-dimer values before and after administration of UFH or fondaparinux. Result(s): Although there was no difference in D-dimer reduction between the two groups (p = 0.44), fondaparinux showed a greater reduction, 26% against 22% for UFH. While on platelets, there was a significant difference (p = 0.04) between fondaparinux and UFH. Fondaparinux showed a reduced thrombocytopenia impact, as seen by an increase in pre-and post-therapy platelets of up to 50%, compared to 16% in UFH. In regard to the incidence of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT), there was no significant difference between post-UFH therapy and post-fondaparinux therapy (p = 0.361). Conclusion(s): Fondaparinux did not reduce platelet levels as much as UFH, but there was no difference between the fondaparinux group compared to the UFH group in the effect of decreasing D-dimer levels and the sign of HIT. Copyright © 2022 Via Medica.

Real-World Management of Pharmacological Thromboprophylactic Strategies for COVID-19 Patients in Japan: From the CLOT-COVID Study.

Background: Data on prophylactic anticoagulation are important in understanding the current issues, unmet needs, and optimal management of Japanese COVID-19 patients. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the clinical management strategies for prophylactic anticoagulation of COVID-19 patients in Japan. Methods: The CLOT-COVID study was a multicenter observational study that enrolled 2,894 consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The study population consisted of 2,889 patients (after excluding 5 patients with missing data); it was divided into 2 groups: patients with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (n = 1,240) and those without (n = 1,649). Furthermore, we evaluated the 1,233 patients who received prophylactic anticoagulation-excluding 7 patients who could not be classified based on the intensity of their anticoagulants-who were then divided into 2 groups: patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulant doses (n = 889) and therapeutic anticoagulant doses (n = 344). Results: The most common pharmacological thromboprophylaxis anticoagulant was unfractionated heparin (68.2%). The severity of COVID-19 at admission was a predictor of the implementation of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in the multivariable analysis (moderate vs mild: OR: 16.6; 95% CI:13.2-21.0; P < 0.001, severe vs mild: OR: 342.6, 95% CI: 107.7-1090.2; P < 0.001). It was also a predictor of the usage of anticoagulants of therapeutic doses in the multivariable analysis (moderate vs mild: OR: 2.10; 95% CI: 1.46-3.02; P < 0.001, severe vs mild: OR: 5.96; 95% CI: 3.91-9.09; P < 0.001). Conclusions: In the current real-world Japanese registry, pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, especially anticoagulants at therapeutic doses, was selectively implemented in COVID-19 patients with comorbidities and severe COVID-19 status at admission.

Standard dosing of enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in critically ill patient with COVID-19: a multicenter propensity-score matched study.

BACKGROUND: Thrombotic events are common in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and have been linked with COVID-19- induced hyperinflammatory state. In addition to anticoagulant effects, heparin and its derivatives have various anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties that may affect patient outcomes. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic standard-doses of enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in critically ill patients with COVID-19.  METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study included critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU between March 2020 and July 2021. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the type of pharmacological VTE thromboprophylaxis given in fixed doses (Enoxaparin 40 mg SQ every 24 hours versus UFH 5000 Units SQ every 8 hours) throughout their ICU stay. The primary endpoint was all cases of thrombosis. Other endpoints were considered secondary. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to match patients (1:1 ratio) between the two groups based on the predefined criteria. Multivariable logistic, Cox proportional hazards, and negative binomial regression analysis were used as appropriate.  RESULTS: A total of 306 patients were eligible based on the eligibility criteria; 130 patients were included after PS matching (1:1 ratio). Patients who received UFH compared to enoxaparin had higher all thrombosis events at crude analysis (18.3% vs. 4.6%; p-value = 0.02 as well in logistic regression analysis (OR: 4.10 (1.05, 15.93); p-value = 0.04). Although there were no significant differences in all bleeding cases and major bleeding between the two groups (OR: 0.40 (0.07, 2.29); p-value = 0.31 and OR: 1.10 (0.14, 8.56); p-value = 0.93, respectively); however, blood transfusion requirement was higher in the UFH group but did not reach statistical significance (OR: 2.98 (0.85, 10.39); p-value = 0.09). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality were similar between the two groups at Cox hazards regression analysis. In contrast, hospital LOS was longer in the UFH group; however, it did not reach the statistically significant difference (beta coefficient: 0.22; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.48; p-value = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Prophylactic enoxaparin use in critically ill patients with COVID-19 may significantly reduce all thrombosis cases with similar bleeding risk compared to UFH.

SARS-CoV-2 infection showing signs of cerebral sinus vein thrombosis in the infantile period.

The clinical manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection mainly involve the respiratory system. However, there is increasing evidence that this virus can affect other organs, causing a wide range of clinical symptoms. This is the report of a 40-day-old patient who presented with sepsis and had no risk factors other than SARS-CoV-2 infection, whose radiological findings were compatible with cerebral sinus vein thrombosis.

Low molecular weight heparin is associated with better outcomes than unfractionated heparin for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis.

AIMS: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the administration of LMWH and UFH in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We systematically searched several databases and included observational studies or clinical trials that compared the outcomes of the administration of LMWH and UFH in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. A total of nine studies comprising 9637 patients were included. Metanalysis showed that LMWH administration was associated with a lower in-hospital mortality and 28/30-day mortality compared with UFH administration {[relative risk (RR) 0.44; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.32-0.61; I2: 87.9%] and (RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.24-0.86; I2: 78.4%), respectively}. Patient with LMWH had shorter duration of hospital and ICU length of stay compared with UFH {[weighted mean difference (WMD) -2.20; 95% CI -3.01 to -1.40; I2:0%] and (WMD -1.41; 95% CI -2.20 to -0.63; I2: 0%), respectively}. The risk of ICU admission or mechanical ventilation was lower in patients who received LMWH than in those who received UFH (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.55-0.81; I2: 67.3%). However, there was no difference in the incidence of bleeding with LMWH compared with UFH (RR 0.27; 95% CI 0.07-1.01; I2: 64.6%). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis showed that administration of LMWH was associated with better outcomes compared with UFH in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Prospective cohorts and RCTs are urgently needed to explore the definitive effect of LMWH to provide direct high-certainty evidence. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021271977.

Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis in pregnancy presenting with hemiplegia: A case report.

Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) is a rather uncommon disorder. CVST is potentially lethal, therefore early detection and treatment is critical. CVST has been linked to pregnancy and puerperium, while COVID-19 infection has been linked to a hypercoagulable state. CVST can be difficult to detect and treat due to the wide range of neurological manifestations, especially in patients with hypercoagulability. The goal of this study is to conduct a literature review and present a unique case of a pregnant woman with CVST who had left hemiplegia and headache. After 6 months of treatment in the hospital, the patient's hemiplegia was fully resolved. Here, we discuss the treatment of CVST in pregnant women who have a suspected past COVID-19 infection.

Accelerated heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in a COVID-19 patient; a case report with literature review.

Introduction: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare and serious immune-mediated complication of heparin therapy which is seldom reported in association with COVID-19. This report aims to present a case of accelerated HIT in a severe COVID-19 patient. Case report: A 63-year-old man presents with symptoms of COVID-19 for one week. He was conscious, ordinated, feverish, and had diffused chest crackles. Initial laboratory tests revealed elevated C-reactive protein of 87.66 mg/dL, elevated D-dimmer of 1258.9 ng/ml, elevated ferritin of 1020 ng/ml, and his platelet count was within the normal range. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed the diagnosis of COVID-19. On the 9th day of admission, he developed a progressive worsening of dyspnea. His D-dimmer level significantly increased to 7020 ng/ml, and his interleukin-6 was 27.3 pg/ml. Hence, we started him on unfractionated heparin (UFH) for thromboprophylaxis. On the 12th day of hospitalization, the platelet count dropped from 258000 to 111000 cells/µL. He had a high probability of HIT (4Ts score = 6). As a result, we discontinued UFH and switched him to apixaban. His platelet count normalized (174000 cells/µL) within two weeks of ceasing UHF. Discussion: HIT results from the production of antibodies against platelet factor 4/heparin complexes. It is associated with a diminished platelet count within 5-10 days post heparin initiation. Because thrombocytopenia can occur in COVID-19 patients, HIT is seldom suspected. Conclusion: HIT should be considered a differential diagnosis in COVID-19 patients with thrombocytopenia.

Low-molecular-weight heparin compared with unfractionated heparin in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis in COVID-19 worsens mortality. In our study, we sought to investigate how the dose and type of anticoagulation (AC) can influence patient outcomes. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective analysis of critically ill intubated patients with COVID-19, comparing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and unfractionated heparin (UFH) at therapeutic and prophylactic doses. Of 218 patients, 135 received LMWH (70 prophylactic, 65 therapeutic) and 83 UFH (11 prophylactic, 72 therapeutic). The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were thromboembolic complications confirmed on imaging and major bleeding complications. Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to determine whether the type and dose of AC were independent predictors of survival. We performed Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to compare the cumulative survivals. RESULTS: Overall, therapeutic AC, with either LMWH (65% vs 79%, P = .09) or UFH (32% vs 46%, P = .73), conveyed no survival benefit over prophylactic AC. UFH was associated with a higher mortality rate than LMWH (66% vs 28%, P = .001), which was also evident in the multivariable analysis (LMWH vs UFH mortality, hazard ratio: 0.47, P = .001) and in the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Thrombotic and bleeding complications did not depend on the AC type (prophylactic LMWH vs UFH: thrombosis P = .49, bleeding P = .075; therapeutic LMWH vs UFH: thrombosis P = .5, bleeding P = .17). When comparing prophylactic with therapeutic AC, the rate of both thrombotic and bleeding complications was higher with the use of LMWH compared with UFH. In addition, transfusion requirements were significantly higher with both therapeutic LMWH and UFH. CONCLUSIONS: Among intubated critically ill COVID-19 intensive care unit patients, therapeutic AC, with either LMWH or UFH, conveyed no survival benefit over prophylactic AC. AC with LMWH was associated with higher cumulative survival compared with AC with UFH.

Cardiovascular complications in the Post-Acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS).

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV 2) or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) initially surfaced in December 2019 from Wuhan, China, sweeping the world with various strains, forcing the WHO to declare a pandemic epidemic in March 2020. Furthermore, COVID-19 manifests with a wide array of presentations from fever and fatigue to severe respiratory and cardiovascular complications. Post-COVID-19 syndrome is poorly understood affecting COVID-19 survivors at all levels of disease severity. The disease is most associated with post-discharge dyspnea and fatigue. However, other persistent symptoms as chest pains, palpitations, smell, and taste dysfunctions. Patients with high concentrations of CRP and creatinine in the acute phase of Covid-19 are more prone to cardiac sequelae. Therefore, high levels of cardiac-sensitive troponin and hypokalaemia can also be used for risk stratification. Furthermore, Cardiac damage can manifest as myocarditis, pericarditis, rhythm abnormalities. The use of different diagnostic modalities like electrocardiogram (ECG), echocardiogram, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)(CMR) to evaluate the myocardial damage were studied. However, Cardiovascular complications are a common manifestation of PASC, classification of severity of cardiac symptoms and the emergence of CMR as a diagnostic tool needs more evidence.

What treatment really make sense for critically ill patients with COVID-19: single-center retrospective cohort study

Introduction. Even now — a year after the pandemic announcement by WHO, there is lack of clinical evidence to confirm the efficacy of the majority of anti-COVID drugs, evenly for general and critically ill patients. Objective. To estimate the efficacy and safety of some anti-COVID-19 drugs as well as the impact of the demographic data and comorbidity on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients. Materials and methods. The single-center retrospective cohort study was performed on critically ill patients admitted to the ICU of Moscow Municipal Hospital No. 68 from March 6 to June 3, 2020. Anthropometric parameters, severity of the condition and comorbidities, as well as CT data, treatment in the ICU, duration of mechanical ventilation and the patients’ length of staying the ICU were taken into account and analyzed. Results. Overall, 403 patients (231 male, average age: 62.4 ± 15.3 years, range from 21 to 97 years) were enrolled into the study. In hospital mortality rate appeared to be 44.9 % (181/403) and was equal for men and for women (p = 1,000). The application of low molecular weight heparin was the single one significant predictor of mortality reduction according to the results of multivariate analysis — HR = 0.742 (0.545–0.991), p = 0.045. The main unmodifiable predictors for mortality elevation in the ICU were: age 65+ (RR 2.116 [1.680–2.664], p < 0.001) and Charlson’s comorbidity index (HR 1.136 [1.087–1.188], p < 0.001). The group of patients with a fatal outcome had a higher comorbidity index, the number of points on the SOFA scale (p < 0.001), as well as a larger median number of days in the ICU (p = 0.012). Conclusions. Current study has convincingly proved that low molecular weight heparin to be used for while treating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 patients in intensive care settings. © 2021, Practical Medicine Publishing House LLC. All rights reserved.

Can nebulised HepArin Reduce morTality and time to Extubation in patients with COVID-19 Requiring invasive ventilation Meta-Trial (CHARTER-MT): Protocol and statistical analysis plan for an investigator-initiated international meta-trial of prospective randomised clinical studies.

There is significant interest in the potential for nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH), as a novel therapy for patients with COVID-19 induced acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure requiring invasive ventilation. The scientific and biological rationale for nebulised heparin stems from the evidence for extensive activation of coagulation resulting in pulmonary microvascular thrombosis in COVID-19 pneumonia. Nebulised delivery of heparin to the lung may limit alveolar fibrin deposition and thereby limit progression of lung injury. Importantly, laboratory studies show that heparin can directly inactivate the SARS-CoV-2 virus, thereby prevent its entry into and infection of mammalian cells. UFH has additional anti-inflammatory and mucolytic properties that may be useful in this context. METHODS AND INTERVENTION: The Can nebulised HepArin Reduce morTality and time to Extubation in Patients with COVID-19 Requiring invasive ventilation Meta-Trial (CHARTER-MT) is a collaborative prospective individual patient data analysis of on-going randomised controlled clinical trials across several countries in five continents, examining the effects of inhaled heparin in patients with COVID-19 requiring invasive ventilation on various endpoints. Each constituent study will randomise patients with COVID-19 induced respiratory failure requiring invasive ventilation. Patients are randomised to receive nebulised heparin or standard care (open label studies) or placebo (blinded placebo-controlled studies) while under invasive ventilation. Each participating study collect a pre-defined minimum dataset. The primary outcome for the meta-trial is the number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 day, defined as days alive and free from invasive ventilation.

Inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin for the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19: A multicentre case series of 98 patients.

AIMS: To determine the safety and efficacy-potential of inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective, uncontrolled multicentre single-arm case series of hospitalised patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, treated with inhaled nebulised UFH (5000 IU q8h, 10 000 IU q4h, or 25 000 IU q6h) for 6 ± 3 (mean ± standard deviation) days. Outcomes were activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) before treatment (baseline) and highest-level during treatment (peak), and adverse events including bleeding. Exploratory efficacy outcomes were oxygenation, assessed by ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2 ) and FiO2 , and the World Health Organisation modified ordinal clinical scale. RESULTS: There were 98 patients included. In patients on stable prophylactic or therapeutic systemic anticoagulant therapy but not receiving therapeutic UFH infusion, APTT levels increased from baseline of 34 ± 10 seconds to a peak of 38 ± 11 seconds (P < .0001). In 3 patients on therapeutic UFH infusion, APTT levels did not significantly increase from baseline of 72 ± 20 to a peak of 84 ± 28 seconds (P = .17). Two patients had serious adverse events: bleeding gastric ulcer requiring transfusion and thigh haematoma; both were on therapeutic anticoagulation. Minor bleeding occurred in 16 patients, 13 of whom were on therapeutic anticoagulation. The oxygen saturation/FiO2 ratio and the FiO2 worsened before and improved after commencement of inhaled UFH (change in slope, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Inhaled nebulised UFH in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was safe. Although statistically significant, inhaled nebulised UFH did not produce a clinically relevant increase in APTT (peak values in the normal range). Urgent randomised evaluation of nebulised UFH in patients with COVID-19 is warranted and several studies are currently underway.

Spontaneous Muscle Hematoma in Japanese Patients with Severe COVID-19 Treated with Unfractionated Heparin: Two Case Reports.

In hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, anticoagulation therapy is administered to prevent thrombosis. However, anticoagulation sometimes causes bleeding complications. We herein report two Japanese cases of severe COVID-19 in which spontaneous muscle hematomas (SMH) developed under therapeutic anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin. Although the activated partial prothrombin time was within the optimal range, contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) revealed SMH in the bilateral iliopsoas muscles in both cases, which required emergent transcatheter embolization. Close monitoring of the coagulation system and the early diagnosis of bleeding complications through CECT are needed in severe COVID-19 patients treated with anticoagulants.

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

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.

Is COVID-19 an Independent Risk Factor for Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes a viral respiratory illness initially described in Wuhan, China, and was declared a pandemic by World Health Organization (WHO) in 2020, and the disease is named coronavirus disease (COVID-19). SARS-CoV2 is known to cause fever, cough, fatigue, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. As more patients become infected, extrapulmonary manifestations came to rise and hypercoagulability is one among those. COVID-19 could predispose patients to both venous and arterial thromboembolic events which are commonly treated with unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). The treatment of patients who develop heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) while being treated with heparin or LMWH for COVID-induced thromboembolic complications is challenging. We describe a patient admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 pneumonia, found to have a cerebrovascular event treated with unfractionated heparin. She also received therapeutic LMWH for anticoagulation on day 1 of presentation due to atrial fibrillation. She was diagnosed with HIT and was found to have a pulmonary embolism, aortic arch mural thrombus, and arterial thrombi in the lower extremities. As more recent studies showed HIT antibodies in COVID-19 patients who are naive for heparin-based products, COVID-19 may be an independent risk factor for the development of HIT. The role of COVID-19 in the development of HIT is uncertain. High vigilance is required to diagnose and initiate treatment for HIT early in the disease course as it can be life-threatening.