Superior ophthalmic vein and cavernous sinus thrombosis associated with COVID-19: a case report / Trombose de veia oftálmica superior e seio cavernoso associada à COVID-19: relato de caso

ABSTRACT Cavernous sinus and superior ophthalmic vein thrombosis is a rare clinical condition, and little described in the literature. The clinical presentation is nonspecific and highly variable, and symptoms may include red eye, ophthalmoplegia, coma, and death. The main etiology results from infection of the paranasal sinuses. The final diagnosis must be made through imaging tests such as magnetic resonance imaging. We describe a case of cavernous sinus and superior ophthalmic vein thrombosis after COVID-19 infection in a 64-year-old patient with persistent ocular hyperemia and pain on eye movement. Ophthalmological examination showed preserved visual acuity, conjunctival hyperemia, dilation of episcleral vessels and retinal vascular tortuosity in the right eye. Magnetic resonance imaging confirmed the diagnosis. The association with the COVID-19 was raised, excluding other infectious causes. Enoxaparin and Warfarin were started with significant improvement in the ocular clinical presentation and maintenance of initial visual acuity after 12 months of follow-up.

RESUMO A trombose de seio cavernoso e veia oftálmica superior é uma condição clínica rara e pouco descrita na literatura. A apresentação clínica é inespecífica e altamente variável. Os sintomas podem incluir olho vermelho, oftalmoplegia, coma e morte. A etiologia principal resulta da infecção dos seios paranasais. O diagnóstico final deve ser efetuado por meio de exames de imagem, como ressonância magnética. Descrevemos um caso de trombose de seio cavernoso e veia oftálmica superior após COVID-19 em paciente de 64 anos e com quadro de hiperemia ocular persistente e dor à movimentação ocular. Ao exame oftalmológico, observou-se acuidade visual preservada, hiperemia conjuntival, dilatação de vasos episclerais e tortuosidade vascular retiniana em olho direito. A ressonância confirmou o diagnóstico. A associação com a COVID-19 foi levantada, excluindo-se demais causas infecciosas. Prescrevemos enoxaparina e varfarina, com melhora do quadro clínico ocular e manutenção da acuidade visual inicial após 12 meses de acompanhamento.

Supraprophylactic Anti-Factor Xa Levels Are Associated with Major Bleeding in Neurosurgery Patients Receiving Prophylactic Enoxaparin.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies demonstrated reduced risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in neurosurgical patients secondary to prophylaxis with both heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin. The ability to monitor low-molecular-weight heparin by obtaining anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) serum levels provides an opportunity to evaluate safety and efficacy. The aim of this study was to describe characteristics of patients who have anti-Xa levels outside of the goal range (0.2-0.4/0.5 IU/mL) and investigate incidence of major bleeding and VTE. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective, observational study was conducted on neurosurgical patients receiving enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis between August 2019 and December 2020. Significance testing was conducted via Fisher exact test and independent samples t test. RESULTS: The study included 85 patients. Patients were less likely to have an anti-Xa level in the goal range if they were male, had a higher weight, or were morbidly obese. Three neuroendovascular patients (3.5%) experienced a major bleed. Serum anti-Xa levels were significantly higher in patients who experienced major bleeds compared with patients who did not (0.45 ± 0.16 IU/mL vs. 0.28 ± 0.09 IU/mL, P = 0.003). Patients with a supraprophylactic anti-Xa level (>0.5 IU/mL) were more likely to experience a major bleed (P = 0.005). One VTE event occurred: the patient experienced a pulmonary embolism with anti-Xa level at goal. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-Xa-guided enoxaparin dosing for VTE prophylaxis in neurosurgical patients may help prevent major bleeding. These data suggest that a higher anti-Xa level may predispose patients to major bleeding. Further evaluation is needed to identify the goal anti-Xa level for VTE prophylaxis in this population.

The Immediate Effect of COVID-19 Vaccination on Anticoagulation Control in Patients Using Vitamin K Antagonists.

BACKGROUND: In January 2021, the Dutch vaccination program against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was started. Clinical studies have shown that systemic reactions occur in up to 50% of vaccine recipients. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccination could affect anticoagulation control, potentially leading to an increased risk of thrombotic events and bleeding complications. AIMS: This article investigates whether the BNT162b2 vaccine affects anticoagulation control in outpatients using vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). METHODS: A case-crossover study was performed in a cohort of outpatient VKA users from four Dutch anticoagulation clinics who received a BNT162b2 vaccine. International normalized ratio (INR) results and VKA dosages before the first vaccination, the reference period, were compared with those after the first and second vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 3,148 outpatient VKA users were included, with a mean age (standard deviation) of 86.7 (8.7) years, of whom 43.8% were male, 67.0% used acenocoumarol, and 33.0% phenprocoumon. We observed a decrease of 8.9% of INRs within range in the standard intensity group (target INR 2.0-3.0). There was both an increased risk of supratherapeutic (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.67]) and subtherapeutic levels (OR = 1.40 [95% CI 1.08-1.83]) after first vaccination. In the high-intensity group (target INR 2.5-3.5), the risk of a supratherapeutic INR was 2.3 times higher after first vaccination (OR = 2.29 [95% CI 1.22-4.28]) and 3.3 times higher after second vaccination (OR = 3.25 [95% CI 1.06-9.97]). CONCLUSION: BNT162b2 was associated with an immediate negative effect on anticoagulation control in patients treated with VKAs, so it is advisable to monitor the INR shortly after vaccination, even in stable patients.

In COVID-19, escalated- vs. prophylactic-dose anticoagulation does not reduce mortality and increases major bleeding.

SOURCE CITATION: Ortega-Paz L, Galli M, Capodanno D, et al. Safety and efficacy of different prophylactic anticoagulation dosing regimens in critically and non-critically ill patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2021. [Epub ahead of print.] 34519777.

A journey through anticoagulant therapies in the treatment of left ventricular thrombus in post-COVID-19 heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune-mediated adverse drug reaction associated with thrombosis. Clinical scoring systems and the presence of anti-platelet factor 4 (anti-PF4)/heparin antibodies determine the diagnosis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 57-year-old man who was treated with acenocoumarol due to a chronic left ventricular thrombus was admitted to the hospital for severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and pulmonary embolism. The patient was started on bemiparin and discharged. Left lower limb acute arterial ischemia and thrombocytopenia were diagnosed 18 days later. Computed tomography angiography revealed a large left ventricular thrombus and multiple arterial thrombi. Left femoral-popliteal thromboembolectomy was performed. Anti-PF4/heparin antibodies confirmed an HIT diagnosis. Fondaparinux (7.5 mg/24 h) was initiated, but cardiac surgery was necessary. Bivalirudin was used during surgery, with an initial load (1.25 mg/kg) and maintenance infusion (2.5 mg/kg/h). The cardiac thrombus was extracted, but the patient experienced a postsurgical myocardial infarction. Percutaneous cardiovascular intervention (PCI) required a bivalirudin load (0.75 mg/kg) and maintenance infusion (1.75 mg/kg/h). No coronary lesions were detected, and argatroban was started afterwards (0.5 µg/kg/min). When the platelet count exceeded 100 × 109/L, acenocoumarol was initiated. Thereupon, acetylsalicylic acid (100 mg/24 h) was added. No other complications have been reported to date. CONCLUSION: The clinical presentation of intraventricular and multiple arterial thrombi is remarkable. SARS-CoV-2 infection likely contributed to a hypercoagulable state. The management of patients with HIT undergoing cardiac surgery is challenging. If surgery cannot be delayed, then treatment with bivalirudin is recommended. Additionally, this drug is recommended for PCI. Bivalirudin is safe and well-tolerated in both procedures.

Coagulation System Activation for Targeting of COVID-19: Insights into Anticoagulants, Vaccine-Loaded Nanoparticles, and Hypercoagulability in COVID-19 Vaccines.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as COVID-19, is currently developing into a rapidly disseminating and an overwhelming worldwide pandemic. In severe COVID-19 cases, hypercoagulability and inflammation are two crucial complications responsible for poor prognosis and mortality. In addition, coagulation system activation and inflammation overlap and produce life-threatening complications, including coagulopathy and cytokine storm, which are associated with overproduction of cytokines and activation of the immune system; they might be a lead cause of organ damage. However, patients with severe COVID-19 who received anticoagulant therapy had lower mortality, especially with elevated D-dimer or fibrin degradation products (FDP). In this regard, the discovery of natural products with anticoagulant potential may help mitigate the numerous side effects of the available synthetic drugs. This review sheds light on blood coagulation and its impact on the complication associated with COVID-19. Furthermore, the sources of natural anticoagulants, the role of nanoparticle formulation in this outbreak, and the prevalence of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after COVID-19 vaccines are also reviewed. These combined data provide many research ideas related to the possibility of using these anticoagulant agents as a treatment to relieve acute symptoms of COVID-19 infection.

Anticoagulant Treatment Regimens in Patients With Covid-19: A Meta-Analysis.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with a hypercoagulable state. It has been hypothesized that higher-dose anticoagulation, including therapeutic-dose and intermediate-dose anticoagulation, is superior to prophylactic-dose anticoagulation in the treatment of COVID-19. This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of higher-dose anticoagulation compared with prophylactic-dose anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19. Ten randomized controlled open-label trials with a total of 5,753 patients were included. The risk of death and net adverse clinical events (including death, thromboembolic events, and major bleeding) were similar between higher-dose and prophylactic-dose anticoagulation (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% CI, 0.79-1.16, P = 0.66 and RR 0.87, 95% CI, 0.73-1.03, P = 0.11, respectively). Higher-dose anticoagulation, compared with prophylactic-dose anticoagulation, decreased the risk of thromboembolic events (RR 0.63, 95% CI, 0.47-0.84, P = 0.002) but increased the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.76, 95% CI, 1.19-2.62, P = 0.005). The risk of death showed no statistically significant difference between higher-dose anticoagulation and prophylactic-dose anticoagulation in noncritically ill patients (RR 0.87, 95% CI, 0.50-1.52, P = 0.62) and in critically ill patients with COVID-19 (RR 1.04, 95% CI, 0.93-1.17, P = 0.5). The risk of death was similar between therapeutic-dose vs. prophylactic-dose anticoagulation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.69-1.21, P = 0.54) and between intermediate-dose vs. prophylactic-dose anticoagulation (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.63-1.61, P = 0.98). In patients with markedly increased d-dimer levels, higher-dose anticoagulation was also not associated with a decreased risk of death as compared with prophylactic-dose anticoagulation (RR 0.86, 95% CI, 0.64-1.16, P = 0.34). Without any clear evidence of survival benefit, these findings do not support the routine use of therapeutic-dose or intermediate-dose anticoagulation in critically or noncritically ill patients with COVID-19.

OpenSAFELY: impact of national guidance on switching anticoagulant therapy during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Health Service (NHS) recommended that appropriate patients anticoagulated with warfarin should be switched to direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), requiring less frequent blood testing. Subsequently, a national safety alert was issued regarding patients being inappropriately coprescribed two anticoagulants following a medication change and associated monitoring. OBJECTIVE: To describe which people were switched from warfarin to DOACs; identify potentially unsafe coprescribing of anticoagulants; and assess whether abnormal clotting results have become more frequent during the pandemic. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a cohort study using routine clinical data from 24 million NHS patients in England. RESULTS: 20 000 of 164 000 warfarin patients (12.2%) switched to DOACs between March and May 2020, most commonly to edoxaban and apixaban. Factors associated with switching included: older age, recent renal function test, higher number of recent INR tests recorded, atrial fibrillation diagnosis and care home residency. There was a sharp rise in coprescribing of warfarin and DOACs from typically 50-100 per month to 246 in April 2020, 0.06% of all people receiving a DOAC or warfarin. International normalised ratio (INR) testing fell by 14% to 506.8 patients tested per 1000 warfarin patients each month. We observed a very small increase in elevated INRs (n=470) during April compared with January (n=420). CONCLUSIONS: Increased switching of anticoagulants from warfarin to DOACs was observed at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic in England following national guidance. There was a small but substantial number of people coprescribed warfarin and DOACs during this period. Despite a national safety alert on the issue, a widespread rise in elevated INR test results was not found. Primary care has responded rapidly to changes in patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical and laboratory characteristics of patients with novel coronavirus disease-2019 infection and deep venous thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: Early reports suggest that patients with novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection carry a significant risk of altered coagulation with an increased risk for venous thromboembolic events. This report investigates the relationship of significant COVID-19 infection and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) as reflected in the patient clinical and laboratory characteristics. METHODS: We reviewed the demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory and radiologic evaluations, results of venous duplex imaging and mortality of COVID-19-positive patients (18-89 years) admitted to the Indiana University Academic Health Center. Using oxygen saturation, radiologic findings, and need for advanced respiratory therapies, patients were classified into mild, moderate, or severe categories of COVID-19 infection. A descriptive analysis was performed using univariate and bivariate Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to examine the distribution of patient characteristics and compare the DVT outcomes. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio of experiencing DVT and a receiver operating curve analysis to identify the optimal cutoff for d-dimer to predict DVT in this COVID-19 cohort. Time to the diagnosis of DVT from admission was analyzed using log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier plots. RESULTS: Our study included 71 unique COVID-19-positive patients (mean age, 61 years) categorized as having 3% mild, 14% moderate, and 83% severe infection and evaluated with 107 venous duplex studies. DVT was identified in 47.8% of patients (37% of examinations) at an average of 5.9 days after admission. Patients with DVT were predominantly male (67%; P = .032) with proximal venous involvement (29% upper and 39% in the lower extremities with 55% of the latter demonstrating bilateral involvement). Patients with DVT had a significantly higher mean d-dimer of 5447 ± 7032 ng/mL (P = .0101), and alkaline phosphatase of 110 IU/L (P = .0095) than those without DVT. On multivariable analysis, elevated d-dimer (P = .038) and alkaline phosphatase (P = .021) were associated with risk for DVT, whereas age, sex, elevated C-reactive protein, and ferritin levels were not. A receiver operating curve analysis suggests an optimal d-dimer value of 2450 ng/mL cutoff with 70% sensitivity, 59.5% specificity, and 61% positive predictive value, and 68.8% negative predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that males with severe COVID-19 infection requiring hospitalization are at highest risk for developing DVT. Elevated d-dimers and alkaline phosphatase along with our multivariable model can alert the clinician to the increased risk of DVT requiring early evaluation and aggressive treatment.

Treatments Associated with Lower Mortality among Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients remains high. Although randomized controlled trials must continue to definitively evaluate treatments, further hypothesis-generating efforts to identify candidate treatments are required. This study's hypothesis was that certain treatments are associated with lower COVID-19 mortality. METHODS: This was a 1-yr retrospective cohort study involving all COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units in six hospitals affiliated with Yale New Haven Health System from February 13, 2020, to March 4, 2021. The exposures were any COVID-19-related pharmacologic and organ support treatments. The outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: This study analyzed 2,070 patients after excluding 23 patients who died within 24 h after intensive care unit admission and 3 patients who remained hospitalized on the last day of data censoring. The in-hospital mortality was 29% (593 of 2,070). Of 23 treatments analyzed, apixaban (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.363 to 0.48; corrected CI, 0.336 to 0.52) and aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87; corrected CI, 0.54 to 0.96) were associated with lower mortality based on the multivariable analysis with multiple testing correction. Propensity score-matching analysis showed an association between apixaban treatment and lower mortality (with vs. without apixaban, 27% [96 of 360] vs. 37% [133 of 360]; hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.337 to 0.69) and an association between aspirin treatment and lower mortality (with vs. without aspirin, 26% [121 of 473] vs. 30% [140 of 473]; hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.78). Enoxaparin showed similar associations based on the multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.97; corrected CI, 0.61 to 1.05) and propensity score-matching analysis (with vs. without enoxaparin, 25% [87 of 347] vs. 34% [117 of 347]; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.367 to 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the known hypercoagulability in severe COVID-19, the use of apixaban, enoxaparin, or aspirin was independently associated with lower mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

COVID-19 and Its Implications for Thrombosis and Anticoagulation.

Venous thromboembolism, occlusion of dialysis catheters, circuit thrombosis in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) devices, acute limb ischemia, and isolated strokes, all in the face of prophylactic and even therapeutic anticoagulation, are features of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) coagulopathy. It seems well established at this time that a COVID-19 patient deemed sick enough to be hospitalized, should receive at least prophylactic dose anticoagulation. However, should some hospitalized patients have dosage escalation to intermediate dose? Should some be considered for full-dose anticoagulation without a measurable thromboembolic event and how should that anticoagulation be monitored? Should patients receive postdischarge anticoagulation and with what medication and for how long? What thrombotic issues are related to the various medications being used to treat this coagulopathy? Is antiphospholipid antibody part of this syndrome? What is the significance of isolated ischemic stroke and limb ischemia in this disorder and how does this interface with the rest of the clinical and laboratory features of this disorder? The aims of this article are to explore these questions and interpret the available data based on the current evidence.

Cardiogenic shock complicating multisystem inflammatory syndrome following COVID-19 infection: a case report.

BACKGROUND: With the high prevalence of COVID-19 infections worldwide, the multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A) is becoming an increasingly recognized entity. This syndrome presents in patients several weeks after infection with COVID-19 and is associated with thrombosis, elevated inflammatory markers, hemodynamic compromise and cardiac dysfunction. Treatment is often with steroids and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg). The pathologic basis of myocardial injury in MIS-A, however, is not well characterized. In our case report, we obtained endomyocardial biopsy that revealed a pattern of myocardial injury similar to that found in COVID-19 cardiac specimens. CASE PRESENTATION: A 26-year-old male presented with fevers, chills, headache, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea 5 weeks after his COVID-19 infection. His SARS-CoV-2 PCR was negative and IgG was positive, consistent with prior infection. He was found to be in cardiogenic shock with biventricular failure, requiring inotropes and diuretics. Given concern for acute fulminant myocarditis, an endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) was performed, showing an inflammatory infiltrate consisting predominantly of interstitial macrophages with scant T lymphocytes. The histologic pattern was similar to that of cardiac specimens from COVID-19 patients, helping rule out myocarditis as the prevailing diagnosis. His case was complicated by persistent hypoxemia, and a computed tomography scan revealed pulmonary emboli. He received IVIg, steroids, and anticoagulation with rapid recovery of biventricular function. CONCLUSIONS: MIS-A should be considered as the diagnosis in patients presenting several weeks after COVID-19 infection with severe inflammation and multi-organ involvement. In our case, EMB facilitated identification of MIS-A and guided therapy. The patient's biventricular function recovered with IVIg and steroids.

PICO Questions and DELPHI Methodology for the Management of Venous Thromboembolism Associated with COVID-19.

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have a higher risk of venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) than patients with other infectious or inflammatory diseases, both as macrothrombosis (pulmonar embolism and deep vein thrombosis) or microthrombosis. However, the use of anticoagulation in this scenario remains controversial. This is a project that used DELPHI methodology to answer PICO questions related to anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19. The objective was to reach a consensus among multidisciplinary VTE experts providing answers to those PICO questions. Seven PICO questions regarding patients with COVID-19 responded with a broad consensus: 1. It is recommended to avoid pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in most COVID-19 patients not requiring hospital admission; 2. In most hospitalized patients for COVID-19 who are receiving oral anticoagulants before admission, it is recommended to replace them by low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) at therapeutic doses; 3. Thromboprophylaxis with LMWH at standard doses is suggested for COVID-19 patients admitted to a conventional hospital ward; 4. Standard-doses thromboprophylaxis with LMWH is recommended for COVID-19 patients requiring admission to Intensive Care Unit; 5. It is recommended not to determine D-Dimer levels routinely in COVID-19 hospitalized patients to select those in whom VTE should be suspected, or as a part of the diagnostic algorithm to rule out or confirm a VTE event; 6. It is recommended to discontinue pharmacological thromboprophylaxis at discharge in most patients hospitalized for COVID-19; 7. It is recommended to withdraw anticoagulant treatment after 3 months in most patients with a VTE event associated with COVID-19. The combination of PICO questions and DELPHI methodology provides a consensus on different recommendations for anticoagulation management in patients with COVID-19.