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.

Drug-drug interaction between dexamethasone and direct-acting oral anticoagulants: a nested case-control study in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C).

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this work is to evaluate if there is an increase in the risk of thromboembolic events (TEEs) due to concomitant exposure to dexamethasone and apixaban or rivaroxaban. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), as well as corticosteroid dexamethasone, are commonly used to treat individuals hospitalised with COVID-19. Dexamethasone induces cytochrome P450-3A4 enzyme that also metabolises DOACs apixaban and rivaroxaban. This raises a concern about possible interaction between dexamethasone and DOACs that may reduce the efficacy of the DOACs and result in an increased risk of TEE. DESIGN: We used nested case-control study design. SETTING: This study was conducted in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), the largest electronic health records repository for COVID-19 in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were adults over 18 years who were exposed to a DOAC for 10 or more consecutive days. Exposure to dexamethasone was at least 5 or more consecutive days. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary exposure variable was concomitant exposure to dexamethasone for 5 or more days after exposure to either rivaroxaban or apixaban for 5 or more consecutive days. We used McNemar's Χ2 test and adjusted logistic regression to evaluate association between concomitant use of dexamethasone with either apixaban or rivaroxaban. RESULTS: McNemar's Χ2 test did not find a discernible association of TEE in patients concomitantly exposed to dexamethasone and a DOAC (χ2=0.5, df=1, p=0.48). In addition, a conditional logistic regression model did not find an increase in the risk of TEE (adjusted OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.18). CONCLUSION: This nested case-control study did not find evidence of an association between concomitant exposure to dexamethasone and a DOAC with an increase in risk of TEE. Due to small sample size, an association cannot be completely ruled out.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on England's national prescriptions of oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs): an interrupted time series analysis (January 2019-February 2021).

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were developed as an alternative to warfarin to treat and prevent thromboembolism, including stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients. The COVID-19 pandemic could increase the risk of stroke and/or the risk of bleeding in patients due to nonadherence or sub/supra-optimal dosing. OBJECTIVE: To investigate DOAC prescription trends in England's community settings during the complete first wave of COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Descriptive and interrupted time series (ITS) analyses were conducted to examine the prescription patterns of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) and warfarin for primary care patients in the English Prescribing Dataset from January 2019 to February 2021, with March 2020 as the cut-off point. RESULTS: A 19% increase in mean DOAC's accompanied with 20% warfarin prescriptions decline was observed. ITS modelling showed an increase in DOAC prescription volume in March 2020 (+7 million items, p = 0.008). The pre-existing upward trend in DOAC prescriptions slowed during the period (-427,000 items, p = 0.007). Apixaban was the most frequently used DOAC and had the largest step-change in March 2020 (+5 million items, p = 0.010). The mean monthly combined cost of DOACs and warfarin was higher during the period. DOAC prescription trends were consistent across England's regions. Conclusion: The overall oral anticoagulants use in this period was lower than expected, indicating a medical needs gap, possibly due to adherence issues. The potential clinical and logistical consequences warrant further study to identify contributing factors and mitigate avoidable risks.

Rivaroxaban versus no anticoagulation for post-discharge thromboprophylaxis after hospitalisation for COVID-19 (MICHELLE): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalised with COVID-19 are at risk for thrombotic events after discharge; the role of extended thromboprophylaxis in this population is unknown. METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre, randomised trial conducted at 14 centres in Brazil, patients hospitalised with COVID-19 at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism [IMPROVE] venous thromboembolism [VTE] score of ≥4 or 2-3 with a D-dimer >500 ng/mL) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive, at hospital discharge, rivaroxaban 10 mg/day or no anticoagulation for 35 days. The primary efficacy outcome in an intention-to-treat analysis was a composite of symptomatic or fatal venous thromboembolism, asymptomatic venous thromboembolism on bilateral lower-limb venous ultrasound and CT pulmonary angiogram, symptomatic arterial thromboembolism, and cardiovascular death at day 35. Adjudication was blinded. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. The primary and safety analyses were carried out in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04662684. FINDINGS: From Oct 8, 2020, to June 29, 2021, 997 patients were screened. Of these patients, 677 did not meet eligibility criteria; the remaining 320 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban (n=160 [50%]) or no anticoagulation (n=160 [50%]). All patients received thromboprophylaxis with standard doses of heparin during hospitalisation. 165 (52%) patients were in the intensive care unit while hospitalised. 197 (62%) patients had an IMPROVE score of 2-3 and elevated D-dimer levels and 121 (38%) had a score of 4 or more. Two patients (one in each group) were lost to follow-up due to withdrawal of consent and not included in the intention-to-treat primary analysis. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in five (3%) of 159 patients assigned to rivaroxaban and 15 (9%) of 159 patients assigned to no anticoagulation (relative risk 0·33, 95% CI 0·12-0·90; p=0·0293). No major bleeding occurred in either study group. Allergic reactions occurred in two (1%) patients in the rivaroxaban group. INTERPRETATION: In patients at high risk discharged after hospitalisation due to COVID-19, thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban 10 mg/day for 35 days improved clinical outcomes compared with no extended thromboprophylaxis. FUNDING: Bayer.

Effect of common maintenance drugs on the risk and severity of COVID-19 in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance drugs are used to treat chronic conditions. Several classes of maintenance drugs have attracted attention because of their potential to affect susceptibility to and severity of COVID-19. METHODS: Using claims data on 20% random sample of Part D Medicare enrollees from April to December 2020, we identified patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Using a nested case-control design, non-COVID-19 controls were identified by 1:5 matching on age, race, sex, dual-eligibility status, and geographical region. We identified usage of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB), statins, warfarin, direct factor Xa inhibitors, P2Y12 inhibitors, famotidine and hydroxychloroquine based on Medicare prescription claims data. Using extended Cox regression models with time-varying propensity score adjustment we examined the independent effect of each study drug on contracting COVID-19. For severity of COVID-19, we performed extended Cox regressions on all COVID-19 patients, using COVID-19-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality as outcomes. Covariates included gender, age, race, geographic region, low-income indicator, and co-morbidities. To compensate for indication bias related to the use of hydroxychloroquine for the prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19, we censored patients who only started on hydroxychloroquine in 2020. RESULTS: Up to December 2020, our sample contained 374,229 Medicare patients over 65 who were diagnosed with COVID-19. Among the COVID-19 patients, 278,912 (74.6%) were on at least one study drug. The three most common study drugs among COVID-19 patients were statins 187,374 (50.1%), ACEI 97,843 (26.2%) and ARB 83,290 (22.3%). For all three outcomes (diagnosis, hospitalization and death), current users of ACEI, ARB, statins, warfarin, direct factor Xa inhibitors and P2Y12 inhibitors were associated with reduced risks, compared to never users. Famotidine did not show consistent significant effects. Hydroxychloroquine did not show significant effects after censoring of recent starters. CONCLUSION: Maintenance use of ACEI, ARB, warfarin, statins, direct factor Xa inhibitors and P2Y12 inhibitors was associated with reduction in risk of acquiring COVID-19 and dying from it.

Rivaroxaban with Aspirin Versus Aspirin for Peripheral Arterial Disease and Intermittent Claudication. Rationale and Design of the COMPASS CLAUDICATION Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COMPASS trial demonstrated that in patients with peripheral arterial disease, the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin reduces the risk of major adverse limb events, but it is not known whether this combination can also improve symptoms in patients with intermittent claudication. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of the combination on claudication distance. STUDY DESIGN: Eighty-eight patients with intermittent claudication will be randomized to receive rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg once daily or aspirin 100 mg once daily for 24 weeks. The primary outcome is the change in claudication distance from the baseline to 24 weeks, measured by 6 min walking test and treadmill test. The primary safety outcome is the incidence of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria. SUMMARY: The COMPASS CLAUDICATION trial will provide high-quality evidence regarding the effect of the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin on claudication distance in patients with peripheral arterial disease.

A guide to immunotherapy for COVID-19.

Immune dysregulation is an important component of the pathophysiology of COVID-19. A large body of literature has reported the effect of immune-based therapies in patients with COVID-19, with some remarkable successes such as the use of steroids or anti-cytokine therapies. However, challenges in clinical decision-making arise from the complexity of the disease phenotypes and patient heterogeneity, as well as the variable quality of evidence from immunotherapy studies. This Review aims to support clinical decision-making by providing an overview of the evidence generated by major clinical trials of host-directed therapy. We discuss patient stratification and propose an algorithm to guide the use of immunotherapy strategies in the clinic. This will not only help guide treatment decisions, but may also help to design future trials that investigate immunotherapy in other severe infections.

Real-life experience of edoxaban treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE)/pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with isolated positive Lupus Anticoagulant (LAC) during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have established indications, according to recent guidelines for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including pulmonary embolism (PE), with a safer profile compared to vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in terms of a lower risk for major bleeding and no need of blood coagulation tests. However, DOACs are not indicated in the treatment of patients with triple-positive antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). This limitation is often extended in clinical practice to patients with isolated positivity. The COVID-19 pandemic has sometimes made it difficult to maintain a safe VKA treatment, due to the practical difficulties of performing INR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated 39 patients with a previous unprovoked VTE/PE, who were no longer eligible for VKA treatment due to the difficulty of performing INR during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, in Italy. All patients had a positive LAC and refused a long-term anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin. They were shifted to edoxaban. RESULTS: Any recurrence of VTE/PE occurred during the observation period (up to eight months of treatment), while only one minor bleeding event was recorded (Hazard ratio=0.06, 95% confidence interval 0.03-0.11, p=0.094). No arterial events occurred during the observation period. Hemoglobin, platelets, and creatinine were unchanged during the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: Edoxaban treatment may be safe and effective in preventing the recurrence of VTE/PE in patients with isolated LAC positivity, without the occurrence of arterial events.

Effect of Antithrombotic Therapy on Clinical Outcomes in Outpatients With Clinically Stable Symptomatic COVID-19: The ACTIV-4B Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Acutely ill inpatients with COVID-19 typically receive antithrombotic therapy, although the risks and benefits of this intervention among outpatients with COVID-19 have not been established. Objective: To assess whether anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy can safely reduce major adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes among symptomatic but clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ACTIV-4B Outpatient Thrombosis Prevention Trial was designed as a minimal-contact, adaptive, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to compare anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy among 7000 symptomatic but clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19. The trial was conducted at 52 US sites between September 2020 and June 2021; final follow-up was August 5, 2021. Prior to initiating treatment, participants were required to have platelet count greater than 100 000/mm3 and estimated glomerular filtration rate greater than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Interventions: Random allocation in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to aspirin (81 mg orally once daily; n = 164), prophylactic-dose apixaban (2.5 mg orally twice daily; n = 165), therapeutic-dose apixaban (5 mg orally twice daily; n = 164), or placebo (n = 164) for 45 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a composite of all-cause mortality, symptomatic venous or arterial thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for cardiovascular or pulmonary cause. The primary analyses for efficacy and bleeding events were limited to participants who took at least 1 dose of trial medication. Results: On June 18, 2021, the trial data and safety monitoring board recommended early termination because of lower than anticipated event rates; at that time, 657 symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 had been randomized (median age, 54 years [IQR, 46-59]; 59% women). The median times from diagnosis to randomization and from randomization to initiation of study treatment were 7 days and 3 days, respectively. Twenty-two randomized participants (3.3%) were hospitalized for COVID-19 prior to initiating treatment. Among the 558 patients who initiated treatment, the adjudicated primary composite end point occurred in 1 patient (0.7%) in the aspirin group, 1 patient (0.7%) in the 2.5-mg apixaban group, 2 patients (1.4%) in the 5-mg apixaban group, and 1 patient (0.7%) in the placebo group. The risk differences compared with placebo for the primary end point were 0.0% (95% CI not calculable) in the aspirin group, 0.7% (95% CI, -2.1% to 4.1%) in the 2.5-mg apixaban group, and 1.4% (95% CI, -1.5% to 5.0%) in the 5-mg apixaban group. Risk differences compared with placebo for bleeding events were 2.0% (95% CI, -2.7% to 6.8%), 4.5% (95% CI, -0.7% to 10.2%), and 6.9% (95% CI, 1.4% to 12.9%) among participants who initiated therapy in the aspirin, prophylactic apixaban, and therapeutic apixaban groups, respectively, although none were major. Findings inclusive of all randomized patients were similar. Conclusions and Relevance: Among symptomatic clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19, treatment with aspirin or apixaban compared with placebo did not reduce the rate of a composite clinical outcome. However, the study was terminated after enrollment of 9% of participants because of an event rate lower than anticipated. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04498273.

Anticoagulation for COVID-19 Patients: A Bird's-Eye View.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a systemic disease that can be life-threatening involving immune and inflammatory responses, and that can result in potentially lethal complications, including venous thrombo-embolism (VTE). Forming an integrative approach to thrombo-prophylaxis and coagulation treatment for COVID-19 patients ensues. We aim at reviewing the literature for anticoagulation in the setting of COVID-19 infection to provide a summary on anticoagulation for this patient population. COVID-19 infection is associated with a state of continuous inflammation, which results in macrophage activation syndrome and an increased rate of thrombosis. Risk assessment models to predict the risk of thrombosis in critically ill patients have not yet been validated. Currently published guidelines suggest the use of prophylactic intensity over intermediate intensity or therapeutic intensity anticoagulant for patients with critical illness or acute illness related to COVID-19 infection. Critically ill COVID-19 patients who are diagnosed with acute VTE are considered to have a provoking factor, and, therefore, treatment duration should be at least 3 months. Patients with proximal deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism should receive parenteral over oral anticoagulants with low-molecular-weight heparin or fondaparinux preferred over unfractionated heparin. In patients with impending hemodynamic compromise due to PE, and who are not at increased risk for bleeding, reperfusion may be necessary. Internists should remain updated on new emerging evidence regarding anticoagulation for COVID-19 patients. Awaiting these findings, we invite internists to perform individualized decisions that are unique for every patient and to base them on clinical judgment for risk assessment.

The Cross-Talk between Thrombosis and Inflammatory Storm in Acute and Long-COVID-19: Therapeutic Targets and Clinical Cases.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) commonly complicates with coagulopathy. A syndrome called Long-COVID-19 is emerging recently in COVID-19 survivors, characterized, in addition to the persistence of symptoms typical of the acute phase, by alterations in inflammatory and coagulation parameters due to endothelial damage. The related disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) can be associated with high death rates in COVID-19 patients. It is possible to find a prothrombotic state also in Long-COVID-19. Early administration of anticoagulants in COVID-19 was suggested in order to improve patient outcomes, although exact criteria for their application were not well-established. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was commonly adopted for counteracting DIC and venous thromboembolism (VTE), due to its pharmacodynamics and anti-inflammatory properties. However, the efficacy of anticoagulant therapy for COVID-19-associated DIC is still a matter of debate. Thrombin and Factor Xa (FXa) are well-known components of the coagulation cascade. The FXa is known to strongly promote inflammation as the consequence of increased cytokine expression. Endothelial cells and mononuclear leucocytes release cytokines, growth factors, and adhesion molecules due to thrombin activation. On the other hand, cytokines can activate coagulation. The cross-talk between coagulation and inflammation is mediated via protease-activated receptors (PARs). These receptors might become potential targets to be considered for counteracting the clinical expressions of COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 is effectively able to activate local and circulating coagulation factors, thus inducing the generation of disseminated coagula. LMWH may be considered as the new frontier in the treatment of COVID-19 and Long-COVID-19. Indeed, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may be an alternative option for both early and later treatment of COVID-19 patients due to their ability to inhibit PARs. The aim of this report was to evaluate the role of anticoagulants-and DOACs in particular in COVID-19 and Long-COVID-19 patients. We report the case of a COVID-19 patient who, after administration of enoxaparin developed DIC secondary to virosis and positivity for platelet factor 4 (PF4) and a case of Long-COVID with high residual cardiovascular risk and persistence of blood chemistry of inflammation and procoagulative state.

Edoxaban for the treatment of pulmonary embolism in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate the clinical performance of edoxaban for the treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis selecting hospitalized patients with COVID-19 admitted to our Institution from 20 May 2020 to 20 November 2020 with computer tomography (CT) detected PE at admission, treated with edoxaban after initial parenteral therapy. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without ARDS at admission and between those with and without CT confirmed PE resolution. RESULTS: 50 patients were included. Mean follow-up was 42.5 ± 10 days. No baseline differences were found between patients with ARDS (30%) and those without ARDS at admission. Patients with PE resolution (84%) were younger (P = 0.03), had a shorter duration of fondaparinux therapy (9.9 ± 3.8 vs 15.8 ± 7.5 days; P = 0.0015) and length of hospitalization (36 ± 8 vs 46 ± 9 days: P = 0.0023) compared with those without PE resolution. 2 patients experienced major bleedings. At multivariate analysis the time to edoxaban switch was the only predictor of the PE resolution (HR: 0.92; 95% C.I. 0.86 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: Edoxaban was an effective and safe treatment for acute PE in COVID-19 setting.

Severe Inflammation, Acute Kidney Injury, and Drug-Drug Interaction: Triple Penalty for Prolonged Elimination of Apixaban in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Grand Round.

ABSTRACT: In this article, we present a case of apixaban elimination prolonged by 450% in a patient with coronavirus disease 2019 because of multiple conditions, including drug-drug interaction, severe inflammation, and acute kidney injury. Therapeutic drug monitoring was used to explain unusual routine coagulation assays. This grand round highlights the importance of dialog between the clinician and a therapeutic drug monitoring consultant for optimal patient care.

Direct-acting oral anticoagulants use prior to COVID-19 diagnosis and associations with 30-day clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear if direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) use before hospitalization due to COVID-19 diagnosis would potentially impact the severity and clinical outcomes thereafter. We compared 30-day hospitalization/re-hospitalization and clinical outcomes between patients on chronic DOAC therapy and patients not on oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy at time of COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS: We used data from TriNetX, a global federated health research network. Patients aged ≥18 years who were treated with DOACs at time of COVID-19 diagnosis between 20 January 2020 and 28 February 2021 were included, and matched with patients not on OAC therapy from the same period. All patients were followed-up at 30-days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalization/re-hospitalization, venous thromboembolism (VTE) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). RESULTS: 738,423 patients were included. After propensity score matching (PSM), 26,006 patients remained in the study (13,003 on DOACs; 13,003 not on OAC). DOAC-treated patients (mean age 67.1 ± 15.4 years, 52.2% male) had higher relative risks (RRs) and lower 30-days event-free survival as compared to patients not on OAC for all-cause mortality (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12-1.44; Log-Rank test p = 0.010), hospitalization/re-hospitalization (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.64-1.82; Log-Rank test p < 0.001) and VTE (RR 4.51, 95% CI 3.91-5.82; Log-Rank test p < 0.001), but not for ICH (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.54-1.51; Log-Rank test p = 0.513). CONCLUSION: In COVID-19 patients, previous DOAC therapy at time of diagnosis was not associated with improved clinical outcomes or lower hospitalization/re-hospitalization rate compared to patients not taking OAC therapy.

COVID-19 vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia: A review of the potential mechanisms and proposed management.

With over 600 million coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine doses administered globally, adverse events are constantly monitored. Recently however, reports of thrombosis and thrombocytopenia following vaccination with the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine have emerged. This paper aims to review the available literature and guidelines pertaining to vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) and the proposed guidelines, while offering a potential approach that unifies the available evidence. While the risk of VITT remains extremely low and the benefits outweigh the risks, experimental studies are needed to clarify the pathophysiology behind VITT and possibly decrease the risk of thrombosis and other adverse events occurring. However, treatment should not be delayed in suspected cases, and IV immunoglobulin and non-heparin anticoagulation should be initiated.

Heparin dosage, level, and resistance in SARS-CoV2 infected patients in intensive care unit.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with COVID-19 frequently exhibit a hypercoagulable state with high thrombotic risk, particularly those admitted to intensive care units (ICU). Thromboprophylaxis is mandatory in these patients; nevertheless, thrombosis still occurs in many cases. Thus, the problem of assessing an adequate level of anticoagulation in ICU patients becomes evident during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the heparin resistance and the efficacy of heparin monitoring using an anti-Xa activity assay. METHODS: Thirty-seven heparin-treated patients admitted to ICU for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia were retrospectively studied for antifactor Xa activity (anti-Xa), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), Antithrombin, Fibrinogen, D-Dimer, Factor VIII, von Willebrand Factor, and the total daily amount of heparin administered. The correlation between APTT and anti-Xa was evaluated for unfractionated heparins (UFH). The correlations between the daily dose of UFH or the dosage expressed as IU/kg b.w. for low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and anti-Xa were also evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients received calcium heparin, 8 sodium heparin, and 8 LMWH. A moderate correlation was found between APTT and anti-Xa for UFH. APTT did not correlate with coagulation parameters. 62% of UFH and 75% of LMWH treated patients were under the therapeutic range. About 75% of patients could be considered resistant to heparin. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-COV2 pneumonia patients in ICU have frequently heparin resistance. Anti-Xa seems a more reliable method to monitor heparin treatment than APTT in acute patients, also because the assay is insensitive to the increased levels of fibrinogen, FVIII, and LAC that are common during the COVID-19 inflammatory state.