Randomized Trial of Anticoagulation Strategies for Noncritically Ill Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 have reported conflicting results. OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the safety and effectiveness of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation in noncritically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 not requiring intensive care unit treatment were randomized to prophylactic-dose enoxaparin, therapeutic-dose enoxaparin, or therapeutic-dose apixaban. The primary outcome was the 30-day composite of all-cause mortality, requirement for intensive care unit-level of care, systemic thromboembolism, or ischemic stroke assessed in the combined therapeutic-dose groups compared with the prophylactic-dose group. RESULTS: Between August 26, 2020, and September 19, 2022, 3,398 noncritically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized to prophylactic-dose enoxaparin (n = 1,141), therapeutic-dose enoxaparin (n = 1,136), or therapeutic-dose apixaban (n = 1,121) at 76 centers in 10 countries. The 30-day primary outcome occurred in 13.2% of patients in the prophylactic-dose group and 11.3% of patients in the combined therapeutic-dose groups (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.69-1.04; P = 0.11). All-cause mortality occurred in 7.0% of patients treated with prophylactic-dose enoxaparin and 4.9% of patients treated with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.52-0.93; P = 0.01), and intubation was required in 8.4% vs 6.4% of patients, respectively (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.58-0.98; P = 0.03). Results were similar in the 2 therapeutic-dose groups, and major bleeding in all 3 groups was infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19, the 30-day primary composite outcome was not significantly reduced with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation compared with prophylactic-dose anticoagulation. However, fewer patients who were treated with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation required intubation and fewer died (FREEDOM COVID [FREEDOM COVID Anticoagulation Strategy]; NCT04512079).

Does early detection of atrial fibrillation reduce the risk of thromboembolic events? Rationale and design of the Heartline study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of using direct-to-consumer wearable devices as a means to timely detect atrial fibrillation (AF) and to improve clinical outcomes is unknown. METHODS: Heartline is a pragmatic, randomized, and decentralized application-based trial of US participants aged ≥65 years. Two randomized cohorts include adults with possession of an iPhone and without a history of AF and those with a diagnosis of AF taking a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for ≥30 days. Participants within each cohort are randomized (3:1) to either a core digital engagement program (CDEP) via iPhone application (Heartline application) and an Apple Watch (Apple Watch Group) or CDEP alone (iPhone-only Group). The Apple Watch Group has the watch irregular rhythm notification (IRN) feature enabled and access to the ECG application on the Apple Watch. If an IRN notification is issued for suspected AF then the study application instructs participants in the Apple Watch Group to seek medical care. All participants were "watch-naïve" at time of enrollment and have an option to either buy or loan an Apple Watch as part of this study. The primary end point is time from randomization to clinical diagnosis of AF, with confirmation by health care claims. Key secondary endpoint are claims-based incidence of a 6-component composite cardiovascular/systemic embolism/mortality event, DOAC medication use and adherence, costs/health resource utilization, and frequency of hospitalizations for bleeding. All study assessments, including patient-reported outcomes, are conducted through the study application. The target study enrollment is approximately 28,000 participants in total; at time of manuscript submission, a total of 26,485 participants have been enrolled into the study. CONCLUSION: The Heartline Study will assess if an Apple Watch with the IRN and ECG application, along with application-facilitated digital health engagement modules, improves time to AF diagnosis and cardiovascular outcomes in a real-world environment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04276441.

Comparison of the prophylactic antithrombotic effect of indobufen and warfarin in patients with nephrotic syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The risk of thromboembolic events is elevated in patients with nephrotic syndrome, and warfarin use has been associated with an increased risk of bleeding. Indobufen, a selective cyclooxygenase-1 inhibitor, is currently being evaluated for the prevention of thromboembolic events in nephrotic syndrome. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of indobufen with that of warfarin in patients with nephrotic syndrome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, three-arm, open-label, parallel controlled trial involved a total of 180 adult patients with nephrotic syndrome from four centers in China. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg indobufen (bid), 200 mg indobufen (bid), and 3 mg warfarin (qd) daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoints included thromboembolic and bleeding events, while laboratory results and adverse events constituted secondary endpoints. RESULTS: No thromboembolic events occurred in the high-/low-dose indobufen and warfarin groups. Moreover, the use of a low dose of indobufen significantly reduced the risk of minor bleeding events compared with warfarin use (2% versus 18%, p < .05). Finally, adverse events were more frequent in warfarin-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that indobufen therapy provided equivalent effects in preventing thromboembolic events compared with warfarin therapy, while low dose of indobufen was associated with a reduced risk of bleeding events, thus it should be recommended for the prevention of thromboembolic events in clinical practice in patients with nephrotic syndrome. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-IPR-17013428.

The Efficacy and Safety of Prolonged Oral Anticoagulation for the Prevention of Thromboembolic Events in Patients Recovered From COVID-19 1 Year After Hospital Discharge: The SARCOV-19 Prospective Registry.

Our objective in this study is to know the predictors of thromboembolic events 1 year after hospitalization for severe COVID-19 and the benefit of preventive oral anticoagulation for 1 month to placebo after release. We conducted a prospective study to determine the benefit of preventive anticoagulation upon discharge from the hospital and to determine the predictive factors of thromboembolic events. We included 720 patients in the SARCOV-19 Registry, with a mean age of 62.07 (±18.11), and 61.1% male. After 1 year, 60 thromboembolic events were observed, 45 in patients on a placebo, and 15 in patients on a direct oral anticoagulant. The predictive factors determined for these events were the presence of cardiac disease, elevation of D-dimer during hospitalization, myocardial damage defined by elevation of troponins more than 6 times normal, and the use of mechanical ventilation. However, the use of preventive anticoagulation protects against thrombotic events and reduces the risk of a thromboembolic event at 1 year with a relative risk of 0.49 compared to a placebo. The prolongation of the preventive anticoagulation at the exit will protect with a decrease of almost 50% of the risk against thrombotic events and this without increasing the risk of bleeding.

Safety and efficacy of prophylactic anticoagulation versus therapeutic anticoagulation in hospital-admitted COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 disease-related coagulopathy and thromboembolic complication, an important aspect of the disease pathophysiology, are frequent and associated with poor outcomes, particularly significant in hospitalized patients. Undoubtedly, anticoagulation forms a cornerstone for the management of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, but the appropriate dosing has been inconclusive and a subject of research. We aim to review existing literature and compare safety and efficacy outcomes of prophylactic and therapeutic dose anticoagulation in such patients. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of prophylactic dose anticoagulation when compared with therapeutic dosing in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases from 2019 to 2021, without any restriction by language. We screened records, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the studies. RCTs that directly compare therapeutic and prophylactic anticoagulants dosing and are not placebo-controlled trials were included. Analyses of data were conducted using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird analysis). The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021265948). RESULTS: We included three studies in the final quantitative analysis. The incidence of thromboembolic events in therapeutic anticoagulation was lower in comparison with prophylactic anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and reached statistical significance [RR 1·45, 95% CI (1.07, 1.97) I2 -0%], whereas major bleeding as an adverse event was found lower in prophylactic anticoagulation in comparison with therapeutic anticoagulation that was statistically significant [RR 0·42, 95% CI(0.19, 0.93) I2 -0%]. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that therapeutic dose anticoagulation is more effective in preventing thromboembolic events than prophylactic dose but significantly increases the risk of major bleeding as an adverse event. So, the risk-benefit ratio must be considered while using either of them.

The Impact of Prior Antithrombotic use on Thromboembolic Events in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease and Severe COVID-19 Infection.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective in this study was to determine the predictive factors of thromboembolic complications in patients with previous heart disease and severe covid-19 infection and the impact of previous use of antithrombotics on protection against these complications. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study of 158 patients with heart disease admitted to an intensive care unit for severe SARS-COV-2 infection. In order to determine the predictive factors, we used logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Out of 158 patients, 22 were complicated by a thrombo-embolic event (13.9%), mean age of our population 64.03 (SD = 15.27), with a male predominance of 98 (62%). For the predictive factors of thromboembolic complications, and after multivariate analysis, we find the short duration of hospitalization (OR = 0.92; 95%CI (0.863-0.983), P = .014, previous use of antithrombotic drugs ((OR = 0.288, 95%CI (0.091-0.911), P = .034 for antiplatelet agents) and (OR = 0.322, 95% CI (0, 131-0.851), P = .021) for anticoagulants) as protective factors, and admission thrombocytosis as a risk factor (OR = 4.58, 95%CI (1.2-10.627), P = .021). D-dimer was not detected as a risk factor, and this can be explained by the characteristics of our population. Although prior use of antithrombotic drugs protects against thromboembolic complications during severe infection, there was no benefit in mortality. CONCLUSION: Prior use of antithrombotic drugs is a protective factor against thromboembolic complications in patients with a history of heart disease but without effect on mortality.

Anticoagulation in COVID-19 patients - An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic events are common complications of COVID-19. Clinical study results on safety and efficacy of anticoagulation in COVID-19 are controversial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This report updates our systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing standard prophylactic anticoagulation and intermediate or therapeutic anticoagulation in COVID-19 patients. We searched eligible studies for the update up to 4 February 2022 by weekly monitoring of RCTs in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). RESULTS: For this update we included five new trials; a total of 13 RCTs with 7364 patients. Certainty of evidence was very low to low. We are uncertain whether low-dose prophylactic anticoagulation is favoured over placebo or no anticoagulation in the outpatient- or post-discharge-setting. In hospitalized patients with moderate and severe COVID-19, intermediate-dose anticoagulation may have little or no effect on thrombotic events or death (RR 1.03, 95 % CI 0.86-1.24), but may increase severe bleeding non-significantly (RR 1.48, 95 % CI 0.53-4.15). Therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may decrease thrombotic events or deaths in hospitalized patients with moderate COVID-19 (RR 0.64, 95 % CI 0.38-1.07; fixed-effect model RR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.57-0.91), but may have little or no effect in patients with severe disease (RR 0.98, 95 % CI 0.86-1.12). With therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, the risk of major bleeding may increase regardless of COVID-19 severity (RR 1.78, 95 % CI 1.15-2.74). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized, moderately ill COVID-19 patients may benefit from therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, while critically ill patients may not. Risk of major bleeding must be considered.

Role of anticoagulation in lowering the mortality in hospitalized covid-19 patients: Meta-analysis of available literature.

OBJECTIVES: To reducing the risk of venous thromboembolic (VTE) events and subsequent mortality in covid-19 patients is still a matter of research. This systematic review and meta-analysis serve the purpose of comparing the mortality associated with the intensity of anticoagulation in patients admitted with covid-19. METHODS: A total of 7120 patients were recruited in 11 studies comparing using prophylactic anticoagulants against therapeutic anticoagulants. RESULTS: Our study showed that using prophylactic anticoagulants was associated with a 42% reduction in mortality compared to therapeutic anticoagulants (OR 0.58 (95% CI:0.676-0.499), p=0.000). Also, we assessed mortality in patients using no anticoagulants against using prophylactic anticoagulants. A total of 6069 patients were recruited in 4 studies in which 2 studies significantly favored prophylactic anticoagulants in terms of reducing mortality. Cumulatively, the meta-analysis showed that using prophylactic anticoagulants was associated with a 5% reduction in mortality but without any statistical significance: (OR 1.049 [95% CI 1.237 - 0.865]) (p=0.626). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis favors using prophylactic anticoagulation in covid-19 patients reduces all-cause mortality in comparison to therapeutic anticoagulation however the impact on mortality when compared with no anticoagulation was not significant.PROSPERO Number: CRD42021257320.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Anticoagulation in Patients With COVID-19: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

Clinical, laboratory, and autopsy findings support an association between coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and thromboembolic disease. Acute COVID-19 infection is characterized by mononuclear cell reactivity and pan-endothelialitis, contributing to a high incidence of thrombosis in large and small blood vessels, both arterial and venous. Observational studies and randomized trials have investigated whether full-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes compared with prophylactic dose heparin. Although no benefit for therapeutic heparin has been found in patients who are critically ill hospitalized with COVID-19, some studies support a possible role for therapeutic anticoagulation in patients not yet requiring intensive care unit support. We summarize the pathology, rationale, and current evidence for use of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 and describe the main design elements of the ongoing FREEDOM COVID-19 Anticoagulation trial, in which 3,600 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 not requiring intensive care unit level of care are being randomized to prophylactic-dose enoxaparin vs therapeutic-dose enoxaparin vs therapeutic-dose apixaban. (FREEDOM COVID-19 Anticoagulation Strategy [FREEDOM COVID]; NCT04512079).

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.

Medically Ill hospitalized Patients for COVID-19 THrombosis Extended ProphyLaxis with rivaroxaban ThErapy: Rationale and Design of the MICHELLE Trial.

BACKGROUND: The devastating Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is associated with a high prothrombotic state. It is unclear if the coagulation abnormalities occur because of the direct effect of SARS-CoV-2 or indirectly by the cytokine storm and endothelial damage or by a combination of mechanisms. There is a clear indication of in-hospital pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for every patient with COVID-19 after bleed risk assessment. However, there is much debate regarding the best dosage regimen, and there is no consensus on the role of extended thromboprophylaxis. DESIGN: This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 35 ± 4 days versus no intervention after hospital discharge in COVID-19 patients who were at increased risk for VTE and have received standard parenteral VTE prophylaxis during hospitalization. The composite efficacy endpoint is a combination of symptomatic VTE, VTE-related death, VTE detected by bilateral lower limbs venous duplex scan and computed tomography pulmonary angiogram on day 35 ± 4 posthospital discharge and symptomatic arterial thromboembolism (myocardial infarction, nonhemorrhagic stroke, major adverse limb events, and cardiovascular death) up to day 35 ± 4 posthospital discharge. The key safety outcome is the incidence of major bleeding according to ISTH criteria. SUMMARY: The MICHELLE trial is expected to provide high-quality evidence around the role of extended thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 and will help guide medical decisions in clinical practice.1.

[Title: Covid-19-associated coagulopathy]. / COVID-19-assoziierte Koagulopathie.

COVID-19, primarily a respiratory disease, is considered a multi-systemic disease as symptom severity increases. Blood coagulation abnormalities are key features of patients with severe symptoms and indicative of the high risk of both venous and arterial thromboembolism in COVID-19. This prothrombotic condition caused by an interplay of the infectious agent, inflammation, and the blood coagulation system is referred to as COVID-19-associated coagulopathy and characterized by greatly increased D-dimer, high fibrinogen, an extended prothrombin time, and a reduced number of platelets. Due to this high thrombotic potential, prophylactic anticoagulation is recommended in all hospitalized patients. However, the optimal dosage of anticoagulation is still debated. In this article, we provide an overview of the current state of knowledge about COVID-19-associated coagulopathy and discuss clinical therapeutic consequences.

COVID-19: Thrombosis, thromboinflammation, and anticoagulation considerations.

Vascular endothelial injury is a hallmark of acute infection at both the microvascular and macrovascular levels. The hallmark of SARS-CoV-2 infection is the current COVID-19 clinical sequelae of the pathophysiologic responses of hypercoagulability and thromboinflammation associated with acute infection. The acute lung injury that initially occurs in COVID-19 results from vascular and endothelial damage from viral injury and pathophysiologic responses that produce the COVID-19-associated coagulopathy. Clinicians should continue to focus on the vascular endothelial injury that occurs and evaluate potential therapeutic interventions that may benefit those with new infections during the current pandemic as they may also be of benefit for future pathogens that generate similar thromboinflammatory responses. The current Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) studies are important projects that will further define our management strategies. At the time of writing this report, two mRNA vaccines are now being distributed and will hopefully have a major impact on slowing the global spread and subsequent thromboinflammatory injury we see clinically in critically ill patients.

Heparin beyond anti-coagulation.

Heparin has served as a mainstream anticoagulant for over eight decades. Clinically heparin-derived compounds significantly contribute to prevention and treatment of thrombotic events complicated in numerous medical conditions such as venous thromboembolism, coronary artery disease and extracorporeal circulation processes. Moreover in recent years, various off-labeled efficacious potentials of heparin beyond anti-coagulation are dramatically emerging, and increasingly investigated in clinical studies. Herein this article presents a comprehensive update on the expanded applications of heparin agents, covering the pregnant clinic, respiratory inflammation, renal disease, sepsis, pancreatitis, among others. It aims to maximize the beneficial profile of a pharmaceutical product through medical re-purposing development, exemplified by heparin, to address the unmet clinical needs of severe illness including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Vitamin K metabolism as the potential missing link between lung damage and thromboembolism in Coronavirus disease 2019.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2, exerts far-reaching effects on public health and socio-economic welfare. The majority of infected individuals have mild to moderate symptoms, but a significant proportion develops respiratory failure due to pneumonia. Thrombosis is another frequent manifestation of Covid-19 that contributes to poor outcomes. Vitamin K plays a crucial role in the activation of both pro- and anticlotting factors in the liver and the activation of extrahepatically synthesised protein S which seems to be important in local thrombosis prevention. However, the role of vitamin K extends beyond coagulation. Matrix Gla protein (MGP) is a vitamin K-dependent inhibitor of soft tissue calcification and elastic fibre degradation. Severe extrahepatic vitamin K insufficiency was recently demonstrated in Covid-19 patients, with high inactive MGP levels correlating with elastic fibre degradation rates. This suggests that insufficient vitamin K-dependent MGP activation leaves elastic fibres unprotected against SARS-CoV-2-induced proteolysis. In contrast to MGP, Covid-19 patients have normal levels of activated factor II, in line with previous observations that vitamin K is preferentially transported to the liver for activation of procoagulant factors. We therefore expect that vitamin K-dependent endothelial protein S activation is also compromised, which would be compatible with enhanced thrombogenicity. Taking these data together, we propose a mechanism of pneumonia-induced vitamin K depletion, leading to a decrease in activated MGP and protein S, aggravating pulmonary damage and coagulopathy, respectively. Intervention trials should be conducted to assess whether vitamin K administration plays a role in the prevention and treatment of severe Covid-19.

Role of combining anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents in COVID-19 treatment: a rapid review.

Although primarily affecting the respiratory system, COVID-19 causes multiple organ damage. One of its grave consequences is a prothrombotic state that manifests as thrombotic, microthrombotic and thromboembolic events. Therefore, understanding the effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy in the context of COVID-19 treatment is important. The aim of this rapid review was to highlight the role of thrombosis in COVID-19 and to provide new insights on the use of antithrombotic therapy in its management. A rapid systematic review was performed using preferred reporting items for systematic reviews. Papers published in English on antithrombotic agent use and COVID-19 complications were eligible. Results showed that the use of anticoagulants increased survival and reduced thromboembolic events in patients. However, despite the use of anticoagulants, patients still suffered thrombotic events likely due to heparin resistance. Data on antiplatelet use in combination with anticoagulants in the setting of COVID-19 are quite scarce. Current side effects of anticoagulation therapy emphasise the need to update treatment guidelines. In this rapid review, we address a possible modulatory role of antiplatelet and anticoagulant combination against COVID-19 pathogenesis. This combination may be an effective form of adjuvant therapy against COVID-19 infection. However, further studies are needed to elucidate potential risks and benefits associated with this combination.