Clinically stable covid-19 patients presenting to acute unscheduled episodic care venues have increased risk of hospitalization: secondary analysis of a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Assessment for risks associated with acute stable COVID-19 is important to optimize clinical trial enrollment and target patients for scarce therapeutics. To assess whether healthcare system engagement location is an independent predictor of outcomes we performed a secondary analysis of the ACTIV-4B Outpatient Thrombosis Prevention trial. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the ACTIV-4B trial that was conducted at 52 US sites between September 2020 and August 2021. Participants were enrolled through acute unscheduled episodic care (AUEC) enrollment location (emergency department, or urgent care clinic visit) compared to minimal contact (MC) enrollment (electronic contact from test center lists of positive patients).We report the primary composite outcome of cardiopulmonary hospitalizations, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic arterial thromboembolism, or death among stable outpatients stratified by enrollment setting, AUEC versus MC. A propensity score for AUEC enrollment was created, and Cox proportional hazards regression with inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to compare the primary outcome by enrollment location. RESULTS: Among the 657 ACTIV-4B patients randomized, 533 (81.1%) with known enrollment setting data were included in this analysis, 227 from AUEC settings and 306 from MC settings. In a multivariate logistic regression model, time from COVID test, age, Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, and body mass index were associated with AUEC enrollment. Irrespective of trial treatment allocation, patients enrolled at an AUEC setting were 10-times more likely to suffer from the adjudicated primary outcome, 7.9% vs. 0.7%; p < 0.001, compared with patients enrolled at a MC setting. Upon Cox regression analysis adjustment patients enrolled at an AUEC setting remained at significant risk of the primary composite outcome, HR 3.40 (95% CI 1.46, 7.94). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with clinically stable COVID-19 presenting to an AUEC enrollment setting represent a population at increased risk of arterial and venous thrombosis complications, hospitalization for cardiopulmonary events, or death, when adjusted for other risk factors, compared with patients enrolled at a MC setting. Future outpatient therapeutic trials and clinical therapeutic delivery programs of clinically stable COVID-19 patients may focus on inclusion of higher-risk patient populations from AUEC engagement locations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04498273.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT), thrombosis of the dural sinus, cerebral veins, or both, is a rare cerebrovascular disease. Although mortality rates after CVT have declined over time, this condition can result in devastating neurologic outcomes. This article reviews the latest literature regarding CVT epidemiology, details new factors associated with the development of CVT, and describes advances in CVT treatment. It also contains a discussion of future directions in the field, including novel diagnostic imaging modalities, and potential strategies to reduce the risks associated with CVT. LATEST DEVELOPMENTS: The incidence of CVT may be as high as 2 per 100,000 adults per year. It remains a difficult condition to diagnose given its variable clinical manifestations and the necessity of neuroimaging for confirmation. The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed a novel CVT trigger, vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), as well as an association between COVID-19 infection and CVT. Although VITT is a very rare event, timely diagnosis and treatment of CVT due to VITT likely improves patient outcomes. Direct oral anticoagulants are currently being used to treat CVT and emerging data suggest that these agents are as safe and effective as vitamin K antagonists. The role of endovascular therapy to treat CVT, despite a recent clinical trial, remains unproven. ESSENTIAL POINTS: The incidence of CVT has increased, outcomes have improved, and the use of direct oral anticoagulants to treat CVT represents an important advance in the clinical care of these patients. Rates of CVT as a complication of COVID-19 vaccines using adenoviral vectors are very low (<5 per million vaccine doses administered), with the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination far outweighing the risks.

Acute Myocardial Infarction, Subclavian Vein Thrombosis, and Pulmonary Embolism Secondary to COVID-19-A Case Report.

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The majority of infected patients develop the clinical picture of a respiratory disease, although some may develop various complications, such as arterial or venous thrombosis. The clinical case presented herein is a rare example of sequential development and combination of acute myocardial infarction, subclavian vein thrombosis (Paget Schroetter syndrome), and pulmonary embolism in the same patient after COVID-19. Case presentation: A 57-year-old man with a 10-day history of a SARS-CoV-2 infection was hospitalized with a clinical, electrocardiographic, and laboratory constellation of an acute inferior-lateral myocardial infarction. He was treated invasively and had one stent implanted. Three days after implantation, the patient developed shortness of breath and palpitation on the background of a swollen and painful right hand. The signs of acute right-sided heart strain observed on the electrocardiogram and the elevated D-dimer levels strongly suggested pulmonary embolism. A Doppler ultrasound and invasive evaluation demonstrated thrombosis of the right subclavian vein. The patient was administered pharmacomechanical and systemic thrombolysis and heparin infusion. Revascularization was achieved 24 h later via successful balloon dilatation of the occluded vessel. Conclusion: Thrombotic complications of COVID-19 can develop in a significant proportion of patients. Concomitant manifestation of these complications in the same patient is extremely rare, presenting at the same time, quite a therapeutic challenge to clinicians due to the need for invasive techniques and simultaneous administration of dual antiaggregant therapy combined with an anticoagulant treatment. Such a combined treatment increases the hemorrhagic risk and requires a serious accumulation of data for the purpose of a long-term antithrombotic prophylaxis in patients with such pathology.

Prenatal and Neonatal Pulmonary Thrombosis as a Potential Complication of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Late Pregnancy.

Neonatal venous thrombosis is a rare condition that can be iatrogenic or occur due to viral infections or genetic mutations. Thromboembolic complications are also commonly observed as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infections. They can affect pediatric patients, especially the ones suffering from multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) or multisystem inflammatory syndrome in neonates (MIS-N). The question remains whether the maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy can lead to thromboembolic complications in fetuses and neonates. We report on a patient born with an embolism in the arterial duct, left pulmonary artery, and pulmonary trunk, who presented several characteristic features of MIS-N, suspecting that the cause might have been the maternal SARS-CoV2 infection in late pregnancy. Multiple genetic and laboratory tests were performed. The neonate presented only with a positive result of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. He was treated with low molecular weight heparin. Subsequent echocardiographic tests showed that the embolism dissolved. More research is necessary to evaluate the possible neonatal complications of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Efficacy and safety of two heparin regimens for prevention of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). The optimal heparin regimen remains unknown and should balance thromboembolic and bleeding risks. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of standard or higher heparin regimens for the prevention of VTE in patients hospitalized due to COVID-19. We performed a systematic literature search; studies reporting on hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received standard heparin prophylaxis vs. high (intermediate or therapeutic) heparin regimens were included if outcome events were reported by treatment group and more than 10 patients were included. Primary study outcome was in-hospital VTE. Secondary study outcomes were major bleeding (MB), all-cause death, fatal bleeding and fatal pulmonary embolism. Overall, 33 studies (11,387 patients) were included. Venous thromboembolic events occurred in 5.2% and in 8.2% of patients who received heparin prophylaxis with at high-dose or standard-dose, respectively (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55-0.90, I2 48.8%). MB was significantly higher in patients who received high- compared to the standard-dose (4.2% vs 2.2%, RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.47-2.56, I2 18.1%). Sub-analyses showed a slight benefit associated with high-dose heparin in patients admitted to non-intensive care unit (ICU) but not in those to ICU. No significant differences were observed for mortality outcomes. Heparin prophylaxis at high-dose reduces the risk of VTE, but increased the risk of MB compared to the standard-dose. No clinical benefit for heparin high-dose was observed for ICU setting, but its role in the non-ICU deserves further evaluation. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021252550.

Isolated pulmonary embolism - a specific clinical entity?

Pulmonary embolism in classical meaning is a complication of deep vein thrombosis (usually in the leg veins), developing after a part of the thrombus dislodged and got wedged in pulmonary arteries. However, in half of the patients with pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis is not found. One potential explanation is a different, less common location of the thrombus or previous complete embolization of the whole thrombotic mass. Another possibility is pulmonary artery thrombosis in situ, which is a specific clinical entity associated with some typical risk factors. It develops in the place of vascular injury, as a consequence of hypoxia, inflammatory changes, endothelial dysfunction and injury. Pulmonary artery thrombosis in situ can be a complication after lung resection, radiation therapy, chest trauma, in the patients with Behçet´s disease, sickle cell anemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, tuberculosis or covid pneumonia. Pulmonary artery thrombosis in situ may differ from classical pulmonary embolism in prognosis as well as in therapeutic approach.

High incidence of common femoral Deep Vein Thrombosis in critically ill Covid19 patients.

Objective: To estimate the incidence and prevalence of deep venous thrombosis, and to evaluate the discriminative capacity of D-dimer in its diagnosis. METHODS: The prospective, observational study was conducted at the critical care unit of a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan from February to September 2021 and comprised consecutively admitted adult critically ill patients who were receiving therapeutic-dose anticoagulation therapy. All patients were screened on day one for deep venous thrombosis by colour doppler and compression ultrasonography. Patients who did not have deep venous thrombosis on the first scan were followed every 72 hours. Data was analysed using SPSS 26. RESULTS: Of the 142 patients, 99(69.7%) were male and 43(30.3%) were female. The overall mean age was 53.20+/-13.3 years. On the first scan, 25(17.6%) patients had deep venous thrombosis. Of the remaining 117 patients, 78(68.4%) were followed every 72 hours, and 23(29.48%) of them developed deep venous thrombosis. The most common site for DVT was the common femoral vein 46(95.8%) and most deep venous thrombosis cases were unilateral 28(58.33%). D-dimer levels showed no discriminative capacity for diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis (p=0.79). There were no significant risk factors for the development of deep venous thrombosis. Conclusion: There was a high incidence and prevalence of deep venous thrombosis despite therapeutic-dose anticoagulation therapy. The most common affected site was the common femoral vein and most deep venous thrombosis were unilateral. D-dimer levels had no discriminative capacity for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis DVT.

Management, control, and decision making in unexpected recurrent venous thromboembolism in COVID-19: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 was spread worldwide, as a pandemic, from December 2019. Venous thromboembolism events can inflict patients with coronavirus disease 2019 during the hospitalization or convalescent period. Therefore, monitoring of these patients, in terms of venous thromboembolism events signs and symptoms, and timely management of antithrombotic agents are of great importance. CASE REPORT: A 45-year-old Iranian man, who is the first author of this case report, was infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and displayed the typical signs and symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019. Although reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for coronavirus disease 2019, and specific immunoglobulin M and immunoglobulin G against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, were negative at first, chest computed tomography scan showed the characteristic pattern of lung involvement of a coronavirus disease 2019 infection including bilateral and multilobar ground-glass opacities. At that time, there were no signs or symptoms of deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary thromboembolism, so these were not investigated. About 30 hours after hospital discharge, the patient presented back to the hospital with acute-onset chest pain. We instantly tested his blood for D-dimer, and sent him to take a Doppler sonography of his lower legs and a chest computed tomography angiography in search of pulmonary thromboembolism and deep-vein thrombosis. Although we could confirm pulmonary thromboembolism with computed tomography angiography in our patient, there were no signs or symptoms of venous thromboembolism in his lower legs, and color Doppler sonography of lower limbs was normal. So, the patient was treated with rivaroxaban as an antithrombotic agent. After some days, he was discharged in good condition. About 1 month later, he was referred to our hospital because of left lower limb edema. Although he was under antithrombotic therapy, color Doppler sonography of lower limbs revealed acute deep-vein thrombosis of the left leg. Hence, we decided to shift antithrombotic therapy from rivaroxaban to warfarin, as it is more potent than rivaroxaban in recurrent venous thromboembolism and when taking new oral anticoagulants. Unlike rivaroxaban, which needs no blood test to monitor its efficacy but has a warning for signs and symptoms of bleeding, warfarin therapy must be monitored carefully by regular blood tests for prothrombin time and international normalized ratio to maintain them in the therapeutic range. The patient was informed about the bleeding cautions, and required regular check of prothrombin time and international normalized ratio to maintain them in the proper and advised range of treatment (international normalized ratio therapeutic range 2-3). CONCLUSION: In the case of unexpected recurrent venous thromboembolism in coronavirus disease 2019, especially when patients are taking rivaroxaban or other new oral anticoagulants, such drugs should be substituted by warfarin, with routine follow-up, to maintain the value of prothrombin time and international normalized ratio within the therapeutic range.

External validation of the ADA score for predicting thrombosis among acutely ill hospitalized medical patients from the APEX Trial.

The ADA (Age-D-dimer-Albumin) score was developed to identify hospitalized patients at an increased risk for thrombosis in the coronavirus infectious disease-19 (COVID-19) setting. The study aimed to validate the ADA score for predicting thrombosis in a non-COVID-19 medically ill population from the APEX trial. The APEX trial was a multinational, randomized trial that evaluated the efficacy and safety of betrixaban vs. enoxaparin among acutely ill hospitalized patients at risk for venous thromboembolism. The study endpoints included the composite of arterial or venous thrombosis and its components. Metrics of model calibration and discrimination were computed for assessing the performance of the ADA score as compared to the IMPROVE score, a well-validated VTE risk assessment model. Among 7,119 medical inpatients, 209 (2.9%) had a thrombosis event up to 77 days of follow-up. The ADA score demonstrated good calibration for both arterial and venous thrombosis, whereas the IMPROVE score had adequate calibration for venous thrombosis (p > 0.05 from the Hosmer-Lemeshow test). For discriminating arterial and venous thrombosis, there was no significant difference between the ADA vs. IMPROVE score (c statistic = 0.620 [95% CI: 0.582 to 0.657] vs. 0.590 [95% CI: 0.556 to 0.624]; ∆ c statistic = 0.030 [95% CI: -0.022 to 0.081]; p = 0.255). Similarly, for discriminating arterial thrombosis, there was no significant difference between the ADA vs. IMPROVE score (c statistic = 0.582 [95% CI: 0.534 to 0.629] vs. 0.609 [95% CI: 0.564 to 0.653]; ∆ c statistic = -0.027 [95% CI: -0.091 to 0.036]; p = 0.397). For discriminating venous thrombosis, the ADA score was modestly superior to the IMPROVE score (c statistic = 0.664 [95% CI: 0.607 to 0.722] vs. 0.573 [95% CI: 0.521 to 0.624]; ∆ c statistic = 0.091 [95% CI: 0.011 to 0.172]; p = 0.026). The ADA score had a higher sensitivity (0.579 [95% CI: 0.512 to 0.646]; vs. 0.440 [95% CI: 0.373 to 0.507]) but lower specificity (0.625 [95% CI: 0.614 to 0.637] vs. 0.747 [95% CI: 0.737 to 0.758]) than the IMPROVE score for predicting thrombosis. Among acutely ill hospitalized medical patients enrolled in the APEX trial, the ADA score demonstrated good calibration but suboptimal discrimination for predicting thrombosis. The findings support the use of either the ADA or IMPROVE score for thrombosis risk assessment. The applicability of the ADA score to non-COVID-19 populations warrants further research.Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01583218.

Fondaparinux Sodium: Recent Advances in the Management of Thrombosis.

Fondaparinux sodium is a chemically synthesized selective factor Xa inhibitor approved for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolic events, that is, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and superficial vein thrombosis, in acutely ill (including those affected by COVID-19 or cancer patients) and those undergoing surgeries. Since its approval in 2002, the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux is well demonstrated by many clinical studies, establishing the value of fondaparinux in clinical practice. Some of the advantages with fondaparinux are its chemical nature of synthesis, minimal risk of contamination, 100% absolute bioavailability subcutaneously, instant onset of action, a long half-life, direct renal excretion, fewer adverse reactions when compared with direct oral anticoagulants, and being an ideal alternative in conditions where oral anticoagulants are not approved for use or in patients intolerant to low molecular weight heparins (LMWH). In the last decade, the real-world use of fondaparinux has been explored in other conditions such as acute coronary syndromes, bariatric surgery, in patients developing vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) and in pregnant women with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), or those intolerant to LMWH. The emerging data from these studies have culminated in recent updates in the guidelines that recommend the use of fondaparinux under various conditions. This paper aims to review the recent data and the subsequent updates in the recommendations of various guidelines on the use of fondaparinux sodium.

Encephalopathy as the Only Manifestation in Simultaneous Arterial Infarct and Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis in Recent COVID-19 Infection.

BACKGROUND Emerging cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection associated with cerebral thromboembolism episodes manifesting as arterial strokes or cerebral venous thrombosis have been reported. However, the co-occurrence of arterial strokes and cerebral venous thrombosis is rare. CASE REPORT We report the case of a previously healthy young patient with recent SARS-CoV-2 infection, who presented with encephalopathy. His computed tomography venography and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain showed thrombosis of the vein of Galen and straight sinus, and arterial infarcts in both hemispheres. His inflammatory markers, D-dimer levels, and coagulation profile were normal. He was started on anticoagulation and recovered well. CONCLUSIONS Concurrent arterial and venous thrombosis can happen rarely in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, including patients who have recently recovered from COVID-19. Cerebral thromboembolism associated with SARS-CoV-2 can present with a variety of subtle clinical manifestations, including encephalopathy without focal neurological deficits. Inflammatory markers, D-dimer levels, and coagulation profiles can be normal, especially in patients with mild infection or who have recovered from the infection. Therefore, it is important to be vigilant and recognize this clinical entity so that the diagnosis can be made and treatment can be started promptly. However, larger and prospective studies are needed to determine the clinical outcomes, therapeutic benefits, and complications of concurrent arterial stroke and cerebral venous thrombosis associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Deep Venous Thrombosis after Conservative Treatment of Clavicular Fracture in COVID-19 Negative Children: Two Case Reports.

A 13-year-old girl suffered fracture of her left clavicle. A figure-of-8 bandage was placed during initial treatment. Six days after trauma her distal arm, elbow and proximal forearm were swollen, pain and tenderness of distal part of brachial vein was recognized during clinical examination. Duplex ultrasonography revealed partial thrombosis of the brachial vein. Bandage was immediately removed and administration of LMWH (enoxaparin) was started. Complete recanalization was achieved after a few days. The fracture was healed without further complication, patient was without sonographic and clinical signs of post-thrombotic syndrome. The second case report describes a 14-year-old boy. Initially, the fixation was a figure-of-8 bandage. 5 days after the injury he had swollen arm and elbow on the injured side, according to duplex ultrasonography deep venous thrombosis of the axillary and the brachial vein was recognized. There was only partial recanalization at the first sonographic follow up, the patient was converted to Warfarin for 3 months after injury after initial LMWH therapy. At the last follow-up, fracture of the left clavicle was healed and there were no DUSG or clinical signs of post-thrombotic syndrome. Key words: clavicle, deep venous thrombosis of the upper extremity, anticoagulant therapy.

MRI-negative myelitis associated with cerebral venous thrombosis after COVID-19 infection.

Transverse myelitis and cerebral venous thrombosis represent some of the described neurological complications of coronavirus disease. A woman in her early 30s presented with headache, left-sided sensory symptoms and voiding difficulty. The patient also reported dry cough, fever, nasal congestion, anosmia and ageusia 2 weeks before presentation. The clinical examination showed sensory disturbances on the left side of the body, starting from the lower abdomen and extending to the left leg, which was consistent with transverse myelitis. The laboratory assessment confirmed a previous infection with coronavirus disease and excluded autoimmune entities. Radiological investigations revealed left transverse sinus thrombosis with no spinal cord abnormalities. The treatment was started with therapeutic anticoagulation and intravenous high-dose steroids. The patient showed significant improvement, and the neurological deficits resolved after 3 months. This is the first documented case of imaging-negative myelitis associated with cerebral venous thrombosis after coronavirus disease.

[Cerebral venous thrombosis associated with COVID-19]. / Tserebral'nye venoznye trombozy, assotsiirovannye s COVID-19.

The literature reports that cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) develops in 1-1.5% of patients with COVID-19. Recently, a new syndrome named vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) has been described. VITT is a rare side-effect of COVID-19 vaccination that also causes CVT. The article presents an overview of the above problem and a clinical case of a patient with CVT that developed within a month after the first component of the Sputnik V vaccination and COVID-19.

Anticoagulation and Antiplatelet Therapy for Prevention of Venous and Arterial Thrombotic Events in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: COVID-PACT.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of prophylactic full-dose anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy in critically ill COVID-19 patients remain uncertain. METHODS: COVID-PACT (Prevention of Arteriovenous Thrombotic Events in Critically-ill COVID-19 Patients Trial) was a multicenter, 2×2 factorial, open-label, randomized-controlled trial with blinded end point adjudication in intensive care unit-level patients with COVID-19. Patients were randomly assigned to a strategy of full-dose anticoagulation or standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation. Absent an indication for antiplatelet therapy, patients were additionally randomly assigned to either clopidogrel or no antiplatelet therapy. The primary efficacy outcome was the hierarchical composite of death attributable to venous or arterial thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, clinically evident deep venous thrombosis, type 1 myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, systemic embolic event or acute limb ischemia, or clinically silent deep venous thrombosis, through hospital discharge or 28 days. The primary efficacy analyses included an unmatched win ratio and time-to-first event analysis while patients were on treatment. The primary safety outcome was fatal or life-threatening bleeding. The secondary safety outcome was moderate to severe bleeding. Recruitment was stopped early in March 2022 (≈50% planned recruitment) because of waning intensive care unit-level COVID-19 rates. RESULTS: At 34 centers in the United States, 390 patients were randomly assigned between anticoagulation strategies and 292 between antiplatelet strategies (382 and 290 in the on-treatment analyses). At randomization, 99% of patients required advanced respiratory therapy, including 15% requiring invasive mechanical ventilation; 40% required invasive ventilation during hospitalization. Comparing anticoagulation strategies, a greater proportion of wins occurred with full-dose anticoagulation (12.3%) versus standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (6.4%; win ratio, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.08-3.55]; P=0.028). Results were consistent in time-to-event analysis for the primary efficacy end point (full-dose versus standard-dose incidence 19/191 [9.9%] versus 29/191 [15.2%]; hazard ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.32-0.99]; P=0.046). The primary safety end point occurred in 4 (2.1%) on full dose and in 1 (0.5%) on standard dose (P=0.19); the secondary safety end point occurred in 15 (7.9%) versus 1 (0.5%; P=0.002). There was no difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.56-1.48]; P=0.70). There were no differences in the primary efficacy or safety end points with clopidogrel versus no antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with COVID-19, full-dose anticoagulation, but not clopidogrel, reduced thrombotic complications with an increase in bleeding, driven primarily by transfusions in hemodynamically stable patients, and no apparent excess in mortality. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04409834.

Venous Thromboembolic Disease in COVID-19, Pathophysiology, Therapy and Prophylaxis.

For over two years, the world has been facing the epidemiological and health challenge of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Growing problems are also complications after the development of COVID-19 in the form of post and long- COVID syndromes, posing a challenge for the medical community, both for clinicians and the scientific world. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular complications, especially thromboembolic complications, which are associated with both thrombosis of small and very small vessels due to immunothrombosis, and the development of venous thromboembolism. Low molecular wight heparin (LMHW) are the basic agents used in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic complications in COVID-19. There is still a great deal of controversy regarding both the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic complications, including the prophylaxis dose or the optimal duration of anticoagulant treatment in patients with an episode of venous thromboembolism.

Unusual arm vein thrombosis after the Moderna (mRNA-1273) COVID-19 vaccination-a case report.

BACKGROUND: Since 2019, all over the world is still suffering from managing never-experienced pandemic era of coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19). Prompt development and administration of vaccines contributed lowering severity of the disease, but adverse events related to vaccination were also reported. Exact association between each adverse conditions and vaccination or COVID-19 infection are being investigated. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 44-year-old Asian male developed right upper arm diffuse swelling 4 days after receiving the third dose of messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA)-1273 COVID-19 vaccine in his left deltoid muscle. He was previously healthy, but has history of COVID-19 infection 4 months before the third dose vaccination. Venous duplex ultrasound revealed acute thrombosis in the right cephalic arch, axillary vein, and subclavian vein. There were no abnormal laboratory test results. After 3 months of anticoagulation therapy, arm vein thrombosis was completely resolved upon follow-up duplex ultrasonography. CONCLUSIONS: Although, positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) history might be associated with potential cause of this unusual arm vein thrombosis, we postulate that a possible cause may be secondary to his third dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine given the onset and no prior medical comorbidities. Since the previous studies was mostly done based on mRNA vaccines of other manufacturers rather than Moderna, exact thrombosis mechanism of this case was not established yet. Contralateral arm vein thrombosis is unique to report, and future comprehensive studies are needed.

Evaluation of patients' experience and related qualitative outcomes in venous thromboembolism: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a prevalent disease with high morbidity and mortality. VTE has well-documented physical sequelae; however, the psychological and emotional impacts are seldom evaluated in randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a scoping review of published qualitative studies aiming to understand the physical, psychological, and emotional impact of VTE as reflected from patients' perspectives. This scoping review is part of a larger initiative to develop a core outcome set for VTE treatment studies. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify qualitative studies assessing patient experience of VTE. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts using Covidence systematic review software. Full-text reviews were conducted independently by 2 study team members. A modified method of "thematic synthesis" was used to collate themes upon reading and rereading of the publications. RESULTS: Our search strategy returned a total of 4944 citations; 28 were ultimately included in the analysis. The studies were conducted across 13 countries and representative of 436 participants including a spectrum of VTE subpopulations. There were seven major themes identified: Acute impacts: an unforeseen blow, Sustained psychological distress, Loss of self: life is changed, Challenges of thrombosis management, Balancing coping and control, Negative experience with the medical system, and VTE in the context of other conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The physical, psychological, and emotional impacts of VTE extend beyond objective outcomes typically evaluated in clinical trials. An improved understanding of the outcomes most important to patients will improve patient-centered care in VTE.