Novel Monitoring and Dose Adjustment of Argatroban, a Direct Thrombin Inhibitor, to Maintain Therapeutic Anticoagulation in a Patient With Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome, Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia, and COVID-19 Pneumonia.

In patients who require systemic anticoagulation, a reliable monitoring method is required to ensure anticoagulation is maintained within the correct therapeutic window and patients are treated appropriately. When titrating direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs), dilute thrombin time (dTT) measurements have been demonstrated to be more reliable and accurate than activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) measurements and thus often the preferred DTI assessment. However, a clinical need arises when both dTT measurements are not readily available and aPTT measurements are unreliable. CASE SUMMARY: A 57-year-old woman with a history of antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and multiple prior deep venous thromboses and pulmonary emboli was admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia and intubated due to hypoxic respiratory failure. Argatroban was initiated in place of her home medication warfarin. However, the patient had a prolonged aPTT value at baseline and overnight dTT assay measurements were limited at our institution. A multidisciplinary team of hematology and pharmacy clinicians created a modified patient-specific aPTT target range and argatroban dosing was titrated accordingly. Subsequent aPTT values in the modified target range corresponded to therapeutic dTT values, indicating therapeutic anticoagulation was successfully achieved and maintained. Patient blood samples were additionally evaluated retrospectively using an investigational novel point-of-care test that detected and quantified the argatroban anticoagulant effect. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic anticoagulation with a DTI in a patient with unreliable aPTT measurements can be achieved with use of a modified patient-specific aPTT target range. Early validation of an investigational rapid testing alternative for DTI monitoring is promising.

An examination of gastrointestinal absorption using the acetaminophen absorption test in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction is prevalent in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The acetaminophen absorption test (AAT) has been previously described as a direct method for assessment of GI function. Our study determines whether the AAT can be used to assess GI function in critically ill COVID-19 patients, compared with traditional measures of GI function. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of critically ill patients with COVID-19. SETTING: Three intensive care units at a tertiary care academic medical center. PATIENTS: Twenty critically ill patients with COVID-19. INTERVENTIONS: The results of AAT and traditional measures for assessing GI function were collected and compared. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among the study cohort, 55% (11 of 20) of patients had evidence of malabsorption by AAT. Interestingly, all patients with evidence of malabsorption by AAT had clinical evidence of bowel function, as indicated by stool output and low gastric residuals during the prior 24 h. When comparing patients with a detectable acetaminophen level (positive AAT) with those who had undetectable acetaminophen levels (negative AAT), radiologic evidence of ileus was less frequent (20 vs 88%; P = .03), tolerated tube-feed rates were higher (40 vs 10 ml/h; P =.01), and there was a trend toward lower gastric residual volumes (45 vs 830 ml; P =.11). CONCLUSION: Malabsorption can occur in critically ill patients with COVID-19 despite commonly used clinical indicators of tube-feeding tolerance. The AAT provides a simple, rapid, and cost-effective mechanism by which enteral function can be efficiently assessed in COVID-19 patients.

Filter clotting with continuous renal replacement therapy in COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appears to be associated with increased arterial and venous thromboembolic disease. These presumed abnormalities in hemostasis have been associated with filter clotting during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). We aimed to characterize the burden of CRRT filter clotting in COVID-19 infection and to describe a CRRT anticoagulation protocol that used anti-factor Xa levels for systemic heparin dosing. Multi-center study of consecutive patients with COVID-19 receiving CRRT. Primary outcome was CRRT filter loss. Sixty-five patients were analyzed, including 17 using an anti-factor Xa protocol to guide systemic heparin dosing. Fifty-four out of 65 patients (83%) lost at least one filter. Median first filter survival time was 6.5 [2.5, 33.5] h. There was no difference in first or second filter loss between the anti-Xa protocol and standard of care anticoagulation groups, however fewer patients lost their third filter in the protocolized group (55% vs. 93%) resulting in a longer median third filter survival time (24 [15.1, 54.2] vs. 17.3 [9.5, 35.1] h, p = 0.04). The rate of CRRT filter loss is high in COVID-19 infection. An anticoagulation protocol using systemic unfractionated heparin, dosed by anti-factor Xa levels is reasonable approach to anticoagulation in this population.

A low dose heparinized saline protocol is associated with improved duration of arterial line patency in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

PURPOSE: Critically ill patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) have high rates of line thrombosis. Our objective was to examine the safety and efficacy of a low dose heparinized saline (LDHS) arterial line (a-line) patency protocol in this population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this observational cohort study, patients ≥18 years with COVID-19 admitted to an ICU at one institution from March 20-May 25, 2020 were divided into two cohorts. Pre-LDHS patients had an episode of a-line thrombosis between March 20-April 19. Post-LDHS patients had an episode of a-line thrombosis between April 20-May 25 and received an LDHS solution (10 units/h) through their a-line pressure bag. RESULTS: Forty-one patients (pre-LDHS) and 30 patients (post-LDHS) were identified. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, including age (61 versus 54 years; p = 0.24), median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (6 versus 7; p = 0.67) and systemic anticoagulation (47% versus 32%; p = 0.32). Median duration of a-line patency was significantly longer in post-LDHS versus pre-LDHS patients (8.5 versus 2.9 days; p < 0.001). The incidence of bleeding complications was similar between cohorts (13% vs. 10%; p = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: A LDHS protocol was associated with a clinically significant improvement in a-line patency duration in COVID-19 patients, without increased bleeding risk.