ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Coagulation disorders are frequently encountered among patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially among admitted patients with more severe symptoms. This study aims to determine the mortality rate and incidence and risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study was conducted from March to July 2020 using a hospital database. All adult patients (>18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were included. Laboratory data and the real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 were obtained from medical records. The mortality rate and the incidence of VTE were established as study results. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of thrombotic events. RESULTS: rA total of 1024 confirmed COVID-19 patients were treated, of whom 110 (10.7%) were deceased and 58 patients (5.7%) developed VTE. Death occurred more frequently in patients older than 50 years and those admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU, 95%) and who received mechanical ventilation (62.7%). Multivariate analysis revealed that cancer patients were two times more likely to have VTE (adjusted odds ratio = 2.614; 95% CI = (1.048-6.519); p = 0.039). Other chronic diseases, such as diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease, were not associated with an increased risk of VTE. CONCLUSIONS: One-tenth of hospitalized COVID-19 patients were deceased, and VTE was prevalent among patients with chronic conditions, such as cancer, despite anticoagulation therapy. Healthcare professionals should closely monitor individuals with a high risk of developing VTE to prevent unwanted complications.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Thrombotic events are common in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and have been linked with COVID-19- induced hyperinflammatory state. In addition to anticoagulant effects, heparin and its derivatives have various anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties that may affect patient outcomes. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic standard-doses of enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study included critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU between March 2020 and July 2021. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the type of pharmacological VTE thromboprophylaxis given in fixed doses (Enoxaparin 40 mg SQ every 24 hours versus UFH 5000 Units SQ every 8 hours) throughout their ICU stay. The primary endpoint was all cases of thrombosis. Other endpoints were considered secondary. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to match patients (1:1 ratio) between the two groups based on the predefined criteria. Multivariable logistic, Cox proportional hazards, and negative binomial regression analysis were used as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 306 patients were eligible based on the eligibility criteria; 130 patients were included after PS matching (1:1 ratio). Patients who received UFH compared to enoxaparin had higher all thrombosis events at crude analysis (18.3% vs. 4.6%; p-value = 0.02 as well in logistic regression analysis (OR: 4.10 (1.05, 15.93); p-value = 0.04). Although there were no significant differences in all bleeding cases and major bleeding between the two groups (OR: 0.40 (0.07, 2.29); p-value = 0.31 and OR: 1.10 (0.14, 8.56); p-value = 0.93, respectively); however, blood transfusion requirement was higher in the UFH group but did not reach statistical significance (OR: 2.98 (0.85, 10.39); p-value = 0.09). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality were similar between the two groups at Cox hazards regression analysis. In contrast, hospital LOS was longer in the UFH group; however, it did not reach the statistically significant difference (beta coefficient: 0.22; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.48; p-value = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Prophylactic enoxaparin use in critically ill patients with COVID-19 may significantly reduce all thrombosis cases with similar bleeding risk compared to UFH.
