Serial thrombin generation and exploration of alternative anticoagulants in critically ill COVID-19 patients: Observations from Maastricht Intensive Care COVID Cohort.

Background: COVID-19 associated coagulopathy (CAC) is associated with an increase in thromboembolic events. Current guidelines recommend prophylactic heparins in the management of CAC. However, the efficacy of this strategy in the intensive care population remains uncertain. Objective: We aimed to measure thrombin generation (TG) to assess CAC in intensive care unit (ICU) patients receiving thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH). In addition, we performed statistical modeling to link TG parameters to patient characteristics and clinical parameters. Lastly, we studied the potency of different anticoagulants as an alternative to LMWH treatment in ex vivo COVID-19 plasma. Patients/Methods: We included 33 patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted at the ICU. TG was measured at least twice over the course of 6 weeks after admission. Thrombin generation parameters peak height and endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) were compared to healthy controls. Results were subsequently correlated with a patient characteristics and laboratory measurements. In vitro spiking in TG with rivaroxaban, dabigatran, argatroban and orgaran was performed and compared to LMWH. Results: Anti-Xa levels of all patients remained within the therapeutic range throughout follow-up. At baseline, the mean (SE) endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) was 1,727 (170) nM min and 1,620 (460) nM min for ellagic acid (EA) and tissue factor (TF), respectively. In line with this we found a mean (SE) peak height of 353 (45) nM and 264 (96) nM for EA and TF. Although fluctuating across the weeks of follow-up, TG parameters remained elevated despite thromboprophylaxis. In vitro comparison of LMWHs and direct thrombin inhibitors (e.g., agratroban, dabigatran) revealed a higher efficacy in reducing coagulation potential for direct thrombin inhibition in both ellagic acid (EA) and tissue factor (TF) triggered TG. Conclusion: In a sub-group of mechanically ventilated, critically ill COVID-19 patients, despite apparent adequate anti-coagulation doses evaluated by anti-Xa levels, thrombin generation potential remained high during ICU admission independent of age, sex, body mass index, APACHE II score, cardiovascular disease, and smoking status. These observations could, only partially, be explained by (anti)coagulation and thrombosis, inflammation, and multi-organ failure. Our in vitro data suggested that direct thrombin inhibition compared with LMWH might offer an alternate, more effective anticoagulant strategy in COVID-19.

COVID-19 Coagulopathy: From Pathogenesis to Treatment.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a pandemic at the end of 2019 and continues to exert an unfavorable worldwide health impact on a large proportion of the population. A remarkable feature of COVID-19 is the precipitation of a hypercoagulable state, mainly in severe cases, leading to micro- and macrothrombosis, respiratory failure, and death. Despite the implementation of various therapeutic regimes, including anticoagulants, a large number of patients suffer from such serious complications. This review aims to describe the current knowledge on the pathophysiology of the coagulation mechanism in COVID-19. We describe the interplay between three important mediators of the disease and how this may lead to a hyperinflammatory and prothrombotic state that affects outcome, namely, the endothelium, the immune system, and the coagulation system. In line with the hypercoagulability state during COVID-19, we further review on the rare but severe vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia. We also summarize and comment on available anticoagulant treatment options and include suggestions for some future treatment considerations for COVID-19 anticoagulation therapy.

Baroreflex activation therapy lowers arterial pressure without apparent stimulation of the carotid bodies.

Carotid baroreflex activation therapy produces a sustained fall in blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension. Because the activation electrodes are implanted at the level of the carotid sinus, it is conceivable that the nearby located carotid body chemoreceptors are stimulated as well. Physiological stimulation of the carotid chemoreceptors not only stimulates respiration but also increases sympathetic activity, which may counteract the effects of baroreflex activation. The aim of this exploratory study is to investigate whether there is concomitant carotid chemoreflex activation during baroreflex activation therapy. Fifteen participants with the Rheos system were included in this single-center study. At arrival at the clinic, the device was switched off for 2 hours while patients were at rest. Subsequently, the device was switched on at 6 electric settings of high and low frequencies and amplitudes. Respiration and blood pressure measurements were performed during all device activation settings. Multilevel statistical models were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, antihypertensive therapeutic index, sleep apnea, coronary artery disease, systolic blood pressure, and heart rate. There was no change in end-tidal carbon dioxide, partial pressure of carbon dioxide, breath duration, and breathing frequency during any of the electric settings with the device. Nevertheless, mean arterial pressure showed a highly significant decrease during electric activation (P<0.001). Carotid baroreflex activation therapy using the Rheos system did not stimulate respiration at several electric device activation energies, which suggests that there is no appreciable coactivation of carotid body chemoreceptors during device therapy.

Baropacing as a new option for treatment of resistant hypertension.

Electrical carotid baroreflex activation therapy is an emerging device-based treatment for patients with resistant hypertension. Its blood pressure lowering effect has been demonstrated in several animal and human studies, with prolonged effect over the long-term. The main mechanism of the blood pressure reduction during this therapy is by inhibition of the sympathetic outflow. Yet the question arises whether the inhibition of central sympathetic activity is sufficient to be the sole mechanism behind the sustained reduction in blood pressure. The major focus of this review is to elucidate the mechanisms of action that account for the effects of continuous carotid baroreflex activation on blood pressure in humans. Recent results of baroreflex activation therapy as a treatment for heart failure will also be discussed.

Bilateral or unilateral stimulation for baroreflex activation therapy.

UNLABELLED: Previous trials have shown that in patients with resistant hypertension device-based baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) can substantially reduce blood pressure. However, the fact that electrodes had to be implanted bilaterally may be a drawback for further development of the technique. In this study, we explored whether unilateral stimulation would produce comparable results as bilateral stimulation. In the Pivotal trial, treatment-resistant hypertensive patients were randomized to receive either immediate BAT or deferred BAT, that is, 6 months after implantation. We adjusted stimulation parameters individually so as to provide optimal baroreflex activation. Unilateral stimulation was applied unless bilateral stimulation resulted in a greater blood pressure reduction. When we pooled the 6-month data for the group with immediate BAT and the 12-month data for the group with deferred BAT, a total of 215 patients had been stimulated on one side only (127 at the right side and 88 at the left side), whereas 80 patients had been stimulated bilaterally. Although blood pressure and heart rate did not differ between the 2 groups at baseline, all these variables were significantly lower in the unilateral than in the bilateral group after the 6-month period. When we compared the effect of right-sided stimulation with those of either left-sided or bilateral stimulation, we found right-sided stimulation to be the most effective. We conclude that unilateral and in particular right-sided BAT has a more profound effect on blood pressure than bilateral or left-sided BAT. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00442286.

Baroreflex activation therapy for patients with drug-resistant hypertension.

Uncontrolled or resistant hypertension is still a major problem facing many physicians daily in the clinic. Several new therapies are being developed to help those patients whose blood pressure does not respond sufficiently to regular antihypertensive medication. One of these promising therapies is electrical activation of the carotid sinus baroreflex. In this overview, the authors predominantly summarize the background, efficacy and safety of this promising treatment with its latest achievements in patients with resistant hypertension. The authors also discuss certain issues that need further clarification before this therapy can be added to the common treatment guidelines of hypertension.

Renal responses to long-term carotid baroreflex activation therapy in patients with drug-resistant hypertension.

Carotid baroreflex activation has been demonstrated to provide enduring reductions in arterial blood pressure. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of long-term therapy on renal function. A total of 322 patients were enrolled in the Rheos Pivotal Trial. Group 1 consisted of 236 patients who started baroreflex activation therapy 1 month after device implantation, whereas in the 86 patients from group 2 the device was activated 6 months later. Serum creatinine and urine albumin/creatinine ratio were collected at screening (before device activation), and at months 6 and 12. Multilevel statistical analyses were adjusted for various covariables. Serum creatinine increased from 78 to 84 µmol/L, and glomerular filtration rate decreased from 92 to 87 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) in group 1 at month 6 (P<0.05). These values did not change any further after 12 months of therapy. Patients with highest glomerular filtration rate showed the greatest decrease in glomerular filtration. Group 2 showed the same trends as group 1 even before device activation at month 6. Systolic blood pressure reduction seemed to be significantly related to the change in glomerular filtration rate in both groups. Albumin/creatinine ratio did not change in both groups during follow-up. In conclusion, baroreflex activation therapy in hypertensive patients is associated with an initial mild decrease in glomerular filtration rate, which may be considered as a normal hemodynamic response to the drop in blood pressure. Long-term treatment does not result in further decrease in renal function, indicating baroreflex activation as a safe and effective therapy.

Baroreflex activation therapy for the treatment of drug-resistant hypertension: new developments.

In the past few years, novel accomplishments have been obtained in carotid baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) for the treatment of resistant hypertension. In addition, this field is still evolving with promising results in the reduction of blood pressure and heart rate. This overview addresses the latest developments in BAT for the treatment of drug-resistant hypertension. Although not totally understood considering the working mechanisms of BAT, it appeared to be possible to achieve at least as much efficacy of single-sided as bilateral stimulation. Therefore unlike the first-generation Rheos system, the second-generation Barostim neo operates by unilateral baroreflex activation, using a completely different carotid electrode. Also significant improvements in several cardiac parameters have been shown by BAT in hypertensive patients, which set the basis for further research to evaluate BAT as a therapy for systolic heart failure. Yet important uncertainties need to be clarified to guarantee beneficial effects; hence not all participants seem to respond to BAT.

Sustained acute voltage-dependent blood pressure decrease with prolonged carotid baroreflex activation in therapy-resistant hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic carotid baroreflex stimulation (Rheos system) has been shown to effectively reduce blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension. Upon acute stimulation blood pressure also falls as a function of voltage. the aim of this study is to evaluate whether this voltage-dependent blood pressure decrease is preserved after long-term carotid baroreflex stimulation. METHODS: Forty-five patients implanted with Rheos underwent a voltage response test (VRT) before the start of carotid baroreflex activation (1m), as well as after 4 (4m) and 13 months (13 m) of device implantation. After switching off the device for 10 min (0 V), we started the VRT by increasing voltage from 1 to 6 V, by 1-V steps every 5 min. Blood pressure and heart rate were measured at the end of every step. RESULTS: At 1m, mean blood pressure was 178/101 mmHg at 0 V and fell to 142/83 mmHg at 6 V. Heart rate fell from 75 to 65 beats/min. At 4m and 13 m mean blood pressure was significantly lower compared to 1m when VRT started at 0 V (170/96 and 161/93 mmHg, respectively). However, pattern of blood pressure decrease during VRT was comparable with this at 1m. Maximum SBP reduction during VRT did not change with long-term therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Acute voltage-dependent blood pressure and heart rate decrease with electrical baroreflex stimulation is preserved after at least 1 year of continuous activation in patients with resistant hypertension. This indicates that response adaptation and nerve fatigue are very unlikely in long-term carotid baroreflex activation.