Effectiveness of therapeutic heparin versus prophylactic heparin on death, mechanical ventilation, or intensive care unit admission in moderately ill patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital: RAPID randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of therapeutic heparin compared with prophylactic heparin among moderately ill patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital wards. DESIGN: Randomised controlled, adaptive, open label clinical trial. SETTING: 28 hospitals in Brazil, Canada, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and US. PARTICIPANTS: 465 adults admitted to hospital wards with covid-19 and increased D-dimer levels were recruited between 29 May 2020 and 12 April 2021 and were randomly assigned to therapeutic dose heparin (n=228) or prophylactic dose heparin (n=237). INTERVENTIONS: Therapeutic dose or prophylactic dose heparin (low molecular weight or unfractionated heparin), to be continued until hospital discharge, day 28, or death. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of death, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or admission to an intensive care unit, assessed up to 28 days. The secondary outcomes included all cause death, the composite of all cause death or any mechanical ventilation, and venous thromboembolism. Safety outcomes included major bleeding. Outcomes were blindly adjudicated. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 60 years; 264 (56.8%) were men and the mean body mass index was 30.3 kg/m2. At 28 days, the primary composite outcome had occurred in 37/228 patients (16.2%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 52/237 (21.9%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (odds ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 1.10; P=0.12). Deaths occurred in four patients (1.8%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 18 patients (7.6%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.22, 0.07 to 0.65; P=0.006). The composite of all cause death or any mechanical ventilation occurred in 23 patients (10.1%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 38 (16.0%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.59, 0.34 to 1.02; P=0.06). Venous thromboembolism occurred in two patients (0.9%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and six (2.5%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.34, 0.07 to 1.71; P=0.19). Major bleeding occurred in two patients (0.9%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and four (1.7%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.52, 0.09 to 2.85; P=0.69). CONCLUSIONS: In moderately ill patients with covid-19 and increased D-dimer levels admitted to hospital wards, therapeutic heparin was not significantly associated with a reduction in the primary outcome but the odds of death at 28 days was decreased. The risk of major bleeding appeared low in this trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04362085.

Heparin for Moderately Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Heparin, in addition to its anticoagulant properties, has anti-inflammatory and potential anti-viral effects, and may improve endothelial function in patients with Covid-19. Early initiation of therapeutic heparin could decrease the thrombo-inflammatory process, and reduce the risk of critical illness or death. METHODS: We randomly assigned moderately ill hospitalized ward patients admitted for Covid-19 with elevated D-dimer level to therapeutic or prophylactic heparin. The primary outcome was a composite of death, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive mechanical ventilation or ICU admission. Safety outcomes included major bleeding. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: At 28 days, the primary composite outcome occurred in 37 of 228 patients (16.2%) assigned to therapeutic heparin, and 52 of 237 patients (21.9%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 1.10; p=0.12). Four patients (1.8%) assigned to therapeutic heparin died compared with 18 patients (7.6%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (odds ratio, 0.22; 95%-CI, 0.07 to 0.65). The composite of all-cause mortality or any mechanical ventilation occurred in 23 (10.1%) in the therapeutic heparin group and 38 (16.0%) in the prophylactic heparin group (odds ratio, 0.59; 95%-CI, 0.34 to 1.02). Major bleeding occurred in 2 patients (0.9%) with therapeutic heparin and 4 patients (1.7%) with prophylactic heparin (odds ratio, 0.52; 95%-CI, 0.09 to 2.85). CONCLUSIONS: In moderately ill ward patients with Covid-19 and elevated D-dimer level, therapeutic heparin did not significantly reduce the primary outcome but decreased the odds of death at 28 days. Trial registration numbers: NCT04362085 ; NCT04444700.

Differences in clinical presentation of deep vein thrombosis in men and women.

BACKGROUND: As assessment of clinical pretest probability is the first step in the diagnostic evaluation of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), it is important to know if the clinical features of DVT are the same in men and women. OBJECTIVES: To compare the prevalence and clinical characteristics of DVT, and the accuracy of clinical pretest probability assessment, between men and women with suspected DVT. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of individual patient data from three prospective studies by our group that evaluated diagnostic tests for a suspected first episode of DVT. Clinical characteristics, clinical pretest probability for DVT, and prevalence and extent of DVT was assessed in a total of 1838 outpatients. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of DVT was higher in men than in women (14.4% vs. 9.4%) (P = 0.001). The prevalence of DVT was higher in men than in women who were categorized as having a clinical pretest probability that was low (6.9% vs. 3.5%; P = 0.025) or moderate (16.9% vs. 8.7%; P = 0.04), but similar in patients in the high category (40.2% vs. 44.0%; P = 0.6). In patients diagnosed with DVT, swelling of the entire leg occurred more often (41.5% vs. 15.7%; P < 0.001), and thrombosis was more extensive (involvement of both popliteal and common femoral veins in 47.9% vs. 21.6%), in women than in men. CONCLUSIONS: In outpatients with suspected DVT, the overall prevalence of thrombosis and the prevalence of thrombosis in those with a low or a moderate clinical pretest probability were higher in men than in women.

Potential drug interaction between simvastatin and danazol causing rhabdomyolysis.

Rhabdomyolysis is a life-threatening clinical and biochemical syndrome that results from injury to skeletal muscle. Hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) have been associated with myopathy and rhabdomyolysis. Although rhabdomyolysis is a rare adverse event associated with this class of drugs, their prevalent use in the management of dyslipidemia makes it increasingly important for clinicians to understand the nature of this condition. Rhabdomyolysis can occur with all statins when used alone and particularly when combined with other drugs that are themselves myotoxic or that elevate the concentration of the statin. Statins are particularly susceptible to the latter effect because of their metabolism by the CYP450 system and their low oral bioavailability. In this report, we describe a case of rhabdomyolysis and acute renal failure secondary to the interaction between danazol and simvastatin.