Risk factors for serious adverse events related to vitamin K antagonists in children with congenital or acquired heart disease: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the occurrence of thrombosis and major bleeding in children with congenital or acquired heart disease (CAHD) treated with VKA and to identify risk factors for these serious adverse events (SAE). STUDY DESIGN: All children enrolled in our VKA dedicated educational program between 2008 and 2022 were prospectively included. The time in therapeutic range (TTR) was calculated to evaluate the stability of anticoagulation. Statistical analysis included Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: We included 405 patients. Median follow-up was 18.7 (9.3-49.4) months. The median TTR was 83.1 % (74.4 %-95.3 %). No deaths occurred because of bleeding or thrombotic events. The incidences of thrombotic and major bleeding events were 0.9 % (CI95 % [0.1-1.8]) and 2.3 % (CI95 % [0.9-3.8]) per patient year, respectively. At 1 and 5 years, 98.3 % (CI95 % [96.2 %-99.2 %]) and 88.7 % (CI95 % [81.9 % 93.1 %]) of patients were free of any SAE, respectively. Although the mechanical mitral valve (MMV) was associated to major bleeding events (HR = 3.1 CI95 % [1.2-8.2], p = 0.02) in univariate analysis, only recurrent minor bleeding events (HR = 4.3 CI95 % [1.6-11.7], p < 0.01) and global TTR under 70 % (HR = 4.7 CI95 % [1.5-15.1], p < 0.01) were independent risk factors in multivariable analysis. In multivariable analysis, giant coronary aneurysms after Kawasaki disease (HR = 7.8 [1.9-32.0], p = 0.005) was the only risk factor for thrombotic events. CONCLUSION: Overall, VKA therapy appears to be safe in children with CAHD. Suboptimal TTR, regardless of the indication for VKA initiation, was associated with bleeding events.

A retrospective analysis of discordances between international normalized ratio (INR) self-testing and INR laboratory testing in a pediatric patient population.

INTRODUCTION: The lack of quality control procedures for home point-of-care (POC) international normalized ratio (INR) devices is a concern. Concomitant laboratory and POC INR testing may be proposed to overcome the lack of quality control. However, a difference between the POC INR and the laboratory INR is not necessarily due to failure of the POC device. This study aimed to identify variables associated with a significant deviation between the POC INR and the laboratory INR. METHODS: Children included in this retrospective cohort study performed at least one concomitant laboratory and POC INRs. Clinical and laboratory variables were assessed for an association with significant deviation within pairs of INR. RESULTS: A significant deviation was noted for 30 (15.3%) of the 196 pairs of INR measurements from 124 children. Relative to patients without deviations, patients with deviations were younger (odds ratio =0.91; P = .020), less experienced in the use of POC INR devices (odds ratio =0.89; P = .098), and more likely to have received an INR result from a laboratory using animal thromboplastin (odds ratio =2.81 vs. 0.37 for laboratories using human thromboplastin; P = .016). In a multivariate analysis, younger age and the laboratory's use of animal thromboplastin were associated with significant deviations. CONCLUSIONS: Although most children had coherent pairs of INR values, the occurrence of deviations raises the question of the origin of the thromboplastin used in the laboratory and emphasizes the need to provide specific quality control procedures for POC INR devices.