ABSTRACT
Different dosing strategies exist to initiate warfarin, most commonly fixed warfarin dosing (FWD), clinical warfarin dosing (CWD), and genetic-guided warfarin dosing (GWD). Landmark trials have shown GWD to be superior when compared to FWD in the EU-PACT trial or CWD in the GIFT trial. COAG trial did not show differences between GWD and CWD. We aim to compare the anticoagulation quality outcomes of CWD and FWD. This is a prospective cohort study with a retrospective comparator. Recruited subjects in the CWD (prospective) arm were initiated on warfarin according to the clinical dosing component of the algorithm published in www.warfarindosing.org. The primary efficacy outcome was the percentage time in the therapeutic range (PTTR) from day 3 to 6 till day 28 to 35. The study enrolled 122 and 123 patients in the CWD and FWD, respectively. The PTTR did not differ statistically between CWD and FWD (62.2 ± 26.2% vs. 58 ± 25.4%, p = 0.2). There was also no difference between both arms in the percentage of visits with extreme subtherapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) (<1.5; 15 ± 18.3% vs. 16.8 ± 19.1%, p = 0.44) or extreme supratherapeutic INR (>4; 7.7 ± 14.7% vs. 7.5 ± 12.4%, p = 0.92). We conclude that CWD did not improve the anticoagulation quality parameters compared to the FWD method.
Subject(s)
Anticoagulants , International Normalized Ratio , Warfarin , Humans , Warfarin/administration & dosage , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Female , Male , Aged , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Blood Coagulation/drug effects , Algorithms , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Monitoring/methods , Drug Monitoring/standards , Treatment Outcome , Aged, 80 and overABSTRACT
Intramural hematoma (IMH) is considered a part of acute aortic syndromes (AAS), a group of life-threatening aortic diseases with a similar presentation that appears to have different clinical manifestations and pathological and survival characteristics. AAS comprises three major entities, namely, aortic dissection (AD), IMH, and PAU. IMH-like classic AD is classified using Stanford and DeBakey classification systems to indicate the aortic area involved. Early diagnosis and treatment of AAS are crucial for survival; however, diagnosis of IMH may be delayed and challenging due to atypical presentation, investigation findings, and case progression. In this report, we describe a case of delayed and challenging diagnosis of a Stanford type A IMH that was managed surgically with a good outcome.
