Comparative hemostatic efficacy of 4F-PCC in patients with intracranial hemorrhage on factor Xa inhibitors versus warfarin.

OBJECTIVE: Patients experiencing an intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) on oral anticoagulants often require rapid reversal. This study evaluated patients taking factor Xa inhibitors or warfarin that received reversal with 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for an ICH. The objective of the study was to determine if the efficacy of 4F-PCC for the reversal of factor Xa inhibitors is noninferior to its use in warfarin reversal in patients with ICH. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single center, noninferiority trial. Patients presenting to the emergency department with ICH were divided into two cohorts: those taking factor Xa inhibitors versus those taking warfarin. In each cohort, patients received anticoagulation reversal with weight-based 4F-PCC. The primary endpoint was hemostatic efficacy defined as ≤20% expansion in hematoma volume on repeat computed tomography imaging. A pre-specified noninferiority margin of -10% was selected to evaluate the difference between groups for the primary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 221 patients were included in the study (factor Xa inhibitors, n = 87; warfarin, n = 134). Effective hemostasis was achieved in 70 patients (81%) on factor Xa inhibitors compared to 111 patients (83%) on warfarin, (-2.4% difference, [95% confidence interval, -12.87 to 8.12]; p = 0.654). There was no statistically significant difference between groups with regards to the primary outcome; however, the use of 4F-PCC in factor Xa inhibitor reversal was not noninferior when compared to 4F-PCC use for warfarin reversal. Hospital length of stay and discharge disposition were similar between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of 4F-PCC in reversing factor Xa inhibitor-related ICH compared to warfarin-related ICH was not significantly different between groups; however, these results did not prove noninferiority. Further study is warranted to delineate 4F-PCC's role in reversing factor Xa inhibitors in patients with ICH.

Anaphylaxis Presenting as Uvulitis.

The authors present a case of a young man who woke up with uvular swelling resulting in a severely narrowed airway. He had ingested peanut butter the prior night but was unaware of any allergies. He was treated with epinephrine, diphenhydramine, and methylprednisolone which resulted in resolution of the airway compromise. The authors discuss the mechanism of anaphylaxis and the emergency management of this life-threatening condition.

Impact of early versus late administration of bamlanivimab on readmissions in patients with high-risk COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Recombinant monoclonal antibody therapies have been utilized under emergency use authorization (EUA) for the prevention of clinical decompensation in high-risk COVID-19 positive patients for up to 10 days from symptom onset. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the timing of the monoclonal antibody, bamlanivimab, on clinical outcomes in high-risk COVID-19 positive patients. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved, retrospective evaluation of adult patients who received bamlanivimab per EUA criteria in the emergency department (ED). Patients were dichotomized into two groups- 3 days of symptoms or less (early) versus 4 to 10 days (late). The primary outcome was hospitalization for COVID-related illness at 28 days (or treatment failure). Secondary outcomes were COVID-related ED visits at 28 days, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality at 28 days. RESULTS: A total of 839 patients were included in the analysis. There was no difference observed in COVID-related hospitalization rates within 28 days between the early and late bamlanivimab administration groups (7.5% vs. 8.2%, p = 0.71). There was no difference in COVID-related ED visits within 28 days with 13% of patients returning to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, there were no differences in the rates of hospitalization at 28 days when bamlanivimab was administered in the first 3 days of illness versus days 4 to 10. Future prospective studies are warranted to expand upon the characteristics of patients that may or may not benefit from monoclonal antibody therapy.