RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Optimal pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis dosing is not well described in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) with an external ventricular drain (EVD). Our patients with SAH with an EVD who receive prophylactic enoxaparin are routinely monitored using timed anti-Xa levels. Our primary study goal was to determine the frequency of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and secondary intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) for this population of patients who received pharmacologic prophylaxis with enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for all patients with SAH admitted to the neurocritical care unit at Emory University Hospital between 2012 and 2017. All patients with SAH who required an EVD were included. RESULTS: Of 1,351 patients screened, 868 required an EVD. Of these 868 patients, 627 received enoxaparin, 114 received UFH, and 127 did not receive pharmacologic prophylaxis. VTE occurred in 7.5% of patients in the enoxaparin group, 4.4% in the UFH group (p = 0.32), and 3.2% in the no VTE prophylaxis group (p = 0.08). Secondary ICH occurred in 3.83% of patients in the enoxaparin group, 3.51% in the UFH group (p = 1), and 3.94% in the no VTE prophylaxis group (p = 0.53). As steady-state anti-Xa levels increased from 0.1 units/mL to > 0.3 units/mL, there was a trend toward a lower incidence of VTE. However, no correlation was noted between rising anti-Xa levels and an increased incidence of secondary ICH. When compared, neither enoxaparin nor UFH use was associated with a significantly reduced incidence of VTE or an increased incidence of ICH. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study of patients with nontraumatic SAH with an EVD who received enoxaparin or UFH VTE prophylaxis or no VTE prophylaxis, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of VTE or secondary ICH. For patients receiving prophylactic enoxaparin, achieving higher steady-state target anti-Xa levels may be associated with a lower incidence of VTE without increasing the risk of secondary ICH.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Inactivated four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (I4F-PCC, Kcentra®) has become an important agent for the urgent or emergent reversal of bleeding associated with vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin. There is recognized inter-institutional variability with the use of I4F-PCC, especially as it relates to dosing practices. We sought to characterize variations in I4F-PCC dosing practices and their impact on patient outcomes and describe overall real-world clinical practice surrounding I4F-PCC utilization in the context of the management of warfarin-related intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective pragmatic registry study of adult patients admitted at a participating study site between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015, who received I4F-PCC for reversal of warfarin-related ICH. Practices around warfarin-related ICH reversal in context of I4F-PCC utilization are described, including repeat I4F-PCC dosing, adjunctive reversal agents, and dose rounding policies (i.e., rounding doses to nearest vial size vs preparing exact/unrounded doses). All research was approved by local human investigation committees at each institution. RESULTS: Seventeen institutions contributed data on 528 patients to this registry. These institutions were primarily urban centers (74%), located in the southeast USA (47%), with Level 1 Trauma designation (79%), and with Comprehensive Stroke Center designation (74%). Most patients included in the study had sustained a non-traumatic ICH (68%), had a median admission GCS of 14 (IQR 7-15), and were receiving warfarin for atrial fibrillation (57.4%). There was substantial time latency between baseline INR and I4F-PCC (median 2.4 h, IQR 1.4-4.5 h). Most patients received adjunctive reversal agents, including vitamin K (89.5%) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) (31.9%). A smaller proportion (6.0%) of patients received repeat I4F-PCC dosing. The median ICU length of stay (LOS) was 3 days (IQR 2-7 days), median hospital LOS was 6 days (IQR 3-12 days), and overall mortality rate was 28.8%. For institutions rounding doses to the nearest vial size, the first post-I4F-PCC dose INR was statistically but not clinically significantly lower than for institutions without vial size dose rounding, with comparable degrees of INR reduction from baseline. No differences were observed between dose rounding cohorts in adverse effects, ICU or hospital LOS, modified Rankin score at discharge, or mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients received single doses of I4F-PCC, with adjunctive reversal agents and rounding doses to vial size. The time difference from baseline INR to factor product administration is a potential opportunity for process improvement in the management of warfarin-related ICH.
