Is intermittent pneumatic compression effective in reducing the risk of deep vein thrombosis in non-surgical hospitalized patients at high risk of major bleed?

The weight of the evidence to date suggests that intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) is effective in reducing the risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in hospitalized patients with stroke. 1,2 Whether IPC is also effective in non-surgical hospitalized patients without stroke at high risk of DVT and major bleed needs further studies.

A 2013 multicenter randomized trial (CLOTS 3) involving over 2,000 immobile hospitalized patients post-stroke found a significantly lower risk of DVT in proximal veins or any symptomatic DVT in the proximal veins within 30 days of randomization (8.5% vs 12.1%; absolute reduction risk 3.6%, 95% C.I. 1.4-5.8). Of note, the rate of concurrent heparin or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) prophylaxis was similar between the 2 groups (17%). 1

A meta-analysis including the CLOTS 3 study and 2 other smaller trials 2 in patients with stroke found a risk reduction for proximal DVT (O.R. 0.66, 95% C.I 0.52-0.84) with nearly significant reduction in deaths by the end of the treatment period (O.R. 0.81, 95% 0.65-1.01).1

Although IPC may also be effective in non-surgical hospitalized patients without stroke but at high risk of DVT and bleed, proper trials in this patient population is lacking. In fact, the 2012 American College of Chest Physicians guidelines on antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis classifies use of IPC in preventing DVT’s in non-surgical acutely ill hospitalized patients as category 2C recommendation (weak, low quality evidence). 3

The patient population and methodology of above studies should be distinguished from those of a 2019 published trial involving only critically ill patients—all receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis—which reported no reduction in the incidence of proximal lower-limb DVT with the addition of IPC. 4

 

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that venous thromboembolism has been reported in up to 42% of hospitalized patients who have had a stroke? 1

 

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

References

  1. Dennis M, Sandercock P, Reid J, et al. Effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression in reduction of risk of deep vein thrombosis in patients who have had a stroke (CLOTS 3): a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2013;382:516-24. https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61050-8/attachment/1a0438d2-86eb-4da1-8bdb-92c0aec18b8d/mmc1.pdf
  2. Naccarato M, Chiodo Grandi F, Dennis M, et al. Physical methods for preventing deep vein thrombosis in stroke. Cochrance Database Syst Rev 2010;8:CD001922. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001922.pub3/full
  3. Guyatt GH, Akl EA, Crowther M, et al. Executive summary: Antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. CHEST 2012;141 (suppl):7S-47S. http://www.sphcs.org/workfiles/CardiacVascular/7S-full.pdf
  4. Arabi YM, Al-Hameed F, Burns KEA, et al. Adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression for venous thromboprophylaxis. N Engl J Med 2019;380:1305-15. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30779530/

 

 

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

Is intermittent pneumatic compression effective in reducing the risk of deep vein thrombosis in non-surgical hospitalized patients at high risk of major bleed?

What’s the evidence that patients with Covid-19 are at high risk of blood clots?

Although we often think of it as a respiratory disease, emerging evidence suggests that Covid-19, particularly when severe,  is also associated with high risk of thrombotic events, including pulmonary embolism, venous thrombosis, and arterial thrombotic events.1

A Chinese study found that ICU patients with severe Covid-19 had a venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence of 25%, with disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC) found in the majority of fatal cases.2

A prospective Dutch study involving critically ill ICU patients with Covid-19 reported VTE in 27% and arterial thrombotic events in another 3.7%, despite standard VTE prophylaxis.3 The authors suggested the use of “high prophylactic doses” of anticoagulants in these patients due to concern over hypercoagulability.

An ICU French study also found high frequency of thrombotic complications in Covid-19 patients with ARDS, with 11.7% of patients having pulmonary embolism vs 2.1% in non-Covid-19 patients with ARDS. As with the Dutch study, thrombotic complications occurred despite standard prophylactic anticoagulation.4

Postmortem studies have also shown marked changes in lung microvasculature with the presence of microthrombi, with some calling it “pulmonary intravascular coagulopathy” to distinguish it from DIC.1

A NEJM letter reported 5 Covid-19 patients less than 50 years of age who presented with large vessel stroke symptoms without an alternative explanation.5 Of interest, 2 of these patients had no other symptoms suggestive of Covid-19.  A pre-print article from China reported an acute stroke incidence of 5% in hospitalized patients with Covid-19.6

The finding of a hypercoagulable state in patients with severe Covid-19 is not surprising given the frequent association of this infection with a high inflammatory state and the well-known capability of SARS-CoV-2 to attack the endothelial surfaces of blood vessels. High inflammatory state can promote activation of blood coagulation through release of inflammatory cytokines (eg, IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-alpha).1

Perhaps even more intriguing is the finding of extremely high levels of factor VIII found in some Covid-19 patients which could make them hypercoagulable.7 This phenomenon should be suspected when a patient appears to be resistant to anticoagulation by heparin based on aPTT but not based on anti-Xa assay.7

 Bonus pearl: Did you know that the overall incidence of VTE is lowest among Asians-Pacific islanders, followed by Hispanics and Caucasians, with highest rate among African-Americans? 1 ,8

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Fogarty H, Townsend L, Cheallaigh CN, et al. COVID-19 coagulopathy in Caucasian patients. Br J Haematol 2020, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjh.16749
  2. Cui S, Chen S, Li X, et al. Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, et al. Prevalence of venous thromboembolism in patients with severe novel coronavirus pneumonia. J Thromb Haematol 2020, April 9. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jth.14830
  3. Klok FA, Kruip MJHA, van der Meer NJM, et al. Incidence of thrombotic complications in critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. Thromb Res 2020. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049384820301201?via%3Dihub
  4. Helms J, Tacquard C, Severac F, et al. High risk of thrombosis in patients in severe SARS-CoV-2 infection: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Med 2020; https://www.esicm.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/863_author_proof.pdf
  5. Oxley TJ, Mocco J, Majidie S, et al. Large-vessel stroke as a presenting feature of Covid-19 in the young. N Engl J Med. 2020, April 28. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009787?query=featured_home
  6. Li Y, Wang M. Acute cerebrovascular disease following COVID-19: A single center, retrospective, observational study. 2020. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3550025
  7. Beun R, Kusadasi N, Sikma M, et al. Thromboembolic events and apparent heparin resistance in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. Int J Lab Hematol 2020, April 20. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ijlh.13230
  8. White RH, Keenan CR. Effects of race and ethnicity on the incidence of venous thromboembolism. Thromb Res 2009;123 Suppl 4:S11-S17. doi:10.1016/S0049-3848(09)70136-7

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

What’s the evidence that patients with Covid-19 are at high risk of blood clots?

Should I consider a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for my patient with pancreatic cancer and pulmonary embolism?

Classically, anticoagulant (AC) of choice in active malignancy with venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (eg, enoxaparin) because of trials showing its superiority over warfarin. But now the pendulum is swinging toward DOACs as an alternative mode of treatment.

A 2018 trial found that oral edoxaban (an Xa inhibitor) was noninferior to subcutaneous dalteparin (a LMWH) with the composite outcome of recurrent VTE or major bleeding.1 Overall, recurrent VTE was significantly lower in edoxaban (7.9% vs 11.3%) but had higher major bleeding (6.9% vs 4.05). Of note, edoxaban was initiated after 5 days of treatment with LMWH.

More recently, the 2020 Caravaggio trial, showed non-inferiority of apixaban (at a dose of 10 mg twice daily for the first 7 days, followed by 5 mg twice daily) to dalteparin with recurrent VTE of 5.6% in the apixaban group vs 7.9% in the dalteparin.2 There was no significant difference in rates of major bleeding (3.8% vs 4%). A prior small study, the ADAM-VTE trial, compared apixaban to dalteparin in patients with malignancy and VTE.3 Apixaban had significantly lower VTE recurrence rates (0.7% to 6.3%) and non-significant lower major bleeding (0% vs 1.4%, p=0.138) consistent with the newer and larger trial. Of note, this trial excluded patients with brain tumor and had few patients with upper GI or hematologic malignancy.  

In addition, a pilot study, the SELECT-D trial, compared rivaroxaban to dalteparin.4 Rivaroxaban had significantly lower VTE recurrence (4% vs 11%), without a significant increase in major bleeding (6% vs 4%), but had an increased number of clinically relevant non-major bleeds (13% vs 4%), particularly in cancers of the upper GI tract.

Although decision regarding use of DOACs in patients with malignancy should be made on case-by-case basis, they are increasingly considered for treatment of VTE in this patient population with the strongest evidence supporting apixaban or the initial use of LMWH for 5 days followed by edoxaban.  

Contributed by Sean Mendez MD, Mass General Hospital, Boston, MA.

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References:  

  1. Raskob GE, van Es N, Verhamme P, Carrier M, Di Nisio M, Garcia D, Grosso MA, Kakkar AK, Kovacs MJ, Mercuri MF, Meyer G, Segers A, Shi M, Wang TF, Yeo E, Zhang G, Zwicker JI, Weitz JI, Büller HR. Edoxaban for the Treatment of Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism. N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 15;378(7):615-624. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1711948. Epub 2017 Dec 12. PubMed PMID: 29231094.
  2. McBane Ii R, Loprinzi CL, Ashrani A, Perez-Botero J, Leon Ferre RA, Henkin S, Lenz CJ, Le-Rademacher JG, Wysokinski WE. Apixaban and dalteparin in active malignancy associated venous thromboembolism. The ADAM VTE Trial. Thromb Haemost. 2017 Oct 5;117(10):1952-1961. doi: 10.1160/TH17-03-0193. Epub 2017 Aug 24. PubMed PMID: 28837207.
  3. Agnelli G, Becattini C, Meyer G, Muñoz A, Huisman MV, Connors JM, Cohen A, Bauersachs R, Brenner B, Torbicki A, Sueiro MR, Lambert C, Gussoni G, Campanini M, Fontanella A, Vescovo G, Verso M. Apixaban for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism Associated with Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 29;. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1915103. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 32223112.
  4. Young AM, Marshall A, Thirlwall J, Chapman O, Lokare A, Hill C, Hale D, Dunn JA, Lyman GH, Hutchinson C, MacCallum P, Kakkar A, Hobbs FDR, Petrou S, Dale J, Poole CJ, Maraveyas A, Levine M. Comparison of an Oral Factor Xa Inhibitor With Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Patients With Cancer With Venous Thromboembolism: Results of a Randomized Trial (SELECT-D). J Clin Oncol. 2018 Jul 10;36(20):2017-2023. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2018.78.8034. Epub 2018 May 10. PubMed PMID: 29746227.

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

Should I consider a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for my patient with pancreatic cancer and pulmonary embolism?

Why is my relatively healthy elderly patient so prone to hyperkalemia?

Hyporeninemic hypoaldosteronism (HH)—without impairment of cortisol synthesis— is associated with hyperkalemic (type IV) renal tubular acidosis (RTA) and is not uncommon among older patients despite glomerular filtration rates (GFRs) >20 ml/min, and absence of diabetes mellitus or chronic tubulointerstitial disease (1-7).  

Hyperkalemia due to HH in the elderly should come as no surprise because the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) function declines with age, reaching its lowest level by age 60. 1-4   In fact, older people have comparatively lower mean levels of plasma renin and aldosterone at baseline and have an impaired ability to mount appropriate responses to RAAS stimuli, such as upright posture, volume depletion, catecholamines, or potassium administration (3-5).

The impaired RAAS capacity in the elderly often becomes more obvious when they are prescribed medications that further suppress RAAS (3). These include angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and heparin (3,7). 

Drugs that increase aldosterone resistance, including potassium-sparing diuretics (eg, spironolactone, amiloride, triamterene, eplerenone) and certain antibiotics (eg, trimethoprim, pentamidine) may also aggravate hyperkalemia associated with HH (7). 

A variety of mechanisms leading to HH with aging have been proposed. These include impaired conversion of prorenin to renin, prostaglandin deficiency, sympathetic nervous system dysfunction and increased plasma levels of atrial natriuretic factors as found in congestive heart failure (1,7). 

Bonus pearl: Did you know that the first case of “pure hypoaldosteronism” was described in 1957 in a 71 year old non-diabetic patient with hyperkalemia in the setting of congestive heart failure? (8)

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Bauer JH. Age-related changes in the renin-aldosterone system. Physiological effects and clinical implications. Drugs & Aging 1993;3:238-45. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8324299
  2. Musso CG, Jauregui JR. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the aging kidney. Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab 2014;9:543-46. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/17446651.2014.956723
  3. Yoon HE, Choi BS. The renin-angiotensin system and aging in the kidney. Korean J Intern Med 2014;29:291-95. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262530577_The_renin-angiotensin_system_and_aging_in_the_kidney
  4. Nadler JL, Lee FO, Hsueh W, et al. Evidence of prostacyclin deficiency in the syndrome of hyporeninemic hypoaldosteronism. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1015-20. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3515183
  5. Williams GH. Hyporeninemic hypoaldosteronism. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1041-42. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3515186
  6.  Block BL, Bernard S, Schwartzstein RM. Hypo-hypo: a complex metabolic disorder. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2016;13:127-133. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26730868
  7. Michelis MF. Hyperkalemia in the elderly. Am J Kid Dis 1990;16:296-99.https://www.ajkd.org/article/S0272-6386(12)80005-9/pdf
  8. Hudson JB, Chobanian AV, Relman AS. Hypoaldosteronism. A clinical study of a patient with an isolated adrenal mineralocorticoid deficiency, resulting in hyperkaliemia and Stokes-Adams attack. N Engl J Med 1957;257:529-36. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13464977

 

Why is my relatively healthy elderly patient so prone to hyperkalemia?

Should I use aPTT or anti-Xa levels to monitor my patient on IV heparin infusion?

Despite more than half a century of use unfractionated heparin (UFH), the optimal method to monitor its anticoagulation effect remains unclear, with arguments for and against continued use of activated partial thromboplastin time, aPTT) vs switching to antifactor Xa heparin assay (anti-Xa HA). 1-4

The advantage of aPTT include decades of use and familiarity by providers, and its relative accessibility, ease of automation and cost.1 Its disadvantages include variation among the sensitivities of different aPTT reagents as well as susceptibility to factors that do not reflect intrinsic heparin activity (eg, liver dysfunction, hypercoagulable states). 1,2 Thus patients may receive unnecessarily high or low heparin doses because of physiologic and non-physiologic influences on aPTT.

In contrast, since anti-XA HA measures the inhibition of a single enzyme (factor Xa)1, it is a more direct measurement of heparin activity, with less variability and minimal interference by certain biological factors (eg, lupus anticoagulants). Anti-Xa monitoring may also improve the time to therapeutic anticoagulation and lead to fewer dose adjustments compared to aPTT monitoring.2

The disadvantages of anti-Xa HA include inaccuracy in the setting of hypertriglyceridemia (>360 mg/dL), hyperbilirubinemia (total bilirubin >6.6 mg/dL), recent use of low molecular weight heparin, fondaparinux and direct oral factor Xa inhibitors. Its relative expense and generally less laboratory availability among healthcare facilities may also limit its use in monitoring patients on therapeutic UFH. 1-3

Somewhat unsettling is the frequent discordance between aPTT and anti-Xa values having been reported in 46% to 60% of instances that may result in either thromboembolic or bleeding complications. 1,4 One study reported that aPTT may be therapeutic only 35% of the time that anti-Xa is also therapeutic! 2

What’s clearly missing are definitive studies that can shed light on the clinical impact of these intriguing findings on patient outcomes. So stay tuned!

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free! Thank you!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Guervil DJ, Rosenberg AF, Winterstein AG, et al. Activated partial thromboplastin time versus antifactory Xa heparin assay in monitoring unfractionated heparin by continuous intravenous infusion. Ann Pharmacother 2011;45:861-68. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21712506
  2. Whitman-Purves E, Coons, JC, Miller T, et al. Performance of Anti-factor Xa versus activated partial thromboplastin time for heparin monitoring using multiple nomograms. Clinical and Applied Thromosis/Hemostasis 2018;24:310-16. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29212374
  3. Fruge KS, Lee YR. Comparison of unfractionated heparin protocols using antifactory XA monitoring or activated partial thrombin time monitoring. Am J Health-System Pharmacy. 2015; 72: S90-S97, https://doi.org/10.2146/sp150016
  4. Samuel S, Allison TA, Sharaf S, et al. Antifactor XA levels vs activated partial thromboplastin time for monitoring unfractionated heparin. A pilot study. J Clin Pharm Ther 2016;41:499-502.
  5. doi:10.1111/jcpt.12415. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27381025
Should I use aPTT or anti-Xa levels to monitor my patient on IV heparin infusion?

My hospitalized patient has developed hyperkalemia while on heparin prophylaxis. Can heparin really cause hyperkalemia and what is its mechanism?

Heparin is one of the most overlooked causes of hyperkalemia in hospitalized patients, occurring in 5-8% of treated patients, including those on thromboprophylaxis1.

The mechanism of heparin-induced hyperkalemia appears to be through suppression of aldosterone synthesis by inhibiting the function of the glomerulosa zone of the adrenal medulla2,3.  Such inhibitory action is usually of no consequence when renal function is normal and potassium excretion is not otherwise impaired.

The risk of heparin-induced hyperkalemia is increased in the elderly, those with preexisting diabetes mellitus or renal insufficiency, as well patients on concomitant use of certain drugs such as spironolactone, ACE inhibitors, NSAIDs, and trimethoprim2

Hyperkalemia is usually detected after at least 3-4 days of treatment with subcutaneous heparin, and usually resolves within a few days of  discontinuation of therapy1,2.  Fractionated heparin products such as enoxaparin may also be associated with hyperkalemia2 but the risk appears to be lower1.

Fludrocortisone has been used to normalize serum potassium in patients who  remain on heparin.4

Liked this post? Download the app and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox! Thank you!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Potti A, Danielson B, Badreddine R, et al. Potassium homeostasis in patients receiving prophylactic enoxaparin therapy. J Thromb Haemost 2004;2:1208-9. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2004.00791.x/pdf
  2. Thomas CM, Thomas J, Smeeton F, et al. Heparin-induced hyperkalemia. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2008;80:e7-e8. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18343525
  3.  Liu AA, Bui T, Nguyen HV, et al. Subcutaneous unfractionated heparin-induced hyperkalemia in an elderly patient. Australas J Ageing 2009;28:97. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19566805
  4. Brown G. Fludrocortisone for heparin-induced hyperkalemia. CJHP 2011;64:463-4. https://www.cjhp-online.ca/index.php/cjhp/article/view/1091/1394

 

My hospitalized patient has developed hyperkalemia while on heparin prophylaxis. Can heparin really cause hyperkalemia and what is its mechanism?