-
Medicina Clinica Jul 2023The objective of the systematic review is to analyze the efficacy of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in the prophylaxis of thrombosis in antiphospholipid... (Review)
Review
The objective of the systematic review is to analyze the efficacy of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in the prophylaxis of thrombosis in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). We searched for clinical trials, cohort studies and meta-analyses published from January 1, 2012 to September 30, 2022. Articles that analyzed the efficacy of DOAC in the prevention of thrombosis recurrence, with or without comparison with antivitamin K (VKA) drugs, were selected. DOACs, specifically rivaroxaban and apixaban, were significantly less effective than VKAs in preventing recurrence of thrombosis in patients with APS and prior arterial thrombosis or the concomitant presence of two or three different antiphospholipid antibodies. The proportion of patients with severe bleeding as side effect are similar in those treated with DOAC and with VKA. The results argue against the use of DOAC in the treatment of patients with thrombotic APS.
Topics: Humans; Antiphospholipid Syndrome; Anticoagulants; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Warfarin; Thrombosis; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 37105842
DOI: 10.1016/j.medcli.2023.03.011 -
Pharmacological Research Apr 2021Anticoagulants are essential in the prevention of venous thromboembolism. However, the effectiveness and safety of different anticoagulants have always been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Anticoagulants are essential in the prevention of venous thromboembolism. However, the effectiveness and safety of different anticoagulants have always been controversial. Therefore, we aimed to expand the sample of anticoagulant results and rank the efficacy and safety of 19 anticoagulants in the prevention of venous thromboembolism when total knee or total hip arthroplasty procedure is performed.
METHODS
A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials of adult patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty were conducted. The trials were identified from PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases, in which anticoagulants were used as interventions randomized controlled trial. The incidence of venous embolism and bleeding are the key outcomes of assessing the efficacy of intervention drugs. We used the Physical Therapy Evidence Database (PEDro) to assess risk bias and used pairwise comparison and network meta-analysis with random effects to estimate the summary relative risk. The study has been registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42020200747.
RESULTS
From the 4083 identified manuscripts, 45,067 participants from 53 randomized trials were included in the analysis and randomly assigned to 19 anticoagulants. With Enoxaparin as a control, Rivaroxaban (risk difference 0.07, 95 % credible interval 0.06 to 0.08), Edoxaban (RD 0.09, 95 % CrI 0.08 to 0.11), and Apixaban (RD 0.05, 95 % CrI 0.04 to 0.06) had the best effect in preventing VTE. However, in terms of comprehensive bleeding rate, Apixaban, Edoxaban, and Darexaban were the most effective and stable. Although effective in preventing VTE, bleeding remains relatively high in Rivaroxaban. Enoxaparin is low-molecular-weight heparin that is widely used in clinics, and although its overall efficacy is not the best, its efficacy and safety are very stable.
CONCLUSION
According to the available data, Apixaban, Edoxaban, and Darexaban are better than any anticoagulants in the prevention of VTE and bleeding during total knee or total hip arthroplasty. In our study, Fondaparinux, Eribaxaban, Dalteparin, Betrixaban, Bemiparin, Reviparin, Acenocoumarol, and Tinzaparin were scarce in the included studies, therefore, more evidence is needed to prove their efficacy and safety.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Enoxaparin; Hemorrhage; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Thiazoles; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 33540046
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105438 -
Pharmacological Research Oct 2020Ticagrelor was related to bradycardia in DISPERSE-II trial. This risk has been integrated into the European risk-management plan, and its use is warned in at-risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Ticagrelor was related to bradycardia in DISPERSE-II trial. This risk has been integrated into the European risk-management plan, and its use is warned in at-risk patients. Nevertheless, this risk was not systematically assessed nor measured.
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the risk of bradyarrhythmia associated with ticagrelor.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA-SOURCE
MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ISI web of Science, clinicaltrial.gov, clinicaltrialsregister.eu.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in patients treated with ticagrelor or comparator(s).
META-ANALYSIS
Risk of bias in each RCT was assessed using Cochrane tool. Relative Risks (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI) were calculated for each RCT, and pooled using fixed-effect or random-effects models, when appropriate. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. A potential publication bias was searched.
RESULTS
Among 82 eligible studies, event data were missing for 56 studies, due to detected reporting bias (i.e. inability to confirm zero events). Fifteen RCTs were selected and the combined RR of bradyarrhythmia was 1.15 (95 %CI 1.05-1.26), and 1.29 (1.02-1.65) for severe bradyarrhythmia. The risk appeared to be dose dependent. Restricting the analysis only to RCTs performed in patients without previous bradyarrhythmia resulted in a non-increased risk.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis confirmed the risk of bradyarrhythmia or severe bradyarrhythmia related to ticagrelor, and its use in patients without previous bradycardia was effective in preventing it. The evidence coming from this meta-analysis was low to moderate due to missing outcome in 2/3 of eligible studies. Waiting for access to these data, the use of ticagrelor in patients with risk factors of bradycardias should be avoided.
Topics: Aged; Bradycardia; Female; Heart Rate; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Ticagrelor
PubMed: 32687950
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105089 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2014Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events in patients including those receiving anticoagulation treatments. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events in patients including those receiving anticoagulation treatments.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and oral anticoagulants for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search for studies of anticoagulation in cancer patients including 1. a February 2013 electronic search of: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 12, 2012), MEDLINE, and EMBASE; 2. a handsearch of conference proceedings; 3. checking of references of included studies; 4. use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed; and 5. a search of clinicaltrials.gov for ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long-term treatment with LMWH versus oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonist (VKA) or ximelagatran) in patients with cancer and symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Using a standardized data form, we extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest: survival, recurrent VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and postphlebitic syndrome. We assessed the quality of evidence at the outcome level following the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Of 9559 identified citations, 10 RCTs (11 reports) were eligible and reported data for 1981 patients with cancer. We excluded 14 studies in which patients with cancer constituted study subgroups, but did not report outcome data for them. Meta-analysis of seven RCTs comparing LMWH with VKA found no statistically significant survival benefit (hazard ratio (HR) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.14) but a statistically significant reduction in VTE (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.71). The remaining findings did not exclude a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared with VKA for the outcomes of major bleeding (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.52 to 2.19), minor bleeding (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.55), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.66). We judged the quality of evidence as low for mortality, major bleeding, and minor bleeding, and as moderate for recurrent VTE.One RCT comparing dabigatran with VKA did not exclude beneficial or harmful effects of one agent over the other. One RCT comparing six months' extension of anticoagulation with 18 months of ximelagatran 24 mg twice daily versus no extended ximelagatran did not exclude beneficial or harmful effects for the outcomes of reduction in VTE, mortality, and minor bleeding. One RCT comparing once-weekly subcutaneous injection of idraparinux for three or six months versus standard treatment (parenteral anticoagulation followed by warfarin or acenocoumarol) suggested a reduction in recurrent VTE (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.14 to 1.11) at six months, but did not exclude beneficial or harmful effects for the outcomes of mortality (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.48) and major bleeding (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.39 to 2.83).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer, LMWH compared with VKA reduces venous thromboembolic events but not mortality. The decision for a patient with cancer and VTE to start long-term LMWH versus oral anticoagulation should balance the benefits and harms and integrate the patient's values and preferences for the important outcomes and alternative management strategies.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Benzylamines; Dabigatran; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Neoplasms; Oligosaccharides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Venous Thromboembolism; Vitamin K; beta-Alanine
PubMed: 25004410
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006650.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2018Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events, especially in people receiving anticoagulation treatments. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events, especially in people receiving anticoagulation treatments.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in people with cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted a literature search including a major electronic search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching conference proceedings; checking references of included studies; use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and a search for ongoing studies in trial registries. As part of the living systematic review approach, we run searches continually, incorporating new evidence after it is identified. Last search date 14 May 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of long-term treatment with LMWHs, DOACs or VKAs in people with cancer and symptomatic VTE.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data in duplicate on study characteristics and risk of bias. Outcomes included: all-cause mortality, recurrent VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and health-related quality of life (QoL). We assessed the certainty of the evidence at the outcome level following the GRADE approach (GRADE handbook).
MAIN RESULTS
Of 15,785 citations, including 7602 unique citations, 16 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 5167 people with cancer and VTE.Low molecular weight heparins versus vitamin K antagonistsEight studies enrolling 2327 participants compared LMWHs with VKAs. Meta-analysis of five studies probably did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWHs compared to VKAs on mortality up to 12 months of follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.13; risk difference (RD) 0 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 45 fewer to 48 more; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of four studies did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWHs compared to VKAs on major bleeding (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.12; RD 4 more per 1000, 95% CI 19 fewer to 48 more, moderate-certainty evidence) or minor bleeding (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.27; RD 38 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 92 fewer to 47 more; low-certainty evidence), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.69). Meta-analysis of five studies showed that LMWHs probably reduced the recurrence of VTE compared to VKAs (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.77; RD 53 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 29 fewer to 72 fewer, moderate-certainty evidence).Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonistsFive studies enrolling 982 participants compared DOACs with VKAs. Meta-analysis of four studies may not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of DOACs compared to VKAs on mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.21; RD 12 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 51 fewer to 37 more; low-certainty evidence), recurrent VTE (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.31; RD 14 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 27 fewer to 12 more; low-certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.57, RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 22 fewer to 20 more; low-certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.22; RD 21 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 54 fewer to 28 more; low-certainty evidence). One study reporting on DOAC versus VKA was published as abstract so is not included in the main analysis.Direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparinsTwo studies enrolling 1455 participants compared DOAC with LMWH. The study by Raskob did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of DOACs compared to LMWH on mortality up to 12 months of follow-up (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.25; RD 27 more per 1000, 95% CI 30 fewer to 95 more; low-certainty evidence). The data also showed that DOACs may have shown a likely reduction in VTE recurrence up to 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.01; RD 36 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 62 fewer to 1 more; low-certainty evidence). DOAC may have increased major bleeding at 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.88; RD 29 more per 1000, 95% CI 0 fewer to 78 more; low-certainty evidence) and likely increased minor bleeding up to 12 months of follow-up compared to LMWH (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.80; RD 35 more per 1000, 95% CI 6 fewer to 92 more; low-certainty evidence). The second study on DOAC versus LMWH was published as an abstract and is not included in the main analysis.Idraparinux versus vitamin K antagonistsOne RCT with 284 participants compared once-weekly subcutaneous injection of idraparinux versus standard treatment (parenteral anticoagulation followed by warfarin or acenocoumarol) for three or six months. The data probably did not rule out a beneficial or harmful effect of idraparinux compared to VKAs on mortality at six months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.59; RD 31 more per 1000, 95% CI 62 fewer to 167 more; moderate-certainty evidence), VTE recurrence at six months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.32; RD 42 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 65 fewer to 25 more; low-certainty evidence) or major bleeding (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.56; RD 4 more per 1000, 95% CI 25 fewer to 98 more; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For the long-term treatment of VTE in people with cancer, evidence shows that LMWHs compared to VKAs probably produces an important reduction in VTE and DOACs compared to LMWH, may likely reduce VTE but may increase risk of major bleeding. Decisions for a person with cancer and VTE to start long-term LMWHs versus oral anticoagulation should balance benefits and harms and integrate the person's values and preferences for the important outcomes and alternative management strategies.Editorial note: this is a living systematic review (LSR). LSRs offer new approaches to review updating in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Benzylamines; Dabigatran; Hemorrhage; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Neoplasms; Oligosaccharides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Venous Thromboembolism; Vitamin K; beta-Alanine
PubMed: 29920657
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006650.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2012People who have had a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or non-disabling ischaemic stroke have an annual risk of major vascular events of between 4% and 11%. Aspirin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
People who have had a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or non-disabling ischaemic stroke have an annual risk of major vascular events of between 4% and 11%. Aspirin reduces this risk by 20% at most. Secondary prevention trials after myocardial infarction indicate that treatment with vitamin K antagonists is associated with a risk reduction approximately twice that of treatment with antiplatelet therapy.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of vitamin K antagonists and antiplatelet therapy in the secondary prevention of vascular events after cerebral ischaemia of presumed arterial origin.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 15 September 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE (2008 to September 2011) and EMBASE (2008 to September 2011). In an effort to identify further relevant trials we searched ongoing trials registers and reference lists. We also contacted authors of published trials for further information and unpublished data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials of oral anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonists (warfarin, phenprocoumon or acenocoumarol) versus antiplatelet therapy for long-term secondary prevention after recent transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke of presumed arterial origin.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight trials with a total of 5762 participants. The data showed that anticoagulants (in any intensity) are not more efficacious in the prevention of vascular events than antiplatelet therapy (medium intensity anticoagulation: relative risk (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 1.14; high intensity anticoagulation: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.13). There is no evidence that treatment with low intensity anticoagulation gives a higher bleeding risk than treatment with antiplatelet agents: RR 1.27 (95% CI 0.79 to 2.03). However, it was clear that medium and high intensity anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists, with an INR of 2.0 to 4.5, were not safe because they yielded a higher risk of major bleeding complications (medium intensity anticoagulation: RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.94; high intensity anticoagulation: RR 9.0, 95% CI 3.9 to 21).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For the secondary prevention of further vascular events after TIA or minor stroke of presumed arterial origin, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that vitamin K antagonists in any dose are not more efficacious than antiplatelet therapy and that medium and high intensity anticoagulation leads to a significant increase in major bleeding complications.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Cause of Death; Hemorrhage; Humans; International Normalized Ratio; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention; Stroke; Vitamin K
PubMed: 22972051
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001342.pub3 -
Haematologica Jul 2004Excessive anticoagulation is a frequent complication of anticoagulant therapy. The risk of hemorrhage approximately doubles for each one point increase in the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Excessive anticoagulation is a frequent complication of anticoagulant therapy. The risk of hemorrhage approximately doubles for each one point increase in the International Normalized Ratio (INR) above 3.0. Reducing a prolonged INR to within the desired therapeutic range requires that oral anticoagulants be withheld. In addition, vitamin K may be administered. Since this latter treatment can produce rapid reductions in the INR, it must be carefully tailored to meet individual needs, balancing the risk of bleeding against the potential risk of causing thromboembolism.
METHODS
To review available literature on the management of coumarin-associated coagulopathy in asymptomatic patients, a Medline search was carried out and papers published in English from 1966 and 2003 were identified. All available information on the management of asymptomatic patients presenting with coumarin-associated coagulopathy was analyzed.
RESULTS
Following the results of clinical studies that only used an elevated INR as a surrogate end-point for the risk of bleeding, low dose oral vitamin K appears as the preferable strategy for rapidly restoring therapeutic INR levels in asymptomatic patients who present with an excessively prolonged INR due to warfarin therapy. For the treatment of patients with asymptomatic acenocoumarol-induced coagulopathy, vitamin K does not add any benefit to the strategy of simply withholding oral anticoagulant treatment.
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS
Large randomized trials using clinical end-points are now required to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations for patients with coumarin-associated coagulopathy.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Blood Coagulation Disorders; Costs and Cost Analysis; Coumarins; Hemorrhage; Humans; International Normalized Ratio; Risk Factors; Vitamin K; Warfarin; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 15257939
DOI: No ID Found -
Archivio Italiano Di Urologia,... Oct 2023Renal artery infarction (RI) is the presence of blood clot in the main renal artery or its branches causing complete or partial obstruction of the blood supply. Its...
AIM
Renal artery infarction (RI) is the presence of blood clot in the main renal artery or its branches causing complete or partial obstruction of the blood supply. Its etiology is either related with disorders of the renal vasculature or with cardiovascular diseases. Recently, the SARSCoV- 2 virus is an emerging cause of thromboembolic events and the incidence of RI is anticipated to increase after the pandemic.
METHODS
A systematic review based on COVID-19 associated RI was conducted.
PROTOCOL
A systematic review of the Medline/Pubmed and Scopus databases was conducted in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (the PRISMA statement). Search strategy and information sources: A hand-search was performed using the terms "SARS-Cov-2" OR "COVID-19" AND "renal thrombosis" OR "renal infarction" OR "renal "thromboembolism".
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
all types of publications (case reports, case series, letters to the editor, short communications) were evaluated for relevance. Inclusion criteria were: confirmed SARS-Cov-2 infection irrespectively of the age, diagnosis of RI during or after the onset of viral infection, and exclusion of other potential causes of thromboembolic event except of SARS-Cov-2. Patients with renal transplantation were also considered. Study criteria selection: after checking for relevance based on the title and the abstract, the full texts of the selected papers were retrieved and were further evaluated. Duplicated and irrelevant cases were excluded. Any disagreement was resolved by consensus with the involvement of a third reviewer. Quality of studies: The assessment of the quality case reports was based on four different domains: selection, ascertainment, casualty and reporting. Each paper was classified as "Good", "Moderate" and "Poor" for any of the four domains. Data extractions: Crucial data for the conduct of the study were extracted including: age, sex, time from SARS-Cov-2 infection till RI development, medical history, previous or current antithrombotic protection or treatment, laterality and degree of obstruction, other sites of thromboembolism, treatment for thromboembolism and SARS-Cov-2 and final outcome.
DATA ANALYSIS
methods of descriptive statistics were implicated for analysis and presentation of the data.
RESULTS
The systematic review retrieved 35 cases in 33 reports. In most cases, RI was diagnosed within a month from the SARSCov- 2 infection albeit 17 out of 35 patients were receiving or had recently received thromboprophylaxis. Right, left, bilateral and allograft obstruction was diagnosed in 7, 15, 8 and 5 patients respectively. 17 cases experienced additional extrarenal thromboembolism primarily in aorta, spleen, brain and lower limbs. Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) (usually 60-80 mg enoxaparine bid) was the primary treatment, followed by combinations of unfractionated heparin and salicylic acid, apixaban and rivaraxaban, warfarin, acenocoumarol or clopidogrel. Kidney replacement therapy was offered to five patients while invasive therapies with thrombus aspiration or catheter directed thrombolysis were performed in two. Regarding the outcomes, five of the patients died. The total renal function was preserved in 17 cases and renal impairment with or without hemodialysis was recorded in 5 patients, two of them having lost their kidney allografts.
LIMITATIONS
The majority of included studies are of moderate quality. The results and the conclusions are based on case-reports only and crucial data are dissimilarly presented or missing through the relevant publications.
CONCLUSIONS
Thromboprophylaxis may not offer adequate protection against SARS-Cov-2 induced thrombosis. Most patients could be effectively treated with conservative measures, while in more severe cases aggressive treatment could be recommended.
IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
Therapeutic doses of LMWH could be considered for protection against RI in SARS-Cov-2 cases. Interventional treatment could be offered in a minority of more severe cases after carful balancing the risks and benefits.
Topics: Humans; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Anticoagulants; Heparin; Renal Artery; Venous Thromboembolism; Thrombosis; Infarction
PubMed: 37791549
DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2023.11625 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2001Patients who are entered in clinical trials after a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or non disabling ischaemic stroke have an annual risk of important vascular events... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patients who are entered in clinical trials after a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or non disabling ischaemic stroke have an annual risk of important vascular events (death from all vascular causes, non-fatal stroke, or non-fatal myocardial infarction) of between 4 and 11 percent. Aspirin, in a daily dose of 30mg or more, offers only modest protection after cerebral ischaemia: it reduces the incidence of major vascular events by 20 percent at most. Secondary prevention trials after myocardial infarction indicate that treatment with oral anticoagulants is associated with a risk reduction approximately twice that of treatment with antiplatelet therapy.
OBJECTIVES
1) To compare the efficacy of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapy in the secondary prevention of vascular events after cerebral ischaemia of presumed arterial origin. 2) To compare the safety of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapy in the secondary prevention of vascular events after cerebral ischaemia of presumed arterial origin.
SEARCH STRATEGY
This review draws on the search strategy developed for the Stroke Group as a whole. Relevant trials were identified in the Specialised Register of Controlled Trials (last searched: June 2000). Authors of published trials were contacted for further information and unpublished data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials with concealed treatment allocation on long term (> 6 months) secondary prevention after recent (< 6 months) TIA or minor ischaemic stroke of presumed arterial origin were selected. The oral anticoagulant therapy was to be of specified intensity (by means of the International Normalised Ratio (INR)) with warfarin, phenprocoumon or acenocoumarol versus a single antiplatelet drug (or combination of antiplatelet agents).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers selected trials meeting the inclusion criteria and extracted details of randomisation methods, blinding of treatments and assessments, whether intention-to-treat analysis is possible from the published data, whether treatment groups are comparable with regard to major prognostic risk factors for outcomes, the number of patients who are excluded or lost to follow-up, definition of outcomes, and entry and exclusion criteria. The methodological quality of each trial was assessed by the two reviewers using these extracted data. In addition, target INR for anticoagulant treatment and dose and type of antiplatelet drug, duration of follow-up and the numbers of defined outcome events was recorded. The data were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Subgroup analyses with treatment INR 2.1 - 3.6 versus INR 3.0 - 4.5 was performed. Relative and absolute risk reductions were calculated by means of the statistical software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
Four trials, with a total of 1870 patients were selected. In the prevention of ischaemic stroke after cerebral ischaemia of presumed arterial origin, the available data do not allow a robust conclusion on whether anticoagulants (in any intensity) are more efficacious than antiplatelet therapy (low intensity anticoagulation RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.42, high intensity anticoagulation RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.13). Treatment with anticoagulation INR 2.1 - 3.6 does not give an importantly higher bleeding risk than treatment with antiplatelet agents (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.41). It is clear that oral anticoagulants INR 3.0 - 4.5 are not safe, because they yield a higher risk of major bleeding complications (RR 9.0, 95% CI 3.9 to 21).
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
For the secondary prevention of further vascular events after transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke of presumed arterial origin, there is insufficient evidence to justify the routine use of low intensity oral anticoagulants (INR 2.0 - 3.6). More intense anticoagulation (INR 3.0 - 4.5) is not safe and should not be used in this setting.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Cause of Death; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke
PubMed: 11687110
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001342 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2006Patients with limited cerebral ischaemia of arterial origin have an annual risk of major vascular events between 4% and 11%. Aspirin reduces this risk by 20% at most.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Patients with limited cerebral ischaemia of arterial origin have an annual risk of major vascular events between 4% and 11%. Aspirin reduces this risk by 20% at most. Secondary prevention trials after myocardial infarction indicate that treatment with oral anticoagulants is associated with a risk reduction approximately twice that of treatment with antiplatelet therapy.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapy in the secondary prevention of vascular events after cerebral ischaemia of presumed arterial origin.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (searched 16 September 2004). Authors of published trials were contacted for further information and unpublished data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials examining long-term secondary prevention after recent ischaemic stroke of presumed arterial origin were selected. The oral anticoagulant therapy had to be of specified intensity with warfarin, phenprocoumon or acenocoumarol versus antiplatelet therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. Subgroup analyses with treatment International Normalized Ratio (INR) 1.4 to 2.8 (low intensity), INR 2.1 to 3.6 (medium intensity) and INR 3.0 to 4.5 (high intensity) were performed.
MAIN RESULTS
Five trials, with 4076 patients were selected. The data do not allow a robust conclusion on whether anticoagulants are more or less efficacious in the prevention of vascular events than antiplatelet therapy (medium intensity anticoagulation relative risk (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.38 to 2.42; high intensity anticoagulation RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.13). There is no evidence that treatment with low or medium intensity anticoagulation gives a higher bleeding risk than treatment with antiplatelet agents. The relative risk for major bleeding complications for low intensity anticoagulation was 1.27 (95% CI 0.79 to 2.03) and for medium intensity anticoagulation 1.19 (95% CI 0.59 to 2.41). However, it was clear that high intensity oral anticoagulants with INR 3.0 to 4.5 were not safe, because they yielded a higher risk of major bleeding complications (RR 9.0, 95% CI 3.9 to 21).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For secondary prevention of further vascular events after limited ischaemic stroke of arterial origin, there is insufficient evidence to justify the routine use of medium-intensity oral anticoagulants; such treatment should only be used as part of a clinical trial. More intense anticoagulation is not safe and should not be used in this setting. Low-intensity anticoagulation is not likely to be more or less efficacious than aspirin.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Cause of Death; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke
PubMed: 16855967
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001342.pub2