scholarly journals Major bleeding events after endoscopic sphincterotomy and endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation in cirrhotic patients: A nationwide population-based cohort study

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-31
Author(s):  
Chi-Chih Wang ◽  
Ming-Chang Tsai ◽  
Ming-Hseng Tseng ◽  
Tzu-Wei Yang ◽  
Yao-Tung Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Endoscopic Sphincterotomy ◽  
Balloon Dilatation ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Cirrhotic Patients ◽  
Major Bleeding Events ◽  
Endoscopic Papillary Balloon Dilatation

scholarly journals Differences in Major Bleeding Events Between Patients With Severe Hemophilia A and Hemophilia B: A Nationwide, Population-Based Cohort Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 107602961988802
Author(s):  
Ming-Yang Shih ◽  
Jiaan-Der Wang ◽  
Jia-De Yin ◽  
Yu-Tse Tsan ◽  
Wei-Cheng Chan
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Incidence Rate ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Hemophilia B ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
On Demand ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

There has been an ongoing debate as to whether hemophilia A (HA) is more severe than hemophilia B (HB), and there are studies supporting each side of the argument. The study aimed to investigate whether any differences in major bleeding events exist between patients with severe HA and HB. A nationwide, population-based retrospective cohort study using the National Health Insurance Research Database was conducted. We compared 658 patients with severe HA and 137 patients with severe HB without inhibitors from 1997 to 2013, during the period when adult patients older than 18 years old were treated with the on-demand therapy since birth. There was no significant difference between patients with severe HA and HB in the rate of major bleeding events, with an adjusted relative ratio of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-1.71, P = .548). There was also no significant difference in the incidence rate of major bleeding events between adult patients with HA and HB with the on-demand therapy, and an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.65-1.02). However, patients with HA had a lower incidence rate of intracranial hemorrhage, with an adjusted HR of 0.44 (95% CI: 0.25-0.79). In addition, no significant difference in the frequency of major bleeding events requiring hospitalization between patients with HA and HB was found, P > .05. In conclusion, the study demonstrated that patients with severe HB encountered a similar rate of major bleeding events to those with severe HA.

Increased Incidence of Major Bleeding in Children Receiving Unfractionated Heparin for Clinical Management: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 1772-1772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley G. Mitchell ◽  
Stefan Kuhle ◽  
Patricia M. Massicotte ◽  
Patricia Vegh
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Unfractionated Heparin ◽  
Prospective Cohort Study ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Recurrent Thrombosis ◽  
Heparin Dose ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events ◽  
Relationship Of

Abstract BACKGROUND: Unfractionated heparin (UFH) is one of the most frequently prescribed drugs in paediatric tertiary care centres and is used in a diverse group of disorders including cardiopulmonary bypass, extra corporeal membrane oxygenation, dialyses and maintenance of both venous and arterial catheter patency. Dosing of UFH in children is extrapolated from adults and is assessed by either a chromogenic Anti-Xa assay or a clot-based activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). The overall objective of the study was to assess safety of current standard of practice in the use of therapeutic UFH in children. Objective #1: The primary objective was to determine the incidence of bleeding and the incidence of recurrent thrombosis in children receiving UFH. Objective #2: To assess the monitoring UFH by assessing the relationship of the aPTT and Anti-Xa heparin levels to heparin dose. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort study in nonselected children in a intensive care setting. The primary outcomes were major bleeding events and recurrent thrombosis. The secondary outcomes were assessing the APTT and Anti-Xa levels. Inclusion Criteria: Patients 〉 36 weeks gestation and 〈18 years of age requiring therapeutic doses of UFH. Exclusion Criteria: patients who received UFH for less than 1 day. Major bleeding was defined aprior as any of the following: CNS bleeding, retroperitoneal bleeding, and/or bleeding that results in stopping UFH infusion. RESULTS: Patient Population 39 patients were enrolled, 22 (56%) male, 32 (82%) < 1 year of age and 90% of which where cardiac patients. Major Bleeding events: 11/39 patients had a major bleeding event 28.2% (95% CI 15.0–44.9%). No patient had recurrent thrombosis. Relationship of aPPT and Anti-Xa to heparin dose; A total of 188 paired aPTTs and anti-Xa levels were performed. There was little correlation between aPTT and anti-Xa levels (r2=0.205) and APTT and UFH dose (r2=0.054). There was no relationship between anti-Xa levels and UFH dose (r2=0.0089). (Figure 1 and 2) Figure Figure CONCLUSIONS:. There is an unacceptably high rate of bleeding in children receiving UFH for clinical care. There is little or no relationship of aPPT and Anti-Xa to heparin dose. Clinical trials are needed to assess the appropriate use of UFH therapy in children.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Definitions for Oral Anticoagulant–Associated Major Bleeding: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 426-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Xu ◽  
Tara Gomes ◽  
Philip S. Wells ◽  
Ana Johnson ◽  
Michelle Sholzberg
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Abstract Background: Major bleeding is the most serious complication of oral anticoagulation. Consensus criteria to define major bleeding have been established by the International Society for Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH), Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI). Significant variability exists across these definitions, and their agreement for identifying oral anticoagulant (OAC) related major bleeding is unknown. Furthermore, the association between each definition and mortality in cases of OAC bleeding has not been evaluated. We therefore, sought to evaluate the agreement of cases identified as major bleeding by the ISTH, BARC and TIMI definitions, and to assess associated in-hospital (emergency department or inpatient) and 30-day mortality of cases identified by these criteria. Methods: We used an existing dataset of individuals ≥66 years in Ontario, Canada, who presented to one of five tertiary care institutions with OAC related bleeding across three cities from 2010-2015. Detailed clinical data on consecutive episodes of OAC-associated bleeding were linked to population-based databases held at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. We calculated Cohen's κ for agreement between the three major bleeding definitions, and used Pearson's χ2 to determine any differences in in-hospital and 30-day mortality for cases defined as major bleeding by ISTH, BARC and TIMI criteria. Results: We included 2,002 cases of OAC related bleeding in the analysis (460 on direct oral anticoagulants, 1,542 on warfarin). ISTH, BARC and TIMI major bleeding definitions were met in 75%, 77% and 29% of cases, respectively. 18% of cases did not meet criteria for major bleeding by any definition. Age, sex, CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED score, as well as proportion of chronic kidney disease were similar across ISTH-, BARC- and TIMI-defined cases. Over 9 in 10 cases of TIMI-defined major bleeding events involved an intracranial hemorrhage (94.4%), compared to 37% and 36% of cases identified by ISTH or BARC definitions respectively (p<0.001 across three groups). Agreement in case identification between ISTH and BARC was substantial (agreement 89%; Cohen's κ=0.69). On the other hand, agreement between TIMI and both ISTH (agreement 54%; Cohen's κ =0.24) and BARC (agreement 52%; Cohen's κ=0.21) were poor. The association between in-hospital mortality and TIMI-defined major bleeding was higher (29%) than that for ISTH and BARC (17% for both; p<0.001 for TIMI vs. ISTH and TIMI vs. BARC). The association with 30-day mortality showed a similar trend (30%, 18% and 18% for TIMI-, ISTH- and BARC- defined major bleeding events respectively; p<0.001 for TIMI vs. ISTH and TIMI vs. BARC). 6% of cases that were not categorized as major bleeding by ISTH or BARC definitions died within 30 days of hospital presentation, and this was 10% for cases not meeting criteria for TIMI major bleeding (10%, p=0.036 by Pearson's χ2). Conclusions: Among patients with OAC-associated bleeding, major bleeding events identified by ISTH and BARC criteria showed good agreement and similar prognostic utility. Meanwhile, TIMI criteria identified patients with higher clinical risk and subsequent mortality. Patients presenting with OAC-associated bleeding who did not fulfill ISTH or BARC major bleeding criteria had considerable risk of 30-day mortality and was even higher among those not meeting the TIMI criteria. Our findings suggest the need to refine current major bleeding definitions to identify additional patients at risk of death. Disclosures Wells: Bayer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Sholzberg:Amgen: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of the Alfalfa App in Warfarin Therapy Management for Patients Undergoing Venous Thrombosis Prevention and Treatment: A Cohort Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua Cao ◽  
Shaojun Jiang ◽  
Meina Lv ◽  
Tingting Wu ◽  
Wenjun Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Minor Bleeding ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Anticoagulation Management ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

BACKGROUND In the past years, the internet has enabled considerable progress in the management of chronic diseases, especially hypertension and diabetes. And it also provides novel opportunities in online anticoagulation management. Nevertheless, there is insufficient evidence regarding the effectiveness of online anticoagulation management. OBJECTIVE This study explored the effectiveness and safety of warfarin management via the Alfalfa app, so as to provide evidence in support of anticoagulant management through online services. METHODS In this retrospective, observational cohort study, 824 patients were included. In the offline group, patients went to the hospital clinic for warfarin management. In the Alfalfa app group, patients reported the dose of warfarin, current INR value and other related information through the Alfalfa app. Physicians or pharmacists used the app to adjust the dose of warfarin and determined the time for the next blood INR testing. Patients completed INR testing by point-of-care at home or hospital. The primary outcome of the study was the percentage of time in therapeutic range (TTR). Secondary outcomes included minor and major bleeding events, thrombotic events, warfarin-related emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and high INR values. RESULTS TTR and percentage of INR values in the range were significantly higher in the Alfalfa app than in the offline (79.35% vs. 52.38%, P < .001; 77.39% vs. 47.72%, P < .001, respectively). Patients managed via the Alfalfa app had lower rate of subtherapeutic (4.02% vs. 9.23%, P < .001), supratherapeutic (11.37% vs. 20.99%, P < .001), and extreme subtherapeutic INR values (6.77% vs. 21.66%, P < .001). Additionally, the Alfalfa app had lower incidences of major bleeding (0.47% vs. 3.01%, P = .005), warfarin-related emergency department visits (3.06% vs. 9.07%, P < .001), and hospital admissions (0.24% vs. 3.01%, P = .001) compared with the offline. However, the Alfalfa app had higher incidences of minor bleeding than the offline (10.59% vs. 5.01%, P = .003). There were similar incidences in extreme supratherapeutic INR values (0.44 %vs. 0.40%, P = .782) and thromboembolic events (0.24% vs. 0.25%, P = .964) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Warfarin management is superior via Alfalfa app than via offline services in terms of major bleeding events, warfarin-related emergency department visits, and hospital admissions. CLINICALTRIAL

155 THE INCIDENCE OF VTE AND MAJOR BLEEDING EVENTS IN MAJOR UROLOGIC SURGERY: A POPULATION-BASED ANALYSIS

2013 ◽  
Vol 189 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Reese ◽  
Aaron Lay ◽  
Jeffrey Leow ◽  
Daniel Welchons ◽  
Benjamin Chung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Urologic Surgery ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Abstract 3541: Do Periodic Assessments Of Bleeding Risks Identify More Patients With Major Bleeding Events? A Population-based Cohort Study Among Warfarin-treated Stroke Patients.

Stroke ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond C Seet ◽  
Alejandro A Rabinstein ◽  
Teresa J Christianson ◽  
George W Petty ◽  
Robert D Brown
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Median Duration ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Life Time ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Stroke Onset ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Warfarin Treatment ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Background We sought to determine the occurrence of major bleeding events in a population-based cohort of stroke patients with atrial fibrillation in a population-based cohort who were risk-stratified at baseline, one and five years, following initiation of warfarin treatment. Methods The resources of the Rochester Epidemiology Project Medical Linkage System were used to identify acute ischemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing warfarin treatment for secondary stroke prevention from 1980 to 1995. These patients were risk-stratified according to the HAS-BLED and HEMORRHAGES scores prior to warfarin initiation following stroke onset; these scores were reassessed one and five years later. Major bleeding was considered in patients with fatal or clinically overt bleeding associated with either transfusion of >2 units of blood or >2 g/dl decrease in hemoglobin. Results One hundred patients (mean age, 79.3 years; 68% women) were studied. Median duration of warfarin treatment was 2.4 years (interquartile range, 0.4-6.6) and duration from stroke onset to death was 3.7 years (1.1-8.8). Major bleeding events occurred in 41 patients at a median duration of 19 months (5-58) following warfarin initiation. Sixteen events occurred within a year of treatment, 25 events from years 1-5, and 14 events in patients treated for >5 years. Patients with baseline HAS-BLED scores ≥2 had higher life-time risks of major bleeding events compared with those ≤1 (95% vs 5%, p=0.002), while those with HEMORRHAGES score ≥2 had higher life-time risks of major bleeding events compared with those ≤1 (90% vs 10%, p=0.030). Periodic reassessments of these risks were associated with a higher detection of major bleeding events. Patients with an increase in the HAS-BLED scores had a higher subsequent risk of major bleeding events compared with those with no change (year one, 64% vs 34%, p=0.043; year five, 75% vs 29%, p=0.018). Similarly, patients with an increase in the HEMORRHAGES scores had a higher risks of major bleeding events compared to those with no change (year one, 57% vs 33%, p=0.063; year five, 71% vs 10%, p<0.001). Conclusions Periodic assessments of bleeding risks using prognostic scales are associated with a higher detection of major bleeding events. These scales should be periodically reassessed in the years following warfarin initiation to determine if the benefit of ongoing use outweighs the bleeding risk.

scholarly journals Intermediate vs Standard-dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to ICU: Ninety-day Results from the INSPIRATION Trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Behnood Bikdeli ◽  
Azita H Talasaz ◽  
Farid Rashidi ◽  
Hooman Bakhshandeh ◽  
Farnaz Rafiee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Arterial Thrombosis ◽  
Dose Group ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events ◽  
Prophylactic Anticoagulation ◽  
Intermediate Dose

Background: Thrombotic complications are considered among the main extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. The optimal type and duration of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy in these patients remain unknown. Methods: This manuscript reports the final (90-day) results of the Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) study. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care were randomized to intermediate-dose versus standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation for 30 days, irrespective of hospital discharge status. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or all-cause death. The main safety outcome was major bleeding. Results: Of 600 randomized patients, 562 entered the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median age [Q1, Q3]; 62 (50, 71) years; 237 (42.2%) women), of whom 336 (59.8%) survived to hospital discharge. The primary outcome occurred in 132 (47.8%) of patients assigned to intermediate-dose and 130 (45.4%) patients assigned to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.55, P=0.11). No significant differences were observed between the two groups for other efficacy outcomes, or in the landmark analysis from days 31-90. Overall, there were 7 (2.5%) major bleeding events in the intermediate-dose group (including 3 fatal events) and 4 (1.4%) major bleeding events in the standard-dose group (none fatal) (HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 0.53-6.24, P=0.33). Conclusion: Intermediate-dose compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not reduce a composite of death, treatment with ECMO, or venous or arterial thrombosis at 90-day follow-up.

A Systematic Review of Anticoagulation Strategies for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation in Critical Care.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Jayne Nelson ◽  
Brian W Johnston ◽  
Alicia Achiaa Charlotte Waite ◽  
Gedeon Lemma ◽  
Ingeborg Dorothea Welters
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Anticoagulated Patients

Background. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in critically ill patients. There is a paucity of data assessing the impact of anticoagulation strategies on clinical outcomes for general critical care patients with AF. Our aim was to assess the existing literature to evaluate the effectiveness of anticoagulation strategies used in critical care for AF. Methodology. A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PubMed databases. Studies reporting anticoagulation strategies for AF in adults admitted to a general critical care setting were assessed for inclusion. Results. Four studies were selected for data extraction. A total of 44087 patients were identified with AF, of which 17.8-49.4% received anticoagulation. The reported incidence of thromboembolic events was 0-1.4% for anticoagulated patients, and 0-1.3% in non-anticoagulated patients. Major bleeding events were reported in three studies and occurred in 7.2-8.6% of the anticoagulated patients and up to 7.1% of the non-anticoagulated patients. Conclusions. There was an increased incidence of major bleeding events in anticoagulated patients with AF in critical care compared to non-anticoagulated patients. There was no significant difference in the incidence of reported thromboembolic events within studies, between patients who did and did not receive anticoagulation. However, the outcomes reported within studies were not standardised, therefore, the generalisability of our results to the general critical care population remains unclear. Further data is required to facilitate an evidence-based assessment of the risks and benefits of anticoagulation for critically ill patients with AF.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document