Unfractionated heparin monitoring by anti-factor Xa versus activated partial thromboplastin time strategies during venoarterial extracorporeal life support.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Iris Feng, Tanner R Powley, Christine G Yang, Paul A Kurlansky, Lauren D Sutherland, Jonathan M Hastie, Yuji Kaku, Justin A Fried, Koji Takeda
{"title":"Unfractionated heparin monitoring by anti-factor Xa versus activated partial thromboplastin time strategies during venoarterial extracorporeal life support.","authors":"Iris Feng, Tanner R Powley, Christine G Yang, Paul A Kurlansky, Lauren D Sutherland, Jonathan M Hastie, Yuji Kaku, Justin A Fried, Koji Takeda","doi":"10.1177/02676591241309500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>No clear guidelines exist for unfractionated heparin (UFH) monitoring in adult patients on veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (VA-ECLS) for refractory cardiogenic shock. In this study, we sought to compare outcomes between anti-factor Xa (FXa) and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) strategies for UFH monitoring during VA-ECLS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a single-center, retrospective review of VA-ECLS patients who received UFH in the cardiothoracic intensive care unit between July 2019 and November 2023. Standard protocol for UFH titration was aPTT goal of 45-60 sec (<i>n</i> = 52) before September 2021, then transitioned to FXa goal of 0.1-0.2 U/mL (<i>n</i> = 50) thereafter. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline differences between cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In adjusted analyses, 89.3% of FXa patients and 76.0% of aPTT patients achieved goal range for their respective assay. Total UFH duration (4.0 vs 4.0 days, <i>p</i> = .239) and maximum weight-adjusted UFH dose (9.3 vs 9.4 U/hr/kg, <i>p</i> = .823) remained comparable between adjusted FXa and aPTT cohorts. Moreover, in-hospital mortality (50.3% vs 33.9%, <i>p</i> = .133), major bleeding events (20.6% vs 11.2%, <i>p</i> = .292), and thromboembolic events (30.1% vs 30.1%, <i>p</i> = .998) were not significantly different. Extracorporeal circuit thrombosis and cannula site bleeding were the most frequent events in both groups. Multivariate logistic regression found the FXa strategy was not a significant risk factor for the composite outcome of major bleeding or thromboembolism (OR [95% CI]: 1.539 [0.575, 4.116], <i>p</i> = .393).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In adult VA-ECLS patients at our institution, bleeding and thromboembolic complications occurred at a similar rate regardless of which UFH monitoring strategy was utilized. Further studies in larger and more institutionally diverse cohorts are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":49707,"journal":{"name":"Perfusion-Uk","volume":" ","pages":"2676591241309500"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perfusion-Uk","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02676591241309500","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: No clear guidelines exist for unfractionated heparin (UFH) monitoring in adult patients on veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (VA-ECLS) for refractory cardiogenic shock. In this study, we sought to compare outcomes between anti-factor Xa (FXa) and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) strategies for UFH monitoring during VA-ECLS.

Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective review of VA-ECLS patients who received UFH in the cardiothoracic intensive care unit between July 2019 and November 2023. Standard protocol for UFH titration was aPTT goal of 45-60 sec (n = 52) before September 2021, then transitioned to FXa goal of 0.1-0.2 U/mL (n = 50) thereafter. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline differences between cohorts.

Results: In adjusted analyses, 89.3% of FXa patients and 76.0% of aPTT patients achieved goal range for their respective assay. Total UFH duration (4.0 vs 4.0 days, p = .239) and maximum weight-adjusted UFH dose (9.3 vs 9.4 U/hr/kg, p = .823) remained comparable between adjusted FXa and aPTT cohorts. Moreover, in-hospital mortality (50.3% vs 33.9%, p = .133), major bleeding events (20.6% vs 11.2%, p = .292), and thromboembolic events (30.1% vs 30.1%, p = .998) were not significantly different. Extracorporeal circuit thrombosis and cannula site bleeding were the most frequent events in both groups. Multivariate logistic regression found the FXa strategy was not a significant risk factor for the composite outcome of major bleeding or thromboembolism (OR [95% CI]: 1.539 [0.575, 4.116], p = .393).

Conclusions: In adult VA-ECLS patients at our institution, bleeding and thromboembolic complications occurred at a similar rate regardless of which UFH monitoring strategy was utilized. Further studies in larger and more institutionally diverse cohorts are warranted.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Perfusion-Uk
Perfusion-Uk 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Perfusion is an ISI-ranked, peer-reviewed scholarly journal, which provides current information on all aspects of perfusion, oxygenation and biocompatibility and their use in modern cardiac surgery. The journal is at the forefront of international research and development and presents an appropriately multidisciplinary approach to perfusion science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信