Discordance and bleeding in critically ill patients with COVID-19 receiving unfractionated heparin: A comparison between aPTT and anti-factor Xa activity level monitoring

Q4 Medicine
Merijn C. Reuland , Thijs F. van Haaps , Pieter O.L.P. Broeren , Nick van Es , Claire E. Dijkslag-van der Laan , Alexander P.J. Vlaar , Michiel Coppens , Marcella C.A. Müller
{"title":"Discordance and bleeding in critically ill patients with COVID-19 receiving unfractionated heparin: A comparison between aPTT and anti-factor Xa activity level monitoring","authors":"Merijn C. Reuland ,&nbsp;Thijs F. van Haaps ,&nbsp;Pieter O.L.P. Broeren ,&nbsp;Nick van Es ,&nbsp;Claire E. Dijkslag-van der Laan ,&nbsp;Alexander P.J. Vlaar ,&nbsp;Michiel Coppens ,&nbsp;Marcella C.A. Müller","doi":"10.1016/j.tru.2025.100202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>COVID-19 is associated with hypercoagulability and an increased risk of thrombotic complications. In critically ill COVID-19 patients with thrombosis receiving unfractionated heparin (UFH), heparin resistance is frequently observed when the activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) is used for monitoring. It is unclear whether UFH monitoring with anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) is beneficial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Retrospective cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with UFH in a single center tertiary Intensive Care Unit (ICU) before and after changing treatment protocol from a nurse-driven aPTT guided to an anti-Xa guided UFH dosing protocol. Measurements of aPTT and anti-Xa were simultaneously collected to evaluate discordance. Next, bleeding events while treated using the different treatments protocols was assessed, using the validated HEME scoring system.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 149 patients with a median age of 63 years (interquartile range: 59, 70). Among the 715 samples with simultaneous measurements of aPTT and anti-Xa, discordance was observed in 57 % of samples. This was based on a low aPTT and normal anti-Xa activity in 40 %, and a normal aPTT and high anti-Xa activity in 9 %. In the aPTT period 43 of 83 patients developed any bleeding (52 %) compared to 23 of 68 patients (34 %) in the anti-Xa-guided period. In the 83 patients in the aPTT guided group, there were 43 bleeding events in 19 patients, compared to 23 bleeding events in 16 patients in the group guided by anti-Xa activity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In critically ill patients with COVID-19 receiving UFH, measurement of aPTT and anti-Xa activity are frequently discordant. Anti-Xa monitoring could potentially help in reducing the risk of bleeding.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34401,"journal":{"name":"Thrombosis Update","volume":"19 ","pages":"Article 100202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thrombosis Update","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666572725000057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

COVID-19 is associated with hypercoagulability and an increased risk of thrombotic complications. In critically ill COVID-19 patients with thrombosis receiving unfractionated heparin (UFH), heparin resistance is frequently observed when the activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) is used for monitoring. It is unclear whether UFH monitoring with anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) is beneficial.

Methods

Retrospective cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with UFH in a single center tertiary Intensive Care Unit (ICU) before and after changing treatment protocol from a nurse-driven aPTT guided to an anti-Xa guided UFH dosing protocol. Measurements of aPTT and anti-Xa were simultaneously collected to evaluate discordance. Next, bleeding events while treated using the different treatments protocols was assessed, using the validated HEME scoring system.

Results

We included 149 patients with a median age of 63 years (interquartile range: 59, 70). Among the 715 samples with simultaneous measurements of aPTT and anti-Xa, discordance was observed in 57 % of samples. This was based on a low aPTT and normal anti-Xa activity in 40 %, and a normal aPTT and high anti-Xa activity in 9 %. In the aPTT period 43 of 83 patients developed any bleeding (52 %) compared to 23 of 68 patients (34 %) in the anti-Xa-guided period. In the 83 patients in the aPTT guided group, there were 43 bleeding events in 19 patients, compared to 23 bleeding events in 16 patients in the group guided by anti-Xa activity.

Conclusion

In critically ill patients with COVID-19 receiving UFH, measurement of aPTT and anti-Xa activity are frequently discordant. Anti-Xa monitoring could potentially help in reducing the risk of bleeding.
aPTT与抗Xa因子活性水平监测在重症COVID-19患者未分离肝素治疗中的差异及出血
covid -19与高凝性和血栓性并发症风险增加相关。在接受未分离肝素(UFH)治疗的COVID-19血栓形成危重患者中,当使用活化的部分凝血活素时间(aPTT)进行监测时,经常观察到肝素耐药。目前尚不清楚用抗Xa因子(anti-Xa)监测UFH是否有益。方法回顾性分析单中心三级重症监护室(ICU)重症COVID-19危重患者在从护士驱动的aPTT引导到抗xa引导的UFH给药方案改变前后的治疗方案。同时收集aPTT和抗xa的测量值以评估不一致性。接下来,使用经过验证的HEME评分系统评估使用不同治疗方案治疗时的出血事件。结果纳入149例患者,中位年龄为63岁(四分位数范围:59,70)。在715个同时测定aPTT和anti-Xa的样品中,57%的样品存在不一致。这是基于40%的低aPTT和正常的抗xa活性,9%的aPTT正常和高抗xa活性。在aPTT治疗期间,83例患者中有43例(52%)出现出血,而在抗xa引导治疗期间,68例患者中有23例(34%)出现出血。在aPTT引导组的83例患者中,19例患者发生43例出血事件,而抗xa活性引导组的16例患者发生23例出血事件。结论新冠肺炎危重患者接受UFH治疗时,aPTT和抗xa活性测定经常不一致。抗xa监测可能有助于降低出血的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Thrombosis Update
Thrombosis Update Medicine-Hematology
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
86 days
×
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