Isabelle Gouin-Thibault, Alexandre Mansour, Michael Hardy, Pierre Guéret, Emmanuel de Maistre, Virginie Siguret, Adam Cuker, François Mullier, Thomas Lecompte
{"title":"治疗强度非减量肝素的管理:关于关键点的叙述性综述。","authors":"Isabelle Gouin-Thibault, Alexandre Mansour, Michael Hardy, Pierre Guéret, Emmanuel de Maistre, Virginie Siguret, Adam Cuker, François Mullier, Thomas Lecompte","doi":"10.1055/a-2359-0987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nowadays, unfractionated heparin (UFH) use is limited to selected patient groups at high risk of both bleeding and thrombosis (patients in cardiac surgery, in intensive care unit, and patients with severe renal impairment), rendering its management extremely challenging, with many unresolved questions despite decades of use. In this narrative review, we revisit the fundamental concepts of therapeutic anticoagulation with UFH and address five key points, summarizing controversies underlying the use of UFH and discussing the few recent advances in the field: (1) laboratory tests for UFH monitoring have significant limitations; (2) therapeutic ranges are not well grounded; (3) the actual influence of antithrombin levels on UFH's anticoagulant activity is not well established; (4) the concept of UFH resistance lacks supporting data; (5) scarce data are available on UFH use beyond acute venous thromboembolism. We therefore identified key issues to be appropriately addressed in future clinical research: (1) while anti-Xa assays are often considered as the preferred option, we call for a vigorous action to improve understanding of the differences between types of anti-Xa assays and to solve the issue of the usefulness of added dextran; (2) therapeutic ranges for UFH, which were defined decades ago using reagents no longer available, have not been properly validated and need to be confirmed or reestablished; (3) UFH dose adjustment nomograms require full validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94220,"journal":{"name":"TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis","volume":"8 3","pages":"e297-e307"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11486528/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Management of Therapeutic-intensity Unfractionated Heparin: A Narrative Review on Critical Points.\",\"authors\":\"Isabelle Gouin-Thibault, Alexandre Mansour, Michael Hardy, Pierre Guéret, Emmanuel de Maistre, Virginie Siguret, Adam Cuker, François Mullier, Thomas Lecompte\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2359-0987\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Nowadays, unfractionated heparin (UFH) use is limited to selected patient groups at high risk of both bleeding and thrombosis (patients in cardiac surgery, in intensive care unit, and patients with severe renal impairment), rendering its management extremely challenging, with many unresolved questions despite decades of use. In this narrative review, we revisit the fundamental concepts of therapeutic anticoagulation with UFH and address five key points, summarizing controversies underlying the use of UFH and discussing the few recent advances in the field: (1) laboratory tests for UFH monitoring have significant limitations; (2) therapeutic ranges are not well grounded; (3) the actual influence of antithrombin levels on UFH's anticoagulant activity is not well established; (4) the concept of UFH resistance lacks supporting data; (5) scarce data are available on UFH use beyond acute venous thromboembolism. We therefore identified key issues to be appropriately addressed in future clinical research: (1) while anti-Xa assays are often considered as the preferred option, we call for a vigorous action to improve understanding of the differences between types of anti-Xa assays and to solve the issue of the usefulness of added dextran; (2) therapeutic ranges for UFH, which were defined decades ago using reagents no longer available, have not been properly validated and need to be confirmed or reestablished; (3) UFH dose adjustment nomograms require full validation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94220,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis\",\"volume\":\"8 3\",\"pages\":\"e297-e307\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11486528/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2359-0987\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2359-0987","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Management of Therapeutic-intensity Unfractionated Heparin: A Narrative Review on Critical Points.
Nowadays, unfractionated heparin (UFH) use is limited to selected patient groups at high risk of both bleeding and thrombosis (patients in cardiac surgery, in intensive care unit, and patients with severe renal impairment), rendering its management extremely challenging, with many unresolved questions despite decades of use. In this narrative review, we revisit the fundamental concepts of therapeutic anticoagulation with UFH and address five key points, summarizing controversies underlying the use of UFH and discussing the few recent advances in the field: (1) laboratory tests for UFH monitoring have significant limitations; (2) therapeutic ranges are not well grounded; (3) the actual influence of antithrombin levels on UFH's anticoagulant activity is not well established; (4) the concept of UFH resistance lacks supporting data; (5) scarce data are available on UFH use beyond acute venous thromboembolism. We therefore identified key issues to be appropriately addressed in future clinical research: (1) while anti-Xa assays are often considered as the preferred option, we call for a vigorous action to improve understanding of the differences between types of anti-Xa assays and to solve the issue of the usefulness of added dextran; (2) therapeutic ranges for UFH, which were defined decades ago using reagents no longer available, have not been properly validated and need to be confirmed or reestablished; (3) UFH dose adjustment nomograms require full validation.