Purpose To determine a patient’s clinical course based on the use of an activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) or heparin anti-Xa assay when transitioning from rivaroxaban or apixaban to an unfractionated heparin infusion. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted to investigate how unfractionated heparin infusions were managed at a tertiary care hospital in the setting of recent apixaban or rivaroxaban administration. Patients were separated into 2 cohorts based on the chosen heparin infusion monitoring assay: heparin anti-Xa or aPTT. The primary composite outcome was total number of bleeding and thrombotic events; the secondary composite outcome was average incidence of heparin infusion holds and rate changes per patient. Results Data were collected from 76 patients (heparin anti-Xa = 69, aPTT = 7). Due to the limited number of patients within the aPTT cohort, this data was excluded from the analysis, and heparin anti-Xa descriptive statistics were reported without statistical comparisons. In the heparin anti-Xa group, a total of 10 bleeds and 1 thrombus were discovered. Additionally, the average number of infusion holds and rate changes was 0.841 and 2.65 times per patient, respectively, for those patients monitored via heparin anti-Xa assay. Conclusion In the presence of a recently administered oral anti-Xa anticoagulant, more down-titrations occurred in the initial 6 hours of the heparin infusion when measuring anti-Xa activity, and most up-titrations occurred after 36 hours. Baseline heparin anti-Xa activity may be a useful tool to identify patients with residual plasma concentrations of apixaban and rivaroxaban to help better individualize heparin therapy.
Background There are inadequate data on the optimal strategy for transitioning factor Xa inhibitors (FXai; apixaban, rivaroxaban) to unfractionated heparin (UFH) infusions. Objective In patients transitioning from an FXai to an UFH infusion, this study compared the safety and efficacy of monitoring UFH infusions using an activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) titration scale versus utilizing an UFH-calibrated anti-Xa titration scale aided by a novel institutional guideline. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on adult patients transitioning from an FXai to an UFH infusion at 2 medical centers from June 1, 2018, to November 1, 2020. One institution utilized aPTT while the other institution primarily used UFH-calibrated anti-Xa. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, major bleeding, or new thrombosis during the hospitalization with a planned noninferiority analysis. Secondary outcomes were also collected including the amount and duration of UFH administered between cohorts. Results The incidence rate of the primary composite endpoint was 6.3% in the anti-Xa group and 11% in the aPTT group ( P < 0.001 for noninferiority, P = 0.138 for superiority) meeting noninferiority criteria. No statistical differences were seen in new thrombosis, major bleeding, or any bleeding. Conclusion and Relevance This represents the first report of a comparison between aPTT versus anti-Xa monitoring in relation to clinical outcomes for patients transitioning from an FXai to an UFH infusion. A transition guideline primarily utilizing an UFH-calibrated anti-Xa assay appears to be a safe alternative to aPTT monitoring and can aid facilities in the management of patients during these complex transitions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.