Background In the PAUSE (Perioperative Anticoagulant Use for Surgery Evaluation) Study, a simple, standardized, perioperative interruption strategy was provided for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Our objective was to define the factors associated with perioperative bleeding. Methods and Results We analyzed bleeding as the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Putative predictors of bleeding, and preoperative DOAC level were prospectively collected during recruitment. We used stratified logistic regression models for analysis. All statistical analyses were performed in R version 3.6.0. There were 3007 patients requiring perioperative DOAC interruption. More than one third of the included patients underwent a high bleeding risk procedure. The 30‐day rates of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were 3.02% in apixaban (n=1257), 2.84% in dabigatran (n=668), and 4.16% for rivaroxaban (n=1082). Multivariate analysis stratified by region found more bleeding for hypertension (odds ratio [OR], 1.79; 95% CI 1.07‐2.99; P =0.027), and prior bleeding (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.08‐2.71; P =0.021). Surgical bleed risk classification (high‐ versus low‐risk) as a predictor of bleeding was only significant in the univariate analysis. The prediction model for major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding had an area under the curve of 0.71, and the preoperative DOAC level did not improve the area under the curve of the model. Conclusions In patients treated with DOACs who required an elective surgery/procedure and were managed with standardized DOAC interruption and resumption, there we did not find reversible risk factors for bleeding, suggesting that adjustment of the PAUSE management protocol to mitigate against bleeding is not needed.

Extended thromboprophylaxis given to medically ill patients for up to 45 days following an acute hospitalization remains an emerging topic among many hospital-based health care providers. Recent advancements in the field of extended thromboprophylaxis using risk stratification and careful patient selection criteria have led to an improved safety profile of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and established net clinical benefit when given to key patient subgroups at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and low risk of bleeding. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has now approved the DOACs betrixaban and rivaroxaban for both in-hospital and extended thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients in these key subgroups, which represents more than one-quarter of hospitalized medically ill patients. This has potential to significantly reduce VTE-related morbidity and mortality for these patients. Emerging data also supports reductions in the risk of arterial thromboembolism in medically ill patients with extended thromboprophylaxis post-hospital discharge using DOACs. This article aims to review the most recent concepts of predicting and preventing VTE and to discuss emerging paradigms of extended thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medically ill patients utilizing an individualized, risk-adapted approach.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the leading preventable cause of death in hospitalized patients and data consistently show that acutely ill medical patients remain at increased risk for VTE-related morbidity and mortality in the post-hospital discharge period. Prescribing extended thromboprophylaxis for up to 45 days following an acute hospitalization in key patient subgroups that include more than one-quarter of hospitalized medically-ill patients represents a paradigm shift in the way hospital-based physicians think about VTE prevention. Advances in the field of primary thromboprophylaxis in acutely-ill medical patients using validated VTE and bleeding risk assessment models have established key patient subgroups at high risk of VTE and low risk of bleeding that may benefit from both in-hospital and extended thromboprophylaxis. The direct oral anticoagulants betrixaban and rivaroxaban are now U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved for in-hospital and extended thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients and provide net clinical benefit in these key subgroups. Coronavirus disease-2019 may predispose patients to VTE due to excessive inflammation, platelet activation, endothelial dysfunction, and hemostasis. The optimum preventive strategy for these patients requires further investigation. This article aims to review the latest concepts in predicting and preventing VTE and discuss the new era of extended thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medically ill patients.

No abstract

Introduction The Perioperative Anticoagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation (PAUSE) Study assessed a standardized perioperative management strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation who were taking a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and required an elective surgery or procedure. The aim of this substudy is to analyze the safety of this management strategy across different patient subgroups, according to four presurgical variables: (1) DOAC type and dose, (2) surgery/procedure bleed risk, (3) patient renal function, and (4) age. Methods Clinical outcomes analyzed included major bleeding (MB), arterial thromboembolism, any bleeding, and any thromboembolism. We used descriptive statistics to summarize clinical outcomes, where the frequency, proportion, and 95% confidence interval were reported. Fisher's exact tests were used for testing the null hypothesis of independence between the clinical outcome and patient characteristic, where the test p-values were reported. Results There were 3,007 patients with atrial fibrillation requiring perioperative DOAC management. There was no significant difference in bleeding or thromboembolic outcomes according to DOAC type/dose regimen, renal function, or patient age. The rate of MB was significantly higher with high bleed risk procedures than low bleed risk procedures in apixaban-treated patients (2.9 vs. 0.59%; p < 0.01), but not in dabigatran-treated patients (0.88 vs. 0.91%; p = 1.0) or rivaroxaban-treated patients (2.9 vs. 1.3%; p = 0.06). The risk for thromboembolism did not differ according to surgery/procedure-related bleed risk. Conclusion Our results suggest that in DOAC-treated patients who received standardized perioperative management, surgical bleed risk is an important determinant of bleeding but not thromboembolic outcomes, although this finding was not consistent across all DOACs. There were no differences in bleeding and thromboembolism according to DOAC type and dose, renal function, or age.

Immunoglobulin D multiple myeloma (IgD MM) is a rare isotype of multiple myeloma (MM), comprising less than 2% of all cases. It is often associated with advanced disease at the time of diagnosis, an aggressive clinical course, and shorter overall survival (OS) than other subtypes of MM. There is an increased frequency of undetectable or small monoclonal (M-) protein levels on electrophoresis, hypercalcemia, anemia, lytic bony lesions, and renal failure. However, given the rarity of the disease, there are few cases of IgD MM described in the literature. Given the very small amount of IgD immunoglobulins, they may form very small or undetectable M spike on electrophoresis, making the diagnostic error in diagnosing this specific subgroup very easy. Treatment for MM has seen significant advancement, especially over the last decade, with the advent of medications such as proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and monoclonal antibodies. It is important to understand how IgD MM responds to these newer agents and why this disease continues to be associated with poor outcomes despite advancements in treatment. Small clinical studies on patients with IgD MM show better outcomes following a combination of high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) compared to standard chemotherapy. Given the rarity of the disease, there are no large studies done to see the effectiveness of these treatments, and most of the data are derived from small case series. We report a case of IgD kappa MM that was incidentally discovered following a traumatic bicycle accident. The patient started treatment with bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) as an inpatient while he was in the rehabilitation unit and was later switched to bortezomib, dexamethasone, and lenalidomide (VRd) as an outpatient. He has now completed seven cycles and successfully underwent autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

No abstract

Heart failure (HF) represents a significant financial burden to the US health care system, affecting approximately 5.7 million Americans. By 2030, the prevalence of HF is expected to increase by 23%. Clinicians generally evaluate volume status in patients with HF by visualizing jugular venous distension to estimate right atrial pressure; a method with an estimated accuracy of only 50%. Currently, the only endorsed methods for acute HF diagnosis in the 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC) guidelines are brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) or Nterminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), pre-discharge BNP or NT-proBNP, and myocardial fibrosis markers. However, serial testing of BNP to monitor therapy remains controversial. Moreover, an elevated BNP cannot be attributed solely to a cardiac cause. Given the limitations of the current methods, a robust tool is needed to reliably assess volume status in HF patients. It is now known that hemodynamic congestion from increases in intracardiac pressure occurs days to weeks prior to the onset of typical HF symptoms, such as weight gain and shortness of breath. It has been postulated that assessing the inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter with a portable ultrasound, may be the simple, reliable, and cost-effective method of evaluating right atrial pressure, and thus, the severity of HF. Given this exciting new tool in assessing volume status in patients with HF, we pose the question of whether this imaging modality can be used to risk-stratify patients and guide management. The aim of this paper is to highlight the many benefits of portable ultrasound in assessing volume status in this population, and to discuss whether this imaging modality can help guide physicians in the management of their HF patients.