Essentials The safety of apixaban in patients on dialysis is currently debated.Bleeding events were retrospectively compared for dialysis patients on warfarin vs apixaban.Overall bleeding events were significantly less frequent in apixaban group compared to warfarin group.Apixaban appears to be a safe and effective choice for anticoagulation in patients on dialysis. BackgroundThe use of apixaban for stroke prophylaxis or for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients maintained on dialysis is based on one single‐dose pharmacokinetic study. There is a deficiency of clinical evidence supporting safety in this population.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of apixaban compared with warfarin in dialysis patients.Patients/methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study conducted at the University of Virginia Medical Center. A total of 124 ESRD patients maintained on dialysis who either received apixaban (n = 74) or warfarin (n = 50) between January 1, 2014 and October 31, 2016 were included in the study. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare the likelihood of patients experiencing a bleeding event based on anticoagulant therapy.ResultsThe apixaban group experienced fewer overall bleeding events than the warfarin group (18.9% vs 42.0%; P = .01); this significant difference persisted in adjusted analysis (OR = 0.15; 95% CI = 0.05‐0.46; P = .001). Major bleeding events were less frequent in the apixaban group compared with patients on warfarin (5.4% vs 22.0%; P = .01). There were no recurrent ischemic strokes in either groups. A lower, non‐significant, incidence of recurrent VTE was found in patients on apixaban compared with warfarin (4.4% vs 28.6%; P = .99).ConclusionCompared to warfarin, our findings suggest that apixaban is a safe and effective alternative in patients with ESRD maintained on dialysis, with apixaban patients experiencing fewer bleeding events than warfarin patients.

Currently, inhaled iloprost offers potential benefit for patients with contraindications to bosentan, preference for non-parenteral products, ineligibility for parenteral therapy, or as adjunctive therapy with other pulmonary vasodilators. Larger, long-term clinical trials are needed to solidify the role for inhaled iloprost in the management of PAH.

No abstract

Purpose: Though previous studies have shown benefit with pharmacist-managed dosing of antibiotics, many institutions still do not offer such services. Our objective was to determine and report novel outcomes associated with the implementation of a pharmacist-managed pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic consult service and to assess the impact of direct pharmacist involvement in therapeutic drug monitoring. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients who received vancomycin or an aminoglycoside in the medical intensive care unit from January 5, 2013, to January 6, 2015, divided into 2 groups: before/after implementation of the consult service on January 6, 2014. Results: Nine-hundred sixty-two patients were included. Groups were similar at baseline. There were fewer critical values after implementation of the consult service (40.8% vs 27.3%, P < .001). The intervention group had significantly more vancomycin troughs within therapeutic range (15.4% vs 32.8%, P = .019). Time from order entry to medication administration was shorter when pharmacists entered the medication order, although this difference was nonsignificant (103 minutes vs 77 minutes, P = .054). Conclusion: Implementation of a pharmacist-managed dosing and monitoring program led to significantly decreased rates of critical value drug concentrations and increased rates of therapeutic concentrations, with a 25% (NS) decreased time-to-antibiotic administration, therefore demonstrating the additive value of the pharmacist-managed over pharmacist-monitored approach.

No abstract