No abstract

IMPORTANCE Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who use a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and request elective surgery or procedure present a common clinical situation yet perioperative management is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To investigate the safety of a standardized perioperative DOAC management strategy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Perioperative Anticoagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation (PAUSE) cohort study conducted at 23 clinical centers in Canada, the United States, and Europe enrolled and screened patients from August 1, 2014, through July 31, 2018. Participants (n = 3007) had AF; were 18 years of age or older; were long-term users of apixaban, dabigatran etexilate, or rivaroxaban; were scheduled for an elective surgery or procedure; and could adhere to the DOAC therapy interruption protocol. INTERVENTIONS A simple standardized perioperative DOAC therapy interruption and resumption strategy based on DOAC pharmacokinetic properties, procedure-associated bleeding risk, and creatinine clearance levels. The DOAC regimens were omitted for 1 day before a low-bleeding-risk procedure and 2 days before a high-bleeding-risk procedure. The DOAC regimens were resumed 1 day after a low-bleeding-risk procedure and 2 to 3 days after a high-bleeding-risk procedure. Follow-up of patients occurred for 30 days after the operation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Major bleeding and arterial thromboembolism (ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and transient ischemic attack) and the proportion of patients with an undetectable or minimal residual anticoagulant level (<50 ng/mL) at the time of the procedure. RESULTS The 3007 patients with AF (mean [SD] age of 72.5 [9.39] years; 1988 men [66.1%]) comprised 1257 (41.8%) in the apixaban cohort, 668 (22.2%) in the dabigatran cohort, and 1082 (36.0%) in the rivaroxaban cohort; 1007 patients (33.5%) had a high-bleeding-risk procedure. The 30-day postoperative rate of major bleeding was 1.35% (95% CI, 0%-2.00%) in the apixaban cohort, 0.90% (95% CI, 0%-1.73%) in the dabigatran cohort, and 1.85% (95% CI, 0%-2.65%) in the rivaroxaban cohort. The rate of arterial thromboembolism was 0.16% (95% CI, 0%-0.48%) in the apixaban cohort, 0.60% (95% CI, 0%-1.33%) in the dabigatran cohort, and 0.37% (95% CI, 0%-0.82%) in the rivaroxaban cohort. In patients with a high-bleeding-risk procedure, the rates of major bleeding were 2.96% (95% CI, 0%-4.68%) in the apixaban cohort and 2.95% (95% CI, 0%-4.76%) in the rivaroxaban cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this study, patients with AF who had DOAC therapy interruption for elective surgery or procedure, a perioperative management strategy without heparin bridging or coagulation function testing was associated with low rates of major bleeding and arterial thromboembolism.

The prevalence of occult cancer was low among patients with a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism. Routine screening with CT of the abdomen and pelvis did not provide a clinically significant benefit. (Funded by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada; SOME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00773448.).

Central venous catheters are widely used in the care of patients with cancer. Indwelling catheters are associated with upper extremity deep venous thrombosis in some patients, and recognition of this entity is an important aspect of treating patients with malignancies. This article will review the incidence, pathogenesis, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prophylaxis of catheter-associated thrombosis in patients with malignancy. The care of pediatric patients with malignancy and catheter-associated thrombosis will also be addressed.

A State of the Art lecture titled “What’s New in VTE Risk and Prevention in Orthopedic Surgery” was presented at the ISTH congress in 2019. Patients undergoing orthopedic surgery have long been recognized to be at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and were among the first patient groups to be studied in VTE prophylaxis trials. From the late 1950s to 2010s, prophylaxis trials in major orthopedic surgery tended to focus on venographic deep vein thrombosis and assessed thromboprophylaxis in all patients based on a population approach. In general, anticoagulants were favored over mechanical prophylaxis or aspirin, and longer‐duration prophylaxis was favored over shorter durations. As discussed in this paper, more recently, orthopedic prophylaxis has started to become more nuanced and individualized. Modern trials are focusing on symptomatic VTE as outcomes; there has been a resurgence in interest in aspirin for prophylaxis, and there has been a slow move to studying ways to evaluate VTE risk in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery and recommending thromboprophylaxis to patients based on individual attributes, in whom risk stratification and weighing of benefit versus risk of thromboprophylaxis is becoming key. We also touch on VTE risk and guideline recommendations to prevent VTE in 2 other commonly encountered orthopedic populations: patients undergoing knee arthroscopy and those with distal leg fractures. Finally, we summarize relevant new data on this topic presented during the 2019 ISTH annual congress in Melbourne.

Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a thrombogenic condition that is difficult to treat. We evaluated rivaroxaban as a treatment option in patients with suspected or confirmed HIT. One patient had recurrent thrombosis and 9/10 patients with thrombocytopenia had platelet recovery. Rivaroxaban may be an effective and safe treatment option for HIT. Summary BackgroundRivaroxaban is a direct oral anti‐Xa inhibitor that has the potential to greatly simplify treatment of heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in this patient population, we conducted a multicenter, single‐arm, prospective cohort study of patients with suspected or confirmed HIT. Patients/MethodsTwenty‐two consecutive adults with suspected or confirmed HIT received rivaroxaban 15 mg bid until a local HIT assay result was available. Participants with a positive local assay result continued rivaroxaban 15 mg bid until platelet recovery (or until day 21 if they had acute thrombosis at study entry), then stepped down to rivaroxaban 20 mg daily until day 30. Results and ConclusionsThe primary outcome measure, incidence of new symptomatic, objectively‐confirmed venous and arterial thromboembolism at 30 days, occurred in one HIT‐positive participant (4.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0–23.5%) and one HIT‐positive participant required limb amputation despite platelet recovery. Platelet recovery was achieved in nine out of 10 HIT‐positive patients with thrombocytopenia. Rivaroxaban appears to be effective for treating patients with confirmed HIT, although the small number of patients enrolled limits precision.

Background The perioperative management of patients who take a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for atrial fibrillation and require treatment interruption for an elective surgery/procedure is a common clinical scenario for which best practices are uncertain. The Perioperative Anticoagulant Use for Surgery Evaluation (PAUSE) study is designed to address this unmet clinical need. We discuss the rationale for the PAUSE design and analysis plan as well as the rationale supporting the perioperative DOAC protocol. Methods PAUSE is a prospective study with three parallel cohorts, one for each DOAC, to assess a standardized but patient-specific perioperative management protocol for DOAC-treated patients with atrial fibrillation. The perioperative protocol accounts for DOAC type, patient's renal function and surgery/procedure-related bleeding risk. The primary study aim is to demonstrate the safety of the PAUSE protocol for the perioperative management of each DOAC. The secondary aim is to determine the effect of the pre-procedure interruption on residual anticoagulation when measured by the dilute thrombin time for dabigatran and anti-factor Xa levels for rivaroxaban and apixaban. The study hypothesis is that the perioperative management protocol for each DOAC is safe for patient care, defined by expected risks for major bleeding of 1% (80% power to exclude 2%), and for arterial thromboembolism of 0.5% (80% power to exclude 1.5%) in each DOAC group. Conclusion The PAUSE study has the potential to establish a standard-of-care approach for the perioperative management of DOAC-treated patients. The PAUSE management protocol is designed to be easily applied in clinical practice, as it is standardized and also patient specific.

Management of anticoagulant therapy for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (vte) in cancer patients is complex because of an increased risk of recurrent vte and major bleeding complications in those patients relative to the general population. Subgroups of patients with cancer also show variation in their risk for recurrent vte and adverse bleeding events. Accordingly, a committee of 10 Canadian clinical experts developed the consensus risk- stratification treatment algorithm presented here to provide guidance on tailoring anticoagulant treatment choices for the acute and extended treatment of symptomatic and incidental vte, to prevent recurrent vte, and to minimize the bleeding risk in patients with cancer.During a 1-day live meeting, a systematic review of the literature was performed, and a draft treatment algorithm was developed. The treatment algorithm was refined through the use of a Web-based platform and a series of online teleconferences.Clinicians using this treatment algorithm should consider the bleeding risk, the type of cancer, and the potential for drug–drug interactions in addition to informed patient preference in determining the most appropriate treatment for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. Anticoagulant therapy should be regularly reassessed as the patient’s cancer status and management change over time.