BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of off-label use of recombinant factor VIIa in patients without hemophilia are contested. We performed a systematic review to assess the effectiveness and safety of such use. METHODS: We searched electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials comparing recombinant factor VIIa with placebo in any patient population except those with hemophilia up to January 2010. Eligible articles were assessed for inclusion, data were extracted, and study quality was evaluated. Outcomes included mortality, blood loss, requirements for red blood cell transfusion, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic events. RESULTS: We identified 26 trials: 14 on off-label prophylactic use of recombinant factor VIIa (n = 1137) and 12 on off-label therapeutic use (n = 2538). In the studies on prophylactic use, we found no significant difference in mortality or thromboembolic events between the treatment and placebo groups. We found modest benefits favouring recombinant factor VIIa in blood loss (weighted mean difference -276 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] -411 to -141 mL), red blood cell transfusion (weighted mean difference -281 mL, 95% CI -433 to -129 mL) and number of patients transfused (relative risk 0.71, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99). In the therapeutic trials, we found a nonsignificant decrease in mortality and a nonsignificant increase in thromboembolic events but no difference in control of bleeding or red blood cell transfusion. INTERPRETATION: Clinically significant benefits of recombinant factor VIIa as a general hemostatic agent in patients without hemophilia remain unproven. Given its potential risks, such use cannot be recommended, and in most cases, it should be restricted to clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of off-label use of recombinant factor VIIa in patients without hemophilia are contested. We performed a systematic review to assess the effectiveness and safety of such use. METHODS: We searched electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials comparing recombinant factor VIIa with placebo in any patient population except those with hemophilia up to January 2010. Eligible articles were assessed for inclusion, data were extracted, and study quality was evaluated. Outcomes included mortality, blood loss, requirements for red blood cell transfusion, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic events. RESULTS: We identified 26 trials: 14 on off-label prophylactic use of recombinant factor VIIa (n = 1137) and 12 on off-label therapeutic use (n = 2538). In the studies on prophylactic use, we found no significant difference in mortality or thromboembolic events between the treatment and placebo groups. We found modest benefits favouring recombinant factor VIIa in blood loss (weighted mean difference -276 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] -411 to -141 mL), red blood cell transfusion (weighted mean difference -281 mL, 95% CI -433 to -129 mL) and number of patients transfused (relative risk 0.71, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99). In the therapeutic trials, we found a nonsignificant decrease in mortality and a nonsignificant increase in thromboembolic events but no difference in control of bleeding or red blood cell transfusion. INTERPRETATION: Clinically significant benefits of recombinant factor VIIa as a general hemostatic agent in patients without hemophilia remain unproven. Given its potential risks, such use cannot be recommended, and in most cases, it should be restricted to clinical trials.
Authors: Philip W Friederich; Christiaan P Henny; Embert J Messelink; Mark G Geerdink; Tymen Keller; Karl-Heinz Kurth; Harry R Büller; Marcel Levi Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-01-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Raymond M Planinsic; Jan van der Meer; Giuliano Testa; Luis Grande; Angel Candela; Robert J Porte; R Mark Ghobrial; Helena Isoniemi; Peter Billeskov Schelde; Elisabeth Erhardtsen; Goran Klintmalm; Sukru Emre Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Stephan A Mayer; Nikolai C Brun; Kamilla Begtrup; Joseph Broderick; Stephen Davis; Michael N Diringer; Brett E Skolnick; Thorsten Steiner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-02-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J Peter A Lodge; Sven Jonas; Elie Oussoultzoglou; Massimo Malagó; Christian Jayr; Daniel Cherqui; Matthias Anthuber; Darius F Mirza; Luce Kuhlman; Wolf-Otto Bechstein; Juan Carlos Meneu Díaz; Jack Tartiere; Daniel Eyraud; Marianne Fridberg; Elisabeth Erhardtsen; Oliver Mimoz Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Stephan A Mayer; Nikolai C Brun; Joseph Broderick; Stephen Davis; Michael N Diringer; Brett E Skolnick; Thorsten Steiner Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-11-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Veronica Yank; C Vaughan Tuohy; Aaron C Logan; Dena M Bravata; Kristan Staudenmayer; Robin Eisenhut; Vandana Sundaram; Donal McMahon; Ingram Olkin; Kathryn M McDonald; Douglas K Owens; Randall S Stafford Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-04-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Amanda Zatta; Zoe Mcquilten; Rangi Kandane-Rathnayake; James Isbister; Scott Dunkley; John Mcneil; Peter Cameron; Louise Phillips Journal: Blood Transfus Date: 2014-06-05 Impact factor: 3.443
Authors: Ashish Goel; Sukesh Chandran Nair; Auro Viswabandya; Vinodh P Masilamani; Shoma V Rao; Alice George; Annie Regi; Ruby Jose; Uday Zachariah; Kandasamy Subramani; C E Eapen; George Chandy Journal: Indian J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-03-10