Wesley Zemrak1, Francis Manuel2, Kathryn E Smith3, Stephen Rolfe3, Timothy Hayes4, Robert L Trowbridge5, Brian Carlone3, David Seder6. 1. Department of Pharmacy, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, 04105, USA. zemraw@mmc.org. 2. Department of Pharmacy, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Department of Pharmacy, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, 04105, USA. 4. Department of Pathology, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, USA. 6. Department of Critical Care Services, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Four-factor PCC is the recommended standard of care for acute warfarin reversal but optimal dosing is unknown. We aim to show that a low-dose strategy is often adequate and may reduce the risk of thromboembolic events when compared to manufacturer-recommended dosing. METHODS: A weight-based dosing strategy of 15-25 units/kg was established as the institutional standard of care in May 2015. This retrospective, before-and-after cohort analysis included patients receiving 4F-PCC according to a manufacturer-recommended (n = 122) or a low-dose (n = 83) strategy. The primary efficacy outcome was a combination of INR reversal on first check and hemostatic efficacy at 24 h. RESULTS: Demographics, indications for warfarin, and presenting INR values were similar between the two groups. Patients in the manufacturer-recommended dose group received significantly more 4F-PCC than the low dose group (2110 units vs. 1530 units). More patients in the manufacturer-recommended dose group achieved the primary endpoint (75.4% vs. 61.4%), with more patients achieving the target INR on recheck in the manufacturer-recommended dose group (95.9% vs. 84.3%) and no difference in hemostatic efficacy between groups (79.5% vs. 74.7%). There was no difference in thromboembolic events at 72 h (4.1% vs. 1.2%) or at 30 days (8.2% vs. 4.8%). Significantly more patients in the manufacturer-recommended dose group died or were transferred to hospice care during hospitalization (21.3% vs. 9.6%). CONCLUSION: Utilization of a low-dose 4F-PCC strategy resulted in fewer patients achieving target INR reversal, but no difference in hemostatic efficacy, thromboembolic events, or survival.
BACKGROUND: Four-factor PCC is the recommended standard of care for acute warfarin reversal but optimal dosing is unknown. We aim to show that a low-dose strategy is often adequate and may reduce the risk of thromboembolic events when compared to manufacturer-recommended dosing. METHODS: A weight-based dosing strategy of 15-25 units/kg was established as the institutional standard of care in May 2015. This retrospective, before-and-after cohort analysis included patients receiving 4F-PCC according to a manufacturer-recommended (n = 122) or a low-dose (n = 83) strategy. The primary efficacy outcome was a combination of INR reversal on first check and hemostatic efficacy at 24 h. RESULTS: Demographics, indications for warfarin, and presenting INR values were similar between the two groups. Patients in the manufacturer-recommended dose group received significantly more 4F-PCC than the low dose group (2110 units vs. 1530 units). More patients in the manufacturer-recommended dose group achieved the primary endpoint (75.4% vs. 61.4%), with more patients achieving the target INR on recheck in the manufacturer-recommended dose group (95.9% vs. 84.3%) and no difference in hemostatic efficacy between groups (79.5% vs. 74.7%). There was no difference in thromboembolic events at 72 h (4.1% vs. 1.2%) or at 30 days (8.2% vs. 4.8%). Significantly more patients in the manufacturer-recommended dose group died or were transferred to hospice care during hospitalization (21.3% vs. 9.6%). CONCLUSION: Utilization of a low-dose 4F-PCC strategy resulted in fewer patients achieving target INR reversal, but no difference in hemostatic efficacy, thromboembolic events, or survival.
Authors: N Khorsand; N J G M Veeger; M Muller; J W P M Overdiek; W Huisman; R M van Hest; K Meijer Journal: Transfus Med Date: 2010-11-15 Impact factor: 2.019
Authors: Anne Holbrook; Sam Schulman; Daniel M Witt; Per Olav Vandvik; Jason Fish; Michael J Kovacs; Peter J Svensson; David L Veenstra; Mark Crowther; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: Chest Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Cindy Varga; Sultan Al-Touri; Stella Papadoukakis; Stephen Caplan; Susan Kahn; Mark Blostein Journal: Transfusion Date: 2012-10-15 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Lonneke van Aart; Heleen W Eijkhout; Jan S Kamphuis; Marco Dam; Marinus Eeftinck Schattenkerk; Teunis J Schouten; Ben Ploeger; Paul F W Strengers Journal: Thromb Res Date: 2005-09-21 Impact factor: 3.944
Authors: Joji B Kuramatsu; Stefan T Gerner; Peter D Schellinger; Jörg Glahn; Matthias Endres; Jan Sobesky; Julia Flechsenhar; Hermann Neugebauer; Eric Jüttler; Armin Grau; Frederick Palm; Joachim Röther; Peter Michels; Gerhard F Hamann; Joachim Hüwel; Georg Hagemann; Beatrice Barber; Christoph Terborg; Frank Trostdorf; Hansjörg Bäzner; Aletta Roth; Johannes Wöhrle; Moritz Keller; Michael Schwarz; Gernot Reimann; Jens Volkmann; Wolfgang Müllges; Peter Kraft; Joseph Classen; Carsten Hobohm; Markus Horn; Angelika Milewski; Heinz Reichmann; Hauke Schneider; Eik Schimmel; Gereon R Fink; Christian Dohmen; Henning Stetefeld; Otto Witte; Albrecht Günther; Tobias Neumann-Haefelin; Andras E Racs; Martin Nueckel; Frank Erbguth; Stephan P Kloska; Arnd Dörfler; Martin Köhrmann; Stefan Schwab; Hagen B Huttner Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-02-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nakisa Khorsand; Nic J G M Veeger; Reinier M van Hest; Paula F Ypma; Jeroen Heidt; Karina Meijer Journal: Haematologica Date: 2012-04-04 Impact factor: 9.941