Literature DB >> 32311843

Thromboembolic events and apparent heparin resistance in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Robert Beun1, Nuray Kusadasi1, Maaike Sikma1,2, Jan Westerink3, Albert Huisman4.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32311843      PMCID: PMC7264532          DOI: 10.1111/ijlh.13230

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Lab Hematol        ISSN: 1751-5521            Impact factor:   2.877


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear Editors, In March 2020, the global healthcare system is overwhelmed by patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2, which is the cause of the coronavirus pandemic (Covid‐2019). A large number of these patients end up in the intensive care units with critical illness requiring mechanical ventilation. One of the most important clinical features of the infection is a profound coagulopathy. In a recent cohort study, 71% of patients who eventually died matched the ISTH criteria for disseminated intravascular coagulation, while this percentage was only 0.6% in patients who survived. Although no data have been presented or published, clinical experience suggests that this coagulopathy is associated with an increased risk of both venous and arterial thrombosis. Treatment of thrombosis in the setting of profound coagulopathy may be hampered by the inability to use the aPTT ratio when treating with unfractionated heparin (UHF). We provide data from our center and provide guidance for treatment of perceived heparin resistance associated with the coagulopathy in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. In our hospital, 75 patients have now been admitted to the ICU with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, some of these experiencing serious thromboembolic complications during ICU stay including pulmonary embolism, ischemic‐CVA, acral ischemia, and recurrent clotting of dialysis filters or oxygenators of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The percentage of venous thromboembolic events diagnosed at the time of suspicion can be seen in Table 1.
TABLE 1

Thromboembolic events in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 pneumonia

Number of patients (% of total)
Total number of patients admitted to ICU75
Clinical suspicion of thromboembolic event35 (46.6%)
Performed diagnostic approachCT: 32 and ultrasound: 3
Pulmonary embolism in (sub)segmental arteries16 (21.3%)
Pulmonary embolism in central artery4 (5.3%)
Ischemic cerebrovascular accident2 (2.7%)
Deep vein thrombosis3 (4.0%)
Patients with thromboembolic event (total)25 (33.3%)

Patients admitted to the ICU from March 16 until April 9.

Thromboembolic events in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 pneumonia Patients admitted to the ICU from March 16 until April 9. These patients were therapeutically treated with either UHF intravenously (UFH) (with an aPTT ratio range between 2.0 and 3.0 (ie, 50‐75 seconds)) or low–molecular‐weight heparin. Table 2 provides data on four patients with an indication for therapeutic anticoagulation and profound coagulopathy at admission or diagnosis of a thromboembolic event. Treatment in all four patients was complicated by necessitating very high UFH doses to achieve perceived adequate coagulation, based on the aPTT ratio.
TABLE 2

Results of Factor VIII, fibrinogen, D‐dimer, antithrombin, and the platelet count

Mean (Min.–Max.)Reference range
Age (years)60.5 (53‐68)n.a.
Gender (M/F)2/2n.a.
UFH (Max. IU/24 h)48 708 (36 748‐64 576)n.a.
Factor VIII (IU/mL)4.45 (2.50‐5.89)0.60‐1.50
Fibrinogen (g/L)7.3 (6.9‐7.6)2.0‐4.0
D‐dimer (mg/L)48.6 (13.8‐100)<0.5
Antithrombin (IU/mL)0.91 (0.67‐1.19)0.80‐1.20
Platelet count (×109/L)270 (223‐302)150‐450

Blood samples were drawn on the day of admission to the ICU, or on the first day of signs of thromboembolic events. Conversion factor for Factor VIII and antithrombin: 1.00 IU/mL = 100 IU/dL = 100%.

Abbreviation: n.a.: not applicable.

Results of Factor VIII, fibrinogen, D‐dimer, antithrombin, and the platelet count Blood samples were drawn on the day of admission to the ICU, or on the first day of signs of thromboembolic events. Conversion factor for Factor VIII and antithrombin: 1.00 IU/mL = 100 IU/dL = 100%. Abbreviation: n.a.: not applicable. This rare phenomenon defined as the need for high‐dose UFH of more than 35 000 IU/d to achieve the target aPTT ratio or the impossibility of doing so is called heparin resistance. In an attempt to elucidate the possible causal factor(s) of heparin resistance in patients with a SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, we measured the levels of the coagulation‐associated factors such as Factor VIII, D‐dimer, fibrinogen, and antithrombin in these patients. Coagulation assays were measured in the central ISO‐15189 accredited laboratory using an ACL Top 750 LAS coagulation analyzer (Werfen Diagnostics) using Coamatic Factor VIII reagent (chromogenic Factor VIII), QFA thrombin reagent (fibrinogen), liquid antithrombin reagent (antithrombin), and D‐dimer HS500 reagent (D‐dimer) all obtained from Werfen diagnostics. Platelets were measured using an Alinity Hq hematology analyzer (Abbott Diagnostics). A formal ethics review for this study was deemed unnecessary by the local ethics committee. Factor VIII was found to be extremely increased in SARS‐CoV‐2 patients, also fibrinogen and d‐dimer were elevated, while almost all of the antithrombin levels were in the normal range. High Factor VIII level is a common cause of apparent heparin resistance. , Increased Factor VIII levels decrease or normalize the in vitro anticoagulant activity of heparin as measured by aPTT, while the in vivo antithrombotic activity of heparin remains unaffected as measured by anti‐Xa assay. Patients requiring high‐dose UFH to achieve the target aPTT without monitoring its antithrombotic activity via an anti‐Xa assay may develop life‐threatening bleeding complications. Previous studies have shown the anti‐Xa level as a more suitable parameter for monitoring the antithrombotic activity than the aPTT. , , Monitoring the anti‐Xa level shortens the time to reach the target therapeutic range as well as improves the length of time in the target range. , , The treatment and monitoring complications observed with the use of UFH necessitate us to adjust the clinical guidelines used locally awaiting (inter)national guidance. Based on the limited SARS‐CoV‐2 data and our own experience, we suggest to monitor the heparin activity of UFH treatment based on anti‐Xa levels with a target value of 0.3‐0.7 U/L in all patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 instead of treatment based on aPTT levels. , ,

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.
  7 in total

1.  Apparent heparin resistance in a patient with infective endocarditis secondary to elevated factor VIII levels.

Authors:  Ramya Thota; Apar Kishor Ganti; Shanmuga Subbiah
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  Accuracy of aPTT monitoring in critically ill patients treated with unfractionated heparin.

Authors:  S van Roessel; S Middeldorp; Y W Cheung; A H Zwinderman; A C J M de Pont
Journal:  Neth J Med       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.422

3.  Activated partial thromboplastin time versus antifactor Xa heparin assay in monitoring unfractionated heparin by continuous intravenous infusion.

Authors:  David J Guervil; Amy F Rosenberg; Almut G Winterstein; Neil S Harris; Thomas E Johns; Marc S Zumberg
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  2011-06-28       Impact factor: 3.154

4.  Effects of factor VIII levels on the APTT and anti-Xa activity under a therapeutic dose of heparin.

Authors:  Mana Mitsuguro; Akira Okamoto; Yoshie Shironouchi; Michitaka Sano; Shigeki Miyata; Reiko Neki; Tatsuya Araki; Takayoshi Hamamoto; Jun Yoshimatsu; Toshiyuki Miyata
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2014-11-23       Impact factor: 2.490

5.  Antifactor Xa levels vs. activated partial thromboplastin time for monitoring unfractionated heparin. A pilot study.

Authors:  S Samuel; T A Allison; S Sharaf; G Yau; G Ranjbar; N Mckaig; A Nguyen; M Escobar; H A Choi
Journal:  J Clin Pharm Ther       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 2.512

6.  Pseudo heparin resistance caused by elevated factor VIII in a critically ill patient.

Authors:  Ian Downie; Zachary Liederman; Kartiga Thiyagarajah; Rita Selby; Yulia Lin
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2019-05-10       Impact factor: 5.063

7.  Abnormal coagulation parameters are associated with poor prognosis in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia.

Authors:  Ning Tang; Dengju Li; Xiong Wang; Ziyong Sun
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 5.824

  7 in total
  53 in total

1.  Dialysis Filter Life in COVID-19: Early Lessons from the Pandemic.

Authors:  Ignacio Portales-Castillo; Andrew S Allegretti
Journal:  Kidney360       Date:  2020-12-31

Review 2.  COVID-19 - Toward a comprehensive understanding of the disease.

Authors:  Maciej M Kowalik; Piotr Trzonkowski; Magdalena Łasińska-Kowara; Andrzej Mital; Tomasz Smiatacz; Miłosz Jaguszewski
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 2.737

3.  A Review of Pathophysiology, Clinical Features, and Management Options of COVID-19 Associated Coagulopathy.

Authors:  Julie Goswami; Taleen A MacArthur; Meera Sridharan; Rajiv K Pruthi; Robert D McBane; Thomas E Witzig; Myung S Park
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 3.533

Review 4.  Imaging approach to COVID-19 associated pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Lukas M Trunz; Patrick Lee; Steven M Lange; Corbin L Pomeranz; Laurence Needleman; Robert W Ford; Ajit Karambelkar; Baskaran Sundaram
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 3.149

Review 5.  Cardiovascular Involvement in COVID-19: What Sequelae Should We Expect?

Authors:  Maria Vincenza Polito; Angelo Silverio; Michele Bellino; Giuseppe Iuliano; Marco Di Maio; Carmine Alfano; Patrizia Iannece; Nicolino Esposito; Gennaro Galasso
Journal:  Cardiol Ther       Date:  2021-06-30

Review 6.  Entangling COVID-19 associated thrombosis into a secondary antiphospholipid antibody syndrome: Diagnostic and therapeutic perspectives (Review).

Authors:  Eugenio Cavalli; Alessia Bramanti; Rosella Ciurleo; Andrey I Tchorbanov; Antonio Giordano; Paolo Fagone; Cristina Belizna; Placido Bramanti; Yehuda Shoenfeld; Ferdinando Nicoletti
Journal:  Int J Mol Med       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 4.101

7.  How we approach thrombosis risk in children with COVID-19 infection and MIS-C.

Authors:  Anjali A Sharathkumar; E Vincent S Faustino; Clifford M Takemoto
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 3.167

8.  Thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 - Rationale and considerations.

Authors:  Sotirios Bristogiannis; Dawn Swan; Jecko Thachil
Journal:  Adv Biol Regul       Date:  2021-07-23

9.  Venous thromboembolism in critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Syed Shahzad Hasan; Sam Radford; Chia Siang Kow; Syed Tabish Razi Zaidi
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 10.  Heterogeneity in reporting venous thromboembolic phenotypes in COVID-19: methodological issues and clinical implications.

Authors:  Anastasios Kollias; Konstantinos G Kyriakoulis; George S Stergiou; Konstantinos Syrigos
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2020-07-26       Impact factor: 8.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.