Amber Afzal1, Brian F Gage2, Luo Suhong3, Martin W Schoen4, Kevin Korenblat5, Kristen M Sanfilippo1,4. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. 3. Research Service, St. Louis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, St. Louis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Washington University in St Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) often present with an elevated international normalized ratio (INR). Although elevated INR reflects a higher risk of hemorrhage among warfarin users, its clinical significance in CLD patients is less clear. OBJECTIVES: We used Veterans Health Administration data to quantify the association between INR and (non-variceal) hemorrhage in patients with CLD compared to warfarin users. METHODS: We performed a multivariate competing risk analysis to study the association between INR and hemorrhage in the two cohorts. We used an interaction term between INR and cohort (CLD/warfarin users) to test if INR had different effects on hemorrhage in the two cohorts. RESULTS: Data from 80 134 patients (14, 412 with CLD and 65, 722 taking warfarin) were analyzed. The effect of INR on the risk of hemorrhage differed between CLD patients and warfarin users (interaction P < .001). As INR increased above 1.5, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for hemorrhage in CLD patients increased to 2.25 but remained fairly constant with further elevation of INR values. In contrast, the risk of hemorrhage in patients taking warfarin remained low with INR in the subtherapeutic (INR <2.0) and therapeutic ranges (INR 2.0-3.0), and increased exponentially with INR in the supratherapeutic range (aHR 1.64 with INR >3.0-3.5, and 4.70 with INR >3.5). CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between INR and risk of hemorrhage in CLD patients is different from that in warfarin users. Caution should be exercised extrapolating data from warfarin users to make clinical decisions in CLD patients.
BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) often present with an elevated international normalized ratio (INR). Although elevated INR reflects a higher risk of hemorrhage among warfarin users, its clinical significance in CLD patients is less clear. OBJECTIVES: We used Veterans Health Administration data to quantify the association between INR and (non-variceal) hemorrhage in patients with CLD compared to warfarin users. METHODS: We performed a multivariate competing risk analysis to study the association between INR and hemorrhage in the two cohorts. We used an interaction term between INR and cohort (CLD/warfarin users) to test if INR had different effects on hemorrhage in the two cohorts. RESULTS: Data from 80 134 patients (14, 412 with CLD and 65, 722 taking warfarin) were analyzed. The effect of INR on the risk of hemorrhage differed between CLD patients and warfarin users (interaction P < .001). As INR increased above 1.5, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for hemorrhage in CLD patients increased to 2.25 but remained fairly constant with further elevation of INR values. In contrast, the risk of hemorrhage in patients taking warfarin remained low with INR in the subtherapeutic (INR <2.0) and therapeutic ranges (INR 2.0-3.0), and increased exponentially with INR in the supratherapeutic range (aHR 1.64 with INR >3.0-3.5, and 4.70 with INR >3.5). CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between INR and risk of hemorrhage in CLD patients is different from that in warfarin users. Caution should be exercised extrapolating data from warfarin users to make clinical decisions in CLD patients.
Authors: Frederikus A Klok; Volker Hösel; Andreas Clemens; Wilfrid D Yollo; Clemens Tilke; Sam Schulman; Mareike Lankeit; Stavros V Konstantinides Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Nadine Shehab; Robert Ziemba; Kyle N Campbell; Andrew I Geller; Ruth N Moro; Brian F Gage; Daniel S Budnitz; Tsu-Hsuan Yang Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2019-05-29 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Babak Sarani; W Jonathan Dunkman; Laura Dean; Seema Sonnad; Jeffrey I Rohrbach; Vicente H Gracias Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 7.598