Background and aimsCancer provides challenges to the continuity of anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), e.g. through cancer-related surgery or complications. We aimed... Show moreBackground and aimsCancer provides challenges to the continuity of anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), e.g. through cancer-related surgery or complications. We aimed to provide data on the incidence and reasons for interrupting and discontinuing anticoagulant treatment in AF patients with cancer and to assess its contribution to the risk of thromboembolism (TE) and major bleeding (MB).MethodsThis retrospective study identified AF patients with cancer in two hospitals between 2012 and 2017. Data on anticoagulant treatment, TE and MB were collected during two-year follow-up. Incidence rates (IR) per 100 patient-years and adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) were obtained for TE and MB occurring during on- and off-anticoagulant treatment, during interruption and after resumption, and after permanent discontinuation.Results1213 AF patients with cancer were identified, of which 140 patients permanently discontinued anticoagulants and 426 patients experienced one or more interruptions. Anticoagulation was most often interrupted or discontinued due to cancer-related treatment (n = 441, 62 %), bleeding (n = 129, 18 %) or end of life (n = 36, 5 %). The risk of TE was highest off-anticoagulation and during interruptions, with IRs of 19 (14–25)) and 105 (64–13), and aHRs of 3.1 (1.9–5.0) and 4.6 (2.4–9.0), respectively. Major bleeding risk were not only increased during an interruption, but also in the first 30 days after resumption, with IRs of 33 (12–72) and 30 (17–48), and aHRs of 3.3 (1.1–9.8) and 2.4 (1.2–4.6), respectively.ConclusionsInterruption of anticoagulation therapy harbors high TE and MB risk in AF patients with cancer. The high incidence rates call for better (periprocedural) anticoagulant management strategies tailored to the cancer setting. Show less
Introduction: Patients affected with severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suffer from a wide range of sequelae, from limited airway diseases to multiple organ failure. These sequelae... Show moreIntroduction: Patients affected with severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suffer from a wide range of sequelae, from limited airway diseases to multiple organ failure. These sequelae may create exercise limitation, impair the daily activity and thus impact the mental health and the social life. However, the extent of functional limitations and depressive symptoms are understudied especially in patients with COVID-19 after intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization. Methods: The Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) was a clinical trial that randomized ICU patients with COVID-19 to intermediate-dose vs standard-dose anticoagulation. In the current study, we assessed the interval change in 30-day and 90-day functional limitations based on the post-COVID-19 functional status scale (PCFS) and depressive symptoms based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) in the trial participants. We also assessed the effect of intermediate-dose vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation on the functional outcomes and depressive symptoms. Results: Of 600 randomized patients in INSPIRATION, 375 (age: 62 years; 42% women) participated in the functional status study. 195 patients died during the 90-day follow up (191 by day 30). Among survivors, between day 30 and day 90, the proportion of patients with moderate-to-severe functional limitation (PCSF grade 3-or-4) decreased from 20.0% to 4.8% (P <0.001) and PHQ-2 >= 3 decreased from 25.5% to 16.6% (P = 0.05). The proportion of patients with no functional limitations (PCFS grade 0) increased (4.2% to 15.4%, P<0.001). Intermediate-dose compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not impact the 90-day proportion of patients with PCFS grade 3-or-4 (5.3% vs 4.2%; odds ratio (OR), 1.20, [95% CI, 0.46-3.11]; P = 0.80) or PHQ-2 >= 3 (17.9% vs 15.3%; OR, 1.14, [95% CI, 0.79-1.65]; P = 0.14), with similar results when accounting for study center. Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU, functional limitations and depressive symptoms were common at 30-day follow-up and had some improvement by 90-day follow-up among survivors. Intermediate-dose compared to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not improve functional outcomes. Show less
Kunneman, M.; Hargraves, I.G.; Sivly, A.L.; Branda, M.E.; LaVecchia, C.M.; Labrie, N.H.M.; ... ; Montori, V. 2022
Objective: To evaluate how the use of a within-encounter SDM tool (compared to usual care in a randomized trial) contributes to care plans that make sense to patients with atrial fibrillation... Show moreObjective: To evaluate how the use of a within-encounter SDM tool (compared to usual care in a randomized trial) contributes to care plans that make sense to patients with atrial fibrillation considering anticoagulation. Methods: In a planned subgroup of the trial, 123 patients rated post-encounter how much sense their decided-upon care plan made to them and explained why. We explored how sense ratings related to observed patient involvement (OPTION12), patient's decisional conflict, and adherence to their plan based on pharmacy records. We analyzed patient motives using Burke's pentad. Results: Plan sensibility was similarly high in both arms (Usual care n = 62: mean 9.4/10 (SD 1.0) vs SDM tool n = 61: 9.2/10 (SD 1.5); p = .8), significantly and weakly correlated to decisional conflict (rho = -0.28, p = .002), but not to OPTION12 or adherence. Plans made sense to most patients given their known efficacy, safety and what is involved in implementing them. Conclusion: Adding an effective intervention to promote SDM did not affect how much, or why, care plans made sense to patients receiving usual care, nor patient adherence to them. Practice Implications: Evaluating the extent to which care plans make sense can improve SDM assessments, particularly when SDM extends beyond selecting from a menu of options. Show less
Background: Data on the impact of the cumulative percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) caseload on cardiovascular outpatient and hospitalisation costs are limited. Methods: The present... Show moreBackground: Data on the impact of the cumulative percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) caseload on cardiovascular outpatient and hospitalisation costs are limited. Methods: The present single-institution analysis includes patients treated consecutively from the beginning of our LAAC experience in January 2012 until December 2016. Pre- and post-LAAC costs for hospitalisation and ambulatory visits were included. Results: A total of 676 patients underwent percutaneous LAAC (using the Watchman device): 49 (2012), 78 (2013), 211 (2014), 210 (2015), and 129 (2016). LAAC procedural costs were stable over the years (overall median euro9639; 2012: euro9630; 2013: euro10,003; 2014: euro9841; 2015: euro9394; 2016: euro9530; p = 0.8) and there was no correlation between cumulative caseload and procedural costs (p = 0.9). Although annualised cardiovascular management costs after LAAC were lower than before LAAC (median difference between pre-LAAC and post-LAAC yearly costs: euro727; 2012: euro235; 2013: euro1187; 2014: euro716; 2015: euro527; 2016: euro1052; p = 0.5 among years analysed) from the beginning of the cumulative procedural experience, a significant reduction in costs was observed only from 2014 onwards. Institutional cumulative LAAC caseload and year of procedure were not related to the amount of reduction in the costs for cardiovascular care. Conclusion: LAAC led to cost-of-care savings from the beginning of our institutional procedural experience. Show less
Background: Prospectively collected, routine clinical practice-based data on antithrombotic therapy in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are important for assessing real-world... Show moreBackground: Prospectively collected, routine clinical practice-based data on antithrombotic therapy in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are important for assessing real-world comparative outcomes. The objective was to compare the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with newly diagnosed AF..Methods and results: GLORIA-AF is a large, prospective, global registry program. Consecutive patients with newly diagnosed AF and CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc scores >= 1 were included and followed for 3 years. To control for differences in patient characteristics, the comparative analysis for dabigatran versus VKA was performed on a propensity score (PS)-matched patient set. Missing data were multiply imputed. Proportional-hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes of interest. Between 2014 and 2016, 21,300 eligible patients were included worldwide: 3839 patients were prescribed dabigatran and 4836 VKA with a median age of 71.0 and 72.0 years, respectively; > 85% in each group had a CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc-score >= 2. The PS-matched comparative analysis for dabigatran and VKA included on average 3326 pairs of matched initiators. For dabigatran versus VKAs, adjusted HRs (95% confidence intervals) were: stroke 0.89 (0.59-1.34), major bleeding 0.61 (0.42-0.88), all-cause death 0.78 (0.63-0.97), and myocardial infarction 0.89 (0.53-1.48). Further analyses stratified by PS and region provided similar results. Conclusions: Dabigatran was associated with a 39% reduced risk of major bleeding and 22% reduced risk for all-cause death compared with VKA. Stroke and myocardial infarction risks were similar, confirming a more favorable benefit-risk profile for dabigatran compared with VKA in clinical practice.[GRAPHICS]. Show less
Objectives: The optimal management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) remains unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to see if... Show moreObjectives: The optimal management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) remains unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to see if therapeutic anticoagulation (AC) improves outcomes in patients with AP and SVT. Methods: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Main outcomes were recanalization, recurrent venous thromboembolism, development of varices, collaterals or cavernoma, haemorrhage and mortality. Meta-analysis were performed with the Mantel-Haenszel random effect models. Results: Seven retrospective cohort studies (3495 patients) were included. SVT occurred in 233 (7%) patients and involved most frequently the splenic vein (44%). Therapeutic AC was administered to 109 (47%) patients, most frequently to those with triple vessel thrombosis (72%) and least to those with isolated splenic vein (22%) or superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (0%). Most studies administered (low molecular weight) heparin followed by warfarin (duration ranged between 1.5 and 12 months). This meta-analysis showed an absolute risk difference of 9% (95% confidence interval [CI] =-11-28%) for recanalization,-3% (95% CI =-19-12%) for the development of varices, collaterals or cavernoma, 3% (95% CI =-6-12%) for haemorrhage and 2% (95% CI =-8-12%) for mortality. Conclusions: Based on the currently available data, it remains unclear if therapeutic anticoagulation provides benefit to acute pancreatitis patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis. These results are based on low quality data underlining the need for further higher quality studies. (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of IAP and EPC. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Show less
D'Ancona, G.; Arslan, F.; Safak, E.; Weber, D.; Ammareen, R. al; Ince, H. 2022
Aims: Comparing actual management costs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) or OAC only. Methods and results:... Show moreAims: Comparing actual management costs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) or OAC only. Methods and results: Patients undergoing percutaneous LAAC and AF patients treated with OAC only were matched for gender, age, and diagnosis related groups (DRG) clinical complexity level (CCL). Costs for cardiovascular outpatient clinic visits and hospitalizations were derived from the actual reimbursement records. Between 1/2012 and 12/2016, 8478 patients were referred: 7801 (92%) managed with OAC and 677 (8%) with percutaneous LAAC. Matching resulted in 558 patients (279 per group) for final analysis. Age was 74.9 +/- 7.5 years, 244 were female (43.7%), and DRG CCL was 1.8 +/- 1.1.Annualized management cost before percutaneous LAAC was (sic) 3110 (IQR: (sic) 1281-8127). After 4.5 +/- 1.4 years follow-up, annualized management cost was (sic) 1297 (IQR: (sic) 607-2735) in OAC patients and (sic) 1013 (IQR: (sic) 0-4770) in patients after percutaneous LAAC (p = 0.003). Percutaneous LAAC was the strongest independent determinant to reduce follow-up costs (B =-0.8; CI: 1.09-0.6; p < 0.0001). Estimated 3-year survival was 92% in percutaneous LAAC and 90% in OAC patients (p = 0.7). Conclusion: Percutaneous LAAC significantly reduces management costs. Management costs are significantly higher for patients treated with only OAC compared to patients after percutaneous LAAC. In spite of their complex comorbid profile, percutaneous LAAC patients show a follow-up survival rate similar to patients solely treated with OAC. Future studies are necessary to investigate the potential net economic and clinical benefit of percutaneous LAAC in patients treated with OAC only. Show less
Background: In patients with active cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) anticoagulation, thrombotic and bleeding risk still entail uncertainty.Aim: We explored the results of an international... Show moreBackground: In patients with active cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) anticoagulation, thrombotic and bleeding risk still entail uncertainty.Aim: We explored the results of an international survey examining the knowledge and behaviours of a large group of physicians.Methods and results: A web-based survey was completed by 960 physicians (82.4% cardiologists, 75.5% from Europe). Among the currently available anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with active cancer, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were preferred by 62.6%, with lower values for low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (24.1%) and for warfarin (only 7.3%). About 46% of respondents considered that DOACs should be used in all types of cancers except in non-operable gastrointestinal cancers. The lack of controlled studies on bleeding risk (33.5% of respondents) and the risk of drug interactions (31.5%) were perceived as problematic issues associated with use of anticoagulants in cancer. The decision on anticoagulation involved a cardiologist in 27.8% of cases, a cardiologist and an oncologist in 41.1%, and a team approach in 21.6%. The patient also was involved in decision-making, according to similar to 60% of the respondents. For risk stratification, use of CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores was considered appropriate, although not specifically validated in cancer patients, by 66.7% and 56.4%, respectively.Conclusion: This survey highlights that management of anticoagulation in patients with AF and active cancer is challenging, with substantial heterogeneity in therapeutic choices. Direct oral anticoagulants seems having an emerging role but still the use of LMWH remains substantial, despite the absence of long-term data on thromboprophylaxis in AF. Show less
Background In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, an increased incidence of thromboembolic events, such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis and stroke, has been reported. It is unknown... Show moreBackground In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, an increased incidence of thromboembolic events, such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis and stroke, has been reported. It is unknown whether anticoagulation can prevent these complications and improve outcome. Methods A systematic literature search was performed to answer the question: What is the effect of (prophylactic and therapeutic dose) anticoagulation therapy in COVID-19 patients on cardiovascular and thromboembolic complications and clinical outcome? Relevant outcome measures were mortality (crucial), hospital admission, length of stay, thromboembolic complications (pulmonary embolism, stroke, transient ischaemic attack), need for mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury and use of renal replacement therapy. Medline and Embase databases were searched with relevant search terms until 17 July 2020. After systematic analysis, eight studies were included. Analysis was stratified for the start of anticoagulation before or during hospital admission. Results There was insufficient evidence that therapeutic anticoagulation could improve the outcome in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. None of the studies demonstrated improved mortality, except for one very small Italian study. Furthermore, none of the studies showed a positive effect of anticoagulation on other outcome measures in COVID-19, such as ICU admission, length of hospital stay, thromboembolic complications, need for mechanical ventilation, acute kidney failure or need for renal replacement therapy, except for two studies demonstrating an association between anticoagulation and a lower incidence of pulmonary embolism. However, the level of evidence of all studies varied from 'low' to 'very low', according to the GRADE methodology. Conclusion Analysis of the literature showed that there was insufficient evidence to answer our objective on the effect of anticoagulation on outcome in COVID-19 patients, especially due to the low scientific quality of the described studies. Randomised controlled studies are needed to answer this question. Show less
Background: Patients on prehospital anticoagulation with warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent a vulnerable subset of the trauma population. While protocolized warfarin reversal... Show moreBackground: Patients on prehospital anticoagulation with warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent a vulnerable subset of the trauma population. While protocolized warfarin reversal is widely available and easily implemented, prehospital anticoagulation with DOAC is cost prohibitive with only a few reversal options. This study aims to compare hospital outcomes of non-head injured trauma patients taking pre-injury DOAC versus warfarin.Methods: A retrospective cohort study at a level 1 trauma center was performed. All adult trauma patients with pre-injury anticoagulation admitted between January 2015 and December 2018, were stratified into DOAC-using and warfarin-using groups. Patients were excluded if they had traumatic brain injury (TBI). Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed. Outcomes measures included inhospital mortality, blood transfusion requirements, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS and discharge disposition.Results: 374 non-TBI trauma patients on anticoagulation were identified, of which 134 were on DOACs and 240 on warfarin. Patients on DOACs had a higher ISS (9 [IQR, 9-10] vs. 9 [IQR, 5-9]; p<0.001), and lower admission INR values (1.2 [IQR, 1.1-1.3] vs 2.4 [IQR, 1.8-2.7]; p<0.001) than warfarin users. Use of reversal agents was higher in warfarin users (p< 0.001). Relative to warfarin, DOAC users did not differ significantly with respect to hospital mortality (OR 0.47, 95% CI [0.13-1.73]). Multivariable analysis (not possible for mortality) did not show significant difference for RBC transfusion requirements (OR 0.92 [0.51-1.67]), ICU LOS (OR 1.08 [0.53-2.19]), hospital LOS (OR 1.10 [0.70-1.74]) or discharge disposition (OR 0.56 [0.29-1.11]) between the groups.Conclusion: Despite lower reversal rates and higher ISS, non-TBI trauma patients with pre-injury DOAC use had similar outcomes as patients on pre-injury warfarin. There may be equipoise to have larger, prospective studies evaluating the comparative safety of DOACs and warfarin in the population prone to low energy fall type injuries. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Aims This study aimed to describe baseline characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at risk of stroke with and without history of heart failure (HF) and report 2-year outcomes in... Show moreAims This study aimed to describe baseline characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at risk of stroke with and without history of heart failure (HF) and report 2-year outcomes in the dabigatran-treated subset of a prospective, global, observational study (GLORIA-AF).Methods and results Newly diagnosed patients with AF and CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score >= 1 were consecutively enrolled. Baseline characteristics were assessed by the presence or absence of HF diagnosis at enrolment. Incidence rates for outcomes in dabigatran-treated patients were estimated with and without standardization by stroke (excluding HF component) and bleeding risk scores. A total of 15 308 eligible patients were enrolled, including 15 154 with known HF status; of these, 3679 (24.0%) had been diagnosed with HF, 11 475 (75.0%) had not. Among 4873 dabigatran-treated patients, 1169 (24.0%) had HF, and 3658 (75.1%) did not; the risk of stroke was high (CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score >= 2) for 94.3% of patients with HF and 85.8% without, while 6.0% and 7.0%, respectively, had a high bleeding risk (HAS-BLED >= 3). Incidence rates of all-cause death in dabigatran-treated patients with and without HF, standardized for CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc and HAS-BLED scores, were 4.76 vs. 1.80 per 100 patient years (py), with roughly comparable rates of stroke (0.82 vs. 0.60 per 100 py) and major bleeding (1.20 vs. 0.92 per 100 py).Conclusions Patients with AF and history of HF may have greater disease burden at AF diagnosis and increased mortality rates vs. patients without HF. Stroke and major bleeding rates were roughly comparable between groups confirming the long-term safety and effectiveness of dabigatran in patients with HF. Show less
In recent years, as more and more experience has been gained with prescribing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), new research initiatives have emerged in the Netherlands to improve the safety and... Show moreIn recent years, as more and more experience has been gained with prescribing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), new research initiatives have emerged in the Netherlands to improve the safety and appropriateness of DOAC treatment for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). These initiatives address several contemporary unresolved issues, such as inappropriate dosing, non-adherence and the long-term management of DOAC treatment. Dutch initiatives have also contributed to the development and improvement of risk prediction models. Although fewer bleeding complications (notably intracranial bleeding) are in general seen with DOACs in comparison with vitamin K antagonists, to successfully identify patients with high bleeding risk and to tailor anticoagulant treatment accordingly to mitigate this increased bleeding risk, is one of the research aims of recent and future years. This review highlights contributions from the Netherlands that aim to address these unresolved issues regarding the anticoagulant management in AF in daily practice, and provides a narrative overview of contemporary stroke and bleeding risk assessment strategies. Show less
Spencer-Bonilla, G.; Thota, A.; Organick, P.; Ponce, O.J.; Kunneman, M.; Giblon, R.; ... ; Shared Decision Making Atrial Fibr 2020
BackgroundShared decision making (SDM) implementation remains challenging. The factors that promote or hinder implementation of SDM tools for use during the consultation, including contextual... Show moreBackgroundShared decision making (SDM) implementation remains challenging. The factors that promote or hinder implementation of SDM tools for use during the consultation, including contextual factors such as clinician burnout and organizational support, remain unclear. We explored these factors in the context of a practical multicenter randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of an SDM conversation tool for patients with atrial fibrillation considering anticoagulation therapy.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, we recruited clinicians who were regularly involved in conversations with patients regarding anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. Clinicians reported their characteristics and burnout symptoms using the two-item Maslach Burnout Inventory. Clinicians were trained in using the SDM tool, and they recorded their perceptions of the tool's normalization potential using the Normalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) survey instrument and verbally reflected on their answers to these survey questions. When possible, the training sessions and clinicians' verbal responses to the conversation tool were recorded.ResultsOur study comprised 183 clinicians recruited into the trial (168 with survey responses and 112 with recordings). Overall, clinicians gave high scores to the normalization potential of the intervention; they endorsed all domains of normalization to the same extent, regardless of site, clinician characteristics, or burnout ratings. In interviews, clinicians paid significant attention to making sense of the tool. Tool buy-in seemed to depend heavily on their ability to see the tool as accurate and "evidence-based" and their perceptions of having time in the consultation to use it.ConclusionsWhile time in the consultation remains a barrier, we did not find a significant association between burnout symptoms and normalization of an SDM conversation tool. Possible areas for improving the normalization of SDM conversation tools in clinical practice include enabling collaboration among clinicians to implement the tool and reporting how clinicians elsewhere use the tool. Direct measures of normalization (i.e., observing how often clinicians access the tool in practice outside of the clinical trial) may further elucidate the role that contextual factors, such as clinician burnout, play in the implementation of SDM.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02905032. Registered on 9 September 2016. Show less
Es, J. van; Cheung, Y.W.; Es, N. van; Klok, F.A.; Dronkers, C.E.A.; Wolde, M. ten; ... ; Middeldorp, S. 2020
Background: Evidence for guideline recommendations for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during anticoagulant therapy is scarce. We aimed to observe and to describe the management of... Show moreBackground: Evidence for guideline recommendations for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during anticoagulant therapy is scarce. We aimed to observe and to describe the management of VTE occurring during anticoagulant therapy.Methods: This prospective multi-center, observational study included patients with objectively confirmed VTE during anticoagulant therapy (breakthrough event), with a follow-up of 3 months, after the breakthrough event.Results: We registered 121 patients with a breakthrough event, with a mean age of 56 years (range, 19 to 90); 61 were male (50%). Fifty-eight patients (48%) had an active malignancy. At the time of the breakthrough event, 57 patients (47%) were treated with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), 53 patients (44%) with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and 11 patients (9%) with direct oral anticoagulants, unfractionated heparin, or VKA plus LMWH. A total of 21 patients (17%) were receiving a subtherapeutic dose of an anticoagulant. The main regimens to treat recurrence in patients on VKA were: switch to LMWH (33%), temporary double treatment with LMWH and VKA (23%), and VKA with a higher target INR (19%). In patients with a breakthrough on LMWH, the most frequently chosen regimen was a permanent dose increase (74%). During 3-month follow-up, 7% of patients had a second breakthrough event and 8% experienced major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding.Conclusion: There is wide variation in the management of VTE during anticoagulant treatment, reflecting a heterogeneous and complex clinical situation. Despite intensifying anticoagulation, the risk of a second breakthrough event in this population is 7%. Show less
This thesis aimed to evaluate and improve therapeutic anticoagulation strategies in patients presenting with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and to prevent arterial thrombosis after heart valve... Show moreThis thesis aimed to evaluate and improve therapeutic anticoagulation strategies in patients presenting with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and to prevent arterial thrombosis after heart valve surgery. Additionally, major bleeding management with idarucizumab for urgent dabigatran reversal was evaluated. Show less
Murine atherosclerosis models do not spontaneously develop atherothrombotic complications. We investigated whether disruption of natural anticoagulation allows preexisting atherosclerotic plaques... Show moreMurine atherosclerosis models do not spontaneously develop atherothrombotic complications. We investigated whether disruption of natural anticoagulation allows preexisting atherosclerotic plaques to progress toward an atherothrombotic phenotype. Mice featured clots in the left atrium of the heart. Our findings indicate that small interfering RNA-mediated silencing of protein C in apolipoprotein E-deficient mice creates a condition that allows the occurrence of spontaneous atherothrombosis, albeit at a low incidence. Lowering natural anticoagulation in atherosclerosis models may help to discover factors that increase atherothrombotic complications. Show less
