Reprint of: Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus andexanet alfa for direct oral anticoagulant reversal

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of the American Pharmacists Association Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.japh.2024.102156
{"title":"Reprint of: Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus andexanet alfa for direct oral anticoagulant reversal","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.japh.2024.102156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Optimal reversal agent for direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)–associated major bleeding has not been described. Before the approval of andexanet alfa (AA) in 2018, 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) was recommended by major guidelines. Currently, AA is recommended as the first-line agent by most guidelines. With a paucity of literature comparing the 2 agents, there is clinical value in assessing hemostatic efficacy and safety of the 2 agents.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study aimed to evaluate hemostatic efficacy and safety of AA and 4F-PCC in all DOAC-associated major bleedings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A multicenter, retrospective chart review was performed of adult subjects who were admitted for a DOAC-associated major bleeding and received 4F-PCC from February 2018 to May 2019 or AA from May 2019 to September 2021. Some of the exclusion criteria included not receiving a DOAC, receiving multiple reversal agents during the same hospitalization, receiving reversal for any nonmajor bleeding indication, and not receiving the full dose of a reversal agent. The primary outcome was hemostatic efficacy 24 hours after the end of the reversal agent administration. Secondary outcomes included time to administration, hospital mortality, length of stay, need for surgery, and need for additional blood product. Safety outcome was incidence of thrombotic events.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There were 99 subjects included in the 4F-PCC group and 84 subjects in the AA group. Hemostatic efficacy was achieved in 69 subjects (69.7%) in the 4F-PCC group and 63 subjects (75%) in the AA group (<em>P</em> = 0.927). In-hospital mortality was seen in 20 subjects (20.2%) in the 4F-PCC group and 10 subjects (11.9%) in the AA group. Thrombotic events were seen in 7 subjects (7.1%) in the 4F-PCC group and 6 subjects (7.1%) in the AA group.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>There were no significant differences in hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, and number of thrombotic events between 4F-PCC and AA.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50015,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Pharmacists Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Pharmacists Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544319124001766","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Optimal reversal agent for direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)–associated major bleeding has not been described. Before the approval of andexanet alfa (AA) in 2018, 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) was recommended by major guidelines. Currently, AA is recommended as the first-line agent by most guidelines. With a paucity of literature comparing the 2 agents, there is clinical value in assessing hemostatic efficacy and safety of the 2 agents.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate hemostatic efficacy and safety of AA and 4F-PCC in all DOAC-associated major bleedings.

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective chart review was performed of adult subjects who were admitted for a DOAC-associated major bleeding and received 4F-PCC from February 2018 to May 2019 or AA from May 2019 to September 2021. Some of the exclusion criteria included not receiving a DOAC, receiving multiple reversal agents during the same hospitalization, receiving reversal for any nonmajor bleeding indication, and not receiving the full dose of a reversal agent. The primary outcome was hemostatic efficacy 24 hours after the end of the reversal agent administration. Secondary outcomes included time to administration, hospital mortality, length of stay, need for surgery, and need for additional blood product. Safety outcome was incidence of thrombotic events.

Results

There were 99 subjects included in the 4F-PCC group and 84 subjects in the AA group. Hemostatic efficacy was achieved in 69 subjects (69.7%) in the 4F-PCC group and 63 subjects (75%) in the AA group (P = 0.927). In-hospital mortality was seen in 20 subjects (20.2%) in the 4F-PCC group and 10 subjects (11.9%) in the AA group. Thrombotic events were seen in 7 subjects (7.1%) in the 4F-PCC group and 6 subjects (7.1%) in the AA group.

Conclusions

There were no significant differences in hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, and number of thrombotic events between 4F-PCC and AA.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重印本:四因子凝血酶原复合物浓缩物与安赛蜜α用于直接口服抗凝剂逆转。
背景:直接口服抗凝剂(DOAC)相关大出血的最佳逆转剂尚未描述。在 2018 年批准安达赛酮α(AA)之前,主要指南均推荐使用 4 因子凝血酶原复合物浓缩物(4F-PCC)。目前,大多数指南推荐将 AA 作为一线药物。由于比较这两种药物的文献较少,评估这两种药物的止血效果和安全性具有临床价值:本研究旨在评估 AA 和 4F-PCC 在所有 DOAC 相关大出血中的止血效果和安全性:对 2018 年 2 月至 2019 年 5 月期间因 DOAC 相关大出血入院并接受 4F-PCC 或 2019 年 5 月至 2021 年 9 月期间接受 AA 的成人受试者进行了多中心、回顾性病历审查。部分排除标准包括未接受 DOAC、在同一住院期间接受多种逆转剂、因任何非大出血适应症接受逆转剂以及未接受全剂量逆转剂。主要结果是逆转剂给药结束 24 小时后的止血效果。次要结果包括用药时间、住院死亡率、住院时间、手术需求和额外血液制品需求。安全性结果是血栓事件的发生率:4F-PCC 组有 99 名受试者,AA 组有 84 名受试者。4F-PCC 组有 69 名受试者(69.7%)达到止血效果,AA 组有 63 名受试者(75%)达到止血效果(P = 0.927)。4F-PCC 组有 20 名受试者(20.2%)出现院内死亡,AA 组有 10 名受试者(11.9%)出现院内死亡。4F-PCC组有7人(7.1%)发生血栓事件,AA组有6人(7.1%):结论:4F-PCC 和 AA 在止血效果、院内死亡率和血栓事件数量方面没有明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
336
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Pharmacists Association is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Pharmacists Association (APhA), providing information on pharmaceutical care, drug therapy, diseases and other health issues, trends in pharmacy practice and therapeutics, informed opinion, and original research. JAPhA publishes original research, reviews, experiences, and opinion articles that link science to contemporary pharmacy practice to improve patient care.
期刊最新文献
Bringing Providers into the Community Pharmacy: Experiential Education. Feasibility of reaching populations at high risk for HIV in community pharmacies A shared passion for providing care Addressing health literacy and patient communication from the lens of science Pharmacists are the medication, and medication literacy, experts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1