Safety and efficacy of different prophylactic anticoagulation dosing regimens in critically and non-critically ill patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Anticoagulant therapy
Bleeding
Coronavirus disease 2019
Death
Thrombosis
Journal
European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy
ISSN: 2055-6845
Titre abrégé: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101669491
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Sep 2022
29 Sep 2022
Historique:
received:
20
07
2021
revised:
25
08
2021
accepted:
11
09
2021
pubmed:
15
9
2021
medline:
1
10
2022
entrez:
14
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The clinical impact of different prophylactic anticoagulation regimens among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. We pooled evidence from available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide insights on this topic. We searched for RCTs comparing treatment with an escalated-dose (intermediate-dose or therapeutic-dose) vs. a standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation regimen in critically and non-critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization and without a formal indication for anticoagulation. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause death, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Seven RCTs were identified, including 5154 patients followed on an average of 33 days. Compared to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, escalated-dose prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with a reduction of all-cause death [17.8% vs. 18.6%; risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.18] but was associated with an increase in major bleeding (2.4% vs. 1.4%; RR 1.73, 95%CI 1.15-2.60). Compared to prophylactic anticoagulation used at a standard dose, an escalated dose was associated with lower rates of venous thromboembolism (2.5% vs. 4.7%; RR 0.55, 95%CI 0.41-0.74) without a significant effect on myocardial infarction (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.47-1.36), stroke (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.43-2.09), or systemic arterial embolism (RR 1.20, 95%CI 0.29-4.95). There were no significant interactions in the subgroup analysis for critically and non-critically ill patients. Our findings provide comprehensive and high-quality evidence for the use of standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation over an escalated-dose regimen as routine standard of care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who do not have an indication for therapeutic anticoagulation, irrespective of disease severity. This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021257203).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The clinical impact of different prophylactic anticoagulation regimens among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. We pooled evidence from available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide insights on this topic.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We searched for RCTs comparing treatment with an escalated-dose (intermediate-dose or therapeutic-dose) vs. a standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation regimen in critically and non-critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization and without a formal indication for anticoagulation. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause death, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Seven RCTs were identified, including 5154 patients followed on an average of 33 days. Compared to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, escalated-dose prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with a reduction of all-cause death [17.8% vs. 18.6%; risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.18] but was associated with an increase in major bleeding (2.4% vs. 1.4%; RR 1.73, 95%CI 1.15-2.60). Compared to prophylactic anticoagulation used at a standard dose, an escalated dose was associated with lower rates of venous thromboembolism (2.5% vs. 4.7%; RR 0.55, 95%CI 0.41-0.74) without a significant effect on myocardial infarction (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.47-1.36), stroke (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.43-2.09), or systemic arterial embolism (RR 1.20, 95%CI 0.29-4.95). There were no significant interactions in the subgroup analysis for critically and non-critically ill patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings provide comprehensive and high-quality evidence for the use of standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation over an escalated-dose regimen as routine standard of care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who do not have an indication for therapeutic anticoagulation, irrespective of disease severity.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021257203).
Identifiants
pubmed: 34519777
pii: 6370175
doi: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvab070
pmc: PMC8499924
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anticoagulants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
677-686Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.