RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulation therapy with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) such as warfarin and acenocoumarol is recommended in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and risk factors for embolism. The quality of anticoagulation control with VKA may be assessed by the time in therapeutic range (TTR). In our country, there are no data available about the quality of anticoagulation in patients with AF. The primary goal of our study was to assess the level of effective anticoagulation in a multicenter network of anticoagulation clinics in Argentina, which included patients with nonvalvular AF (NVAF) treated with VKA oral anticoagulants. METHODS: The TERRA trial is a multicenter, cross-sectional study involving 14 anticoagulation clinics that were invited to participate and recruit 100 consecutive patients with NVAF treated with VKA for more than 1 year. The international normalized ratio (INR) values were retrospectively obtained from patient charts, and TTR was calculated using the Rosendaal method. RESULTS: A total of 1190 patients were included in the analysis. Mean age was 74.9 ± 9.9 years, and 52.5% of the patients were male. Median TTR was 67.5% (interquartile interval 54-80). During 55% of the TTR, INR was >3. Interinstitution variability was substantial, with a range of 57.7% ± 17% to 87.7% ± 17%, P < .001. The 10th percentile of TTR was 41%, the 20th percentile was 50%, the 30th was 58%, and the 35th percentile was 60%. In 40% of patients, TTR was <70%. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter study, mean TTR values in patients with AF under VKA were similar to those in international therapeutic clinical trials (55%-65%). Marked variations among institutions were observed and, although average results obtained were high, one third of the patients exhibited a TTR below 60%. This cutoff value is conservative according to current recommendations, and guidelines suggest that when management with VKA cannot be improved, patients should be switched to direct oral anticoagulants. The addition of TTR calculation to clinical practice may help improve the quality of oral anticoagulation in patients with AF, thus improving anticoagulation outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Sistema de Registros , Vitamina K/antagonistas & inhibidores , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Argentina , Fibrilación Atrial/sangre , Fibrilación Atrial/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Relación Normalizada Internacional , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Control de CalidadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: DVT is the main cause of death in hospitalized patients and thromboprophylaxis is the only way to prevent these deaths. International recommendations suggested that active monitoring of DVT/PE prophylaxis can improve the efficacy in Hospitals. METHODS: We performed a cohort study in three consecutives periods to evaluate DVT prophylaxis in 388 adults hospitalized in a General Hospital. RESULTS: 85% of the population had high risk factors for DVT. Thromboprophylaxis was in accordance with local and International guidelines (ACCP 2008) in 72.7% and 86% of the patients respectively. No significant difference could be founded between clinical and surgical patients. One every 10 patients received higher prophylaxis than suggested by guidelines and two out of ten received deficient or no prophylaxis. The worst 2 groups of patients were those with moderate/low risk of DVT and the group with a contraindication to pharmacologic prophylaxis. We observed a progressive improvement of the DVT prophylaxis in the 3 periods of evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Although the rate of recommended thromboprophylaxis is higher than many other reports in the region we still have some areas where we need to improve. Regular audits like these are very helpful to find out what specific areas of the hospital needs some careful attention in order to have a better quality of assistance.
RESUMEN
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication following major abdominal surgery. The use of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) to prevent thrombotic events in these patients is a common and well documented practice. However, there is some controversy surrounding the duration of the prophylaxis, as it has been suggested that the risk persists for several weeks after surgery. The objective of this meta-analysis is to systematically review the clinical studies that compared safety and efficacy of extended use of LMWH (for three to four weeks after surgery) versus conventional in-hospital prophylaxis. An electronic data base search was performed. Only randomized, controlled studies were eligible. Data on the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), VTE and bleeding were extracted. Only three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The indication for surgery was neoplastic disease in 70.6% (780/1104) of patients. The administration of extended LMWH prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of VTE, 5.93% (23/388) versus 13.6% (55/405), RR 0.44 (CI 95% 0.28 - 0.7); DVT 5.93% (23/388) versus 12.9% (52/402), RR 0.46 (CI 95% 0.29 - 0.74); proximal DVT 1% (4/388) versus 4.72% (19/402), RR 0.24 (CI 95% 0.09 - 0.67). We found no significant difference in major or minor bleeding between the two groups: 3.85% (21/545) in the extended thrombo-prophylaxis (ETP) group versus 3.48% (19/559) in the conventional prophylaxis group; RR 1.12 (CI 95% 0.61 - 2.06). There was no heterogeneity between the studies. We conclude that ETP with LMWH should be considered as a safe and useful strategy to prevent VTE in high-risk major abdominal surgery.