4.5 Article

Tolerability and effectiveness of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for warfarin and non-warfarin reversals

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 48, Issue -, Pages 183-190

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.08.031

Keywords

Coagulants; General surgery; Hemorrhage; Hemostasis; Thrombosis

Funding

  1. CSL Behring

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Current guidelines favor 4F-PCC over plasma for warfarin reversal. Uncertainty remains on its thrombotic risk and hemostatic effectiveness when used for direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), transplants, massive transfusion protocols (MTP), and non-anticoagulated patients. This study sought to evaluate the tolerability and effectiveness of 4F-PCC in a real-world setting. Materials and methods: This was a retrospective study of adults who received 4F-PCC from March 2014 to December 2015. The primary outcome was thromboembolic events within 14 days. The secondary outcome was hemostatic effectiveness within 24 h. Results: The final analysis included 212 patients. Primary reversal indication was major bleed in 165 patients (77.8%) and emergent surgery in 47 patients (22.2%). Thromboembolism occurred in 22 patients (10.4%), more in emergent surgery than major bleed reversals (17% and 8.5%, respectively). MTP and heart transplant patients had the highest thromboembolic event rates (44.4% and 28.6%, respectively). Hemostatic effectiveness was 65.8% (68% in major bleed and 58.1% in emergent surgery). DOAC patients achieved hemostasis most often (78.9%). Administration of any reversal agent, major surgery within 14 days, and MTP activation were significant predictors of thromboembolism. Conclusions: Use of 4F-PCC in this real-world setting was associated with variable thromboembolic and hemostatic effectiveness rates based on the indication for reversal. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available