4.6 Article

Comparison of three-factor and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates regarding reversal of the anticoagulant effects of rivaroxaban in healthy volunteers

期刊

JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS
卷 12, 期 9, 页码 1428-1436

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/jth.12599

关键词

anticoagulants; hemorrhage; pharmacology; prothrombin complex concentrates; rivaroxaban

资金

  1. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals
  2. Janssen Research & Development, LLC.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundFour-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs), which contain factorII, FVII, FIX, and FX, have shown the potential to reverse the anticoagulant effect of rivaroxaban in healthy volunteers. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a three-factor PCC, which contains little FVII, has a similar effect. Methods and resultsWe performed an open-label, single-center, parallel-group study comparing the effect of a three-factor PCC (ProfilnineSD) with that of a four-factor PCC (BeriplexP/N) on the pharmacodynamics of rivaroxaban in 35 healthy volunteers. After receiving 4days of rivaroxaban 20mg twice daily to obtain supratherapeutic steady-state concentrations, volunteers were randomized to receive a single 50IUkg(-1) bolus dose of four-factor PCC, three-factor PCC or saline 4h after the morning dose of rivaroxaban on day5, and the effects of these interventions on prothrombin time and thrombin generation were determined. Within 30min, four-factor PCC reduced mean prothrombin time by 2.5-3.5s, whereas three-factor PCC produced only a 0.6-1.0-s reduction. In contrast, three-factor PCC reversed rivaroxaban-induced changes in thrombin generation more than four-factor PCC. ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the potential of both three-factor and four-factor PCCs to at least partially reverse the anticoagulant effects of rivaroxaban in healthy adults. The discrepant effects of the PCC preparations may reflect differences in the procoagulant components present in each.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据