4.6 Article

Venous thromboembolic events during warm autoimmune hemolytic anemia

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 13, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207218

关键词

-

资金

  1. Direction de la Recherche Clinique du CHU de Dijon
  2. Conseil Regional de Bourgogne 2012 (SA) [2012-A001154-39, NCT02158195]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thrombotic manifestations are a hallmark of many auto-immune diseases (AID), specially of warm autoimmune hemolytic anemia (wAIHA), as 15 to 33% of adults with wAIHA experience venous thromboembolic events (VTE). However, beyond the presence of positive antiphospholipid antibodies and splenectomy, risk factors for developing a VTE during wAIHA have not been clearly identified. The aim of this retrospective study was to characterize VTEs during wAIHA and to identify risk factors for VTE. Forty-eight patients with wAIHA were included, among whom 26 (54%) had secondary wAIHA. Eleven (23%) patients presented at least one VTE, that occurred during an active phase of the disease for 10/11 patients (90%). The frequency of VTE was not different between primary and secondary AIHA (23.7 vs. 19.2%; p = 0.5). The Padua prediction score based on traditional risk factors was not different between patients with and without VTE. On multivariate analysis, total bilirubin >= 40 mu mol/L [odds ratio (OR) = 7.4; p = 0.02] and leucocyte count above 7x10(9)/L (OR = 15.7; p = 0.02) were significantly associated with a higher risk of thrombosis. Antiphospholipid antibodies were screened in 9 out the 11 patients who presented a VTE and were negative. Thus, the frequency of VTE is high (23%) during wAIHA and VTE preferentially occur within the first weeks of diagnosis. As no clinically relevant predictive factors of VTE could be identified, the systematic use of a prophylactic anticoagulation should be recommended in case of active hemolysis and its maintenance after hospital discharge should be considered. The benefit of a systematic screening for VTE and its procedure remain to be determined.

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