4.4 Article

Guidance for anticoagulation management in venous thromboembolism during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Poland An expert opinion of the Section on Pulmonary Circulation of the Polish Cardiac Society

期刊

KARDIOLOGIA POLSKA
卷 78, 期 6, 页码 642-646

出版社

POLISH CARDIAC SOC-POLSKIE TOWARZYSTWO KARDIOLOGICZNE
DOI: 10.33963/KP.15425

关键词

anticoagulation; coagulation abnormalities; coronavirus disease 2019; prophylaxis; venous thromboembolism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affects anticoagulation not only in those infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) but also in most patients who require daily anticoagulant therapy and are facing substantial limitations in medical care these days. Concomitantvenous thromboembolism (VTE), a potential cause of unexplained deaths, has frequently been reported in patients with COVID-19, but its management is still challenging due to the complexity between antithrombotic therapy and hematological alterations. In the era of COVID-19 pandemic, it is highly recommended for patients who require chronic anticoagulation to continue therapy to prevent thromboembolic events. To avoid regular and frequent blood tests and unnecessary exposure to SARS-CoV-2 during contacts with medical personnel, direct oral anticoagulants should be strongly preferred whenever possible. Current evidence is insufficient to recommend routine pharmacological antithrombotic prophylaxis in all hospitalized patients with COVID-19. In patients with COVID-19 who are suspected of VTE or in whom the diagnosis is confirmed, parentera I therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin should be initiated in the absence of contraindications. If heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is suspected, nonheparin anticoagulants should be used such as bivalirudin or fondaparinux. In case of confirmed acute pulmonary embolism, treatment should be guided by risk stratification as defined in the current guidelines.

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

4.4
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