Safety and efficacy of different prophylactic anticoagulation dosing regimens in critically and non-critically ill patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Author:

Ortega-Paz Luis1ORCID,Galli Mattia23ORCID,Capodanno Davide4,Franchi Francesco3,Rollini Fabiana3,Bikdeli Behnood567,Mehran Roxana8,Montalescot Gilles9,Gibson C Michael10,Lopes Renato D1112,Andreotti Felicita2ORCID,Angiolillo Dominick J3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Cardiovascular Institute, Hospital Clinic, IDIBAPS, Barcelona 08036, Spain

2. Cardiovascular Medicine, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome 00168, Italy

3. Division of Cardiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, ACC Building 5th floor, 655 West 8th Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209, USA

4. Division of Cardiology, A.O.U. “Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele,” University of Catania, Catania 95124, Italy

5. Cardiovascular Medicine Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA

6. Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CORE), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510, USA

7. Cardiovascular Research Foundation (CRF), New York, NY 10019, USA

8. Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA

9. Sorbonne Université, ACTION Study Group, Institut de Cardiologie (Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris) Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, INSERM UMRS 1166, Paris 75013, France

10. Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA

11. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA

12. Cardiovascular Division, Brazilian Clinical Research Institute, São Paulo, 01404-000, Brazil

Abstract

Abstract Background The clinical impact of different prophylactic anticoagulation regimens among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. We pooled evidence from available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide insights on this topic. Methods and results We searched for RCTs comparing treatment with an escalated-dose (intermediate-dose or therapeutic-dose) vs. a standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation regimen in critically and non-critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization and without a formal indication for anticoagulation. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause death, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Seven RCTs were identified, including 5154 patients followed on an average of 33 days. Compared to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, escalated-dose prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with a reduction of all-cause death [17.8% vs. 18.6%; risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78–1.18] but was associated with an increase in major bleeding (2.4% vs. 1.4%; RR 1.73, 95%CI 1.15–2.60). Compared to prophylactic anticoagulation used at a standard dose, an escalated dose was associated with lower rates of venous thromboembolism (2.5% vs. 4.7%; RR 0.55, 95%CI 0.41–0.74) without a significant effect on myocardial infarction (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.47–1.36), stroke (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.43–2.09), or systemic arterial embolism (RR 1.20, 95%CI 0.29–4.95). There were no significant interactions in the subgroup analysis for critically and non-critically ill patients. Conclusions Our findings provide comprehensive and high-quality evidence for the use of standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation over an escalated-dose regimen as routine standard of care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who do not have an indication for therapeutic anticoagulation, irrespective of disease severity. Study registration This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021257203).

Funder

Fondazione Enrico ed Enrica Sovena

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3