Activated partial thromboplastin time monitoring in patients receiving unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism in relation to clinical outcomes

Summary

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a prevalent and serious condition, which requires anticoagulation treatment for prolonged time duration. The use of unfractionated heparin administered intravenously or subcutaneously for acute management of VTE has been studied with favourable clinical results. Most physicians use activated partial thromboplastin time to monitor the treatment effect, in an effort to obtain better efficacy with less bleeding complications. Recent data however does not support this practice. We set to explore the medical literature for the correlation between the level of anticoagulation and the clinical outcomes. Randomised controlled trials comparing subcutaneous unfractionated heparin to any other treatment modality in patients with venous thromboembolism were obtained and a meta-analysis was performed. Seventeen reports from 15 randomised controlled trials were included. Of these, eleven included anticoagulation measurements. Seven and six trials were included in our analysis for subcutaneous and intravenous modes of administration, respectively. No correlation between the anticoagulation level and the major clinical outcomes were found, except for the initial anticoagulation measurement and the total mortality at three months, but not to death related to treatment or disease progression. In conclusion, weight-adjusted subcutaneous unfractionated heparin without anticoagulation monitoring may be feasible for patients with acute venous thromboembolism. No differences exist between intravenous and subcutaneous modes of administration with regards to the correlation between anticoagulant measures and the clinical outcomes. More research is needed to substantiate this observation.

Keywords

Venous thromoembolism - unfractionated heparin - subcutaneous - activated partial thromboplastin time

• References

• 1 Kearon C, Harrison L, Crowther M. et al. Optimal dosing of subcutaneous unfractionated heparin for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Res 2000; 97: 395-403.
• 2 Clark NP. Low-molecular-weight heparin use in the obese, elderly, and in renal insufficiency. Thromb Res 2008; 123 (Suppl. 01) S58-61.
• 3 Bates SM, Greer IA, Pabinger I. et al. ACoC. Venous thromboembolism, thrombophilia, antithrombotic therapy, and pregnancy: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Chest 2008; 133 (Suppl. 06) 844S-886S.
• 4 Vardi M, Zittan E, Bitterman H. Subcutaneous unfractionated heparin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Library. 2009 In press.
• 5 Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D. et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Contr Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1-12.
• 6 Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ. et al. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. J Am Med Assoc 1995; 237: 408-412.
• 7 An AB. Performing logistic regression on survey data with the new SURVEYLOGISTIC procedure. SUGI 27; 2002. Orlando: Florida; 2002: 258.
• 8 Lopaciuk S, Misiak A, Wisawski S. et al. Subcutaneous injections and intravenous infusion of sodium salt of heparin in the treatment of thrombosis of deep veins of the lower extremities. Polski tygodnik lekarski 1990; 45: 949-952.
• 9 Prandoni P, Carnovali M, Marchiori A. et al. Subcutaneous adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin vs fixeddose low-molecular-weight heparin in the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 1077-1083.
• 10 Doyle DJ, Turpie AG, Hirsh J. et al. Adjusted subcutaneous heparin or continuous intravenous heparin in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis. A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107: 441-445.
• 11 Holm HA, Ly B, Handeland GF. et al. Subcutaneous heparin treatment of deep venous thrombosis: a comparison ofunfractionated and low molecular weight heparin. Haemostasis 1986; 16 (Suppl. 02) 30-37.
• 12 Peternel P, Terbizan M, Tratar G. et al. Markers of hemostatic system activation during treatment of deep vein thrombosis with subcutaneous unfractionated or low-molecular weight heparin. Thromb Res 2002; 105: 241-246.
• 13 Hull RD, Raskob GE, Hirsh J. et al. Continuous intravenous heparin compared with intermittent subcutaneous heparin in the initial treatment of proximal-vein thrombosis. New Engl J Med 1986; 315: 1109-1114.
• 14 Lopaciuk S, Meissner AJ, Filipeckil S. et al. Subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin versus subcutaneous unfractionated heparin in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis: A Polish multicenter trial. Thromb Haemost 1992; 68: 14-18.
• 15 Pini M, Pattachini C, Quintavalla R, Poli T. et al. Subcutaneous vs intravenous heparin in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis? a randomised clinical trial. Thromb Haemost 1990; 64: 222-226.
• 16 Andersson G, Fagrell B, Holmgren K. et al. Subcutaneous administration of heparin. A randomised comparison with intravenous administration of heparin to patients with deep-vein thrombosis. Thromb Res 1982; 27: 631-639.
• 17 Bentley PG, Kakkar VV, Scully MF. et al. An objective study of alternative methods of heparin administration. Thromb Res 1980; 18: 177-187.
• 18 Kearon C, Ginsberg JS, Julian JA. et al. Comparison of fixed-dose weight-adjusted unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin for acute treatment of venous thromboembolism. J Am Med Assoc 2006; 296: 935-942.
• 19 Lagakos SW. The Challenge of Subgroup Analyses — Reporting without Distorting. New Engl J Med 2006; 354: 1667.
• 20 Eikelboom W, Hirsh J. Monitoring unfractionated heparin with the aPTT: Time for a fresh look. Thromb Haemost 2006; 96: 547-552.