PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

C Kearon

Publications and source records attributed to C Kearon.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2002

Decrease in sensitivity of D-dimer for acute venous thromboembolism after starting anticoagulant therapy.

D-dimer testing is useful for the exclusion of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). Anticoagulant therapy is expected to reduce D-dimer levels in patients with thrombosis and, consequently, it may not be safe to use D-dimer levels to exclude VTE after anticoagulant therapy has been started. The objectives of this study were to estimate the decrease in D-dimer levels after 24 h of heparin therapy and, applying this estimate to the results of a recent study, to calculate the expected reduction in sensitivity. Using pre-defined criteria, we first performed a literature review to determine whether, and by how much, D-dimer levels decrease within 24 h of starting heparin therapy in patients with acute VTE. Using D-dimer levels that were measured in a prospective study of patients with confirmed deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism as baselines, we then determined the change in sensitivity (and specificity) that would result from the fall in D-dimer levels that the literature review suggested would have occurred after 24 h of heparin therapy. On the basis of the literature review, we calculated that mean D-dimer levels decrease by 25%, 24 h after starting heparin therapy in patients with acute VTE. This 25% decrease in D-dimer levels resulted in a decrease in sensitivity from 95.6% (95% confidence interval, 90.0-98.6) to 89.4% (95% confidence interval, 83.7-95.1). There is a decrease in D-dimer levels in patients with acute VTE 24 h after starting heparin therapy that is expected to result in a clinically important drop in sensitivity.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Management of suspected deep venous thrombosis in outpatients by using clinical assessment and D-dimer testing.

BACKGROUND: When deep venous thrombosis is suspected, objective testing is required to confirm or refute the diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the combination of a low clinical suspicion and a normal D -dimer result rules out deep venous thrombosis. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Three tertiary care hospitals in Canada. PATIENTS: 445 outpatients with a suspected first episode of deep venous thrombosis. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were categorized as having low, moderate, or high pretest probability of thrombosis and underwent whole-blood D -dimer testing. Patients with a low pretest probability and a negative result on the D -dimer test had no further diagnostic testing and received no anticoagulant therapy. Additional diagnostic testing was done in all other patients. MEASUREMENTS: Venous thromboembolic events during 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: 177 (40%) patients had both a low pretest probability and a negative D -dimer result. One of these patients had deep venous thrombosis during follow-up (negative predictive value, 99.4% [95% CI, 96.9% to 100%]). CONCLUSION: The combination of a low pretest probability of deep venous thrombosis and a negative result on a whole-blood D -dimer test rules out deep venous thrombosis in a large proportion of symptomatic outpatients.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed2001

Duration of anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism.

The duration of oral anticoagulant therapy for venous thromboembolism (VTE) depends on the risk of recurrence if treatment is stopped and the risk of bleeding if treatment is continued. If the risk of recurrence is low (e.g., thrombosis provoked by a major reversible risk factor such as surgery), 3 months of treatment is usually adequate. If the risk of recurrence is high (unprovoked "idiopathic" VTE or associated with a non-reversible risk factor such as active cancer), 6 months or indefinite anticoagulant therapy is indicated. The presence of malignancy, an antiphospholipid antibody, and other selected thrombophilic states suggests more prolonged therapy, whereas isolated distal deep vein thrombosis, high risk of bleeding, and patient preference suggest a shorter course of treatment.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed2001

A comparison of three rapid D-dimer methods for the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism.

We compared three rapid D-dimer methods for the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism. Patients presenting to four teaching hospitals with the possible diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism were investigated with a combination of clinical likelihood, D-dimer (SimpliRED) and initial non-invasive testing. Patients were assigned as being positive or negative for deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism based on their three-month outcome and initial test results. The three D-dimer methods compared were: (a) Accuclot D-dimer (b) IL-Test D-dimer (c) SimpliRED D-dimer. Of 993 patients, 141 had objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. The sensitivity of SimpliRED, Accuclot and IL-Test were 79, 90 and 87% respectively. All three D-dimer tests gave similar negative predictive values. The SimpliRED D-dimer was found to be less sensitive than the Accuclot or IL-Test. When combined with pre-test probability all three methods are probably acceptable for use in the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism.

Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products↗
PubMed2001

Noninvasive diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis in postoperative patients.

The accuracy of noninvasive testing for the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) generally is less in asymptomatic patients than it is in those with symptoms suggestive of thrombosis. This is because asymptomatic DVT often is confined to the distal veins and, when it involves the proximal veins, the thrombi usually are smaller than in symptomatic patients with proximal thrombosis. Because the positive predictive value of noninvasive tests for asymptomatic DVT generally is 80% or less, abnormal results should be confirmed by venography. There are two main reasons why asymptomatic DVT is sought in the postoperative period: (1) to identify the need for full-dose anticoagulant therapy to prevent symptomatic episodes of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including fatal pulmonary embolism (this represents a form of secondary prophylaxis), and (2) to use this outcome as a surrogate for episodes of clinically important VTE in studies that are designed to evaluate methods of venous thrombosis prophylaxis. In relation to the first of these indications, evidence suggests that routine surveillance of high-risk patients to detect asymptomatic postoperative DVT does not result in improved clinical outcomes in patients who received appropriate VTE prophylaxis. In relation to the second indication, there is concern that asymptomatic VTE may not be a reliable surrogate for clinically important VTE, particularly if the effectiveness of different antithrombotic agents is being compared. Coupled with the comparatively low accuracy of noninvasive testing for asymptomatic DVT, this suggests that the results of such testing are unsuitable for the evaluation of new methods of prophylaxis in clinical trials.

Diagnostic Imaging↗
PubMed2001

Hemorrhagic complications of anticoagulant treatment.

Bleeding is the major complication of anticoagulant therapy. The criteria for defining the severity of bleeding varied considerably between studies, accounting in part for the variation in the rates of bleeding reported. Since the last review, there have been several meta-analyses published on the rates of major bleeding in trials of anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease. The major determinants of oral anticoagulant-induced bleeding are the intensity of the anticoagulant effect, underlying patient characteristics, and the length of therapy. There is good evidence that low-intensity oral anticoagulant therapy (targeted INR of 2.5; range, 2.0 to 3.0) is associated with a lower risk of bleeding than therapy targeted at a higher intensity. Lower-intensity regimens (INR < 2.0) are associated with an even smaller increase in major bleeding. In terms of treatment decision making for anticoagulant therapy, bleeding risk cannot be considered alone, ie, the potential decrease in thromboembolism must be balanced against the potential increased bleeding risk. The risk of bleeding associated with IV heparin in patients with acute venous thromboembolism is < 3% in recent trials. There is some evidence to suggest that this bleeding risk increases with the heparin dosage and age (> 70 years). LMW heparin is not associated with increased major bleeding compared with standard heparin in acute venous thromboembolism. Standard heparin and LMW heparin are not associated with an increase in major bleeding in ischemic coronary syndromes, but are associated with an increase in major bleeding in ischemic stroke.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed2001

Low molecular weight heparin administered once versus twice daily in patients with venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Low molecular weight heparin is as effective and safe as unfractionated heparin for treatment of acute venous thromboembolism. It is uncertain whether low molecular weight heparin should be administered once-daily or twice-daily in this setting. METHOD: A meta-analysis of randomized studies which directly compared once- and twice-daily administration of low molecular weight heparin for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism was performed. A literature search was performed using Advanced Pub Med and the Cochrane library database, and abstracts from recent meetings were reviewed. Two investigators extracted data independently. RESULTS: Five studies, involving 1522 patients, were eligible. There were no statistically significant differences in the frequencies of symptomatic (odds ratio, 0.85 in favor of once-daily therapy at three months, p = 0.6), and asymptomatic, recurrent venous thromboembolism, total and major bleeds (odds ratio, 1.16 in favor of twice-daily therapy at 10 days, p = 0.8); and death, at 10 days, as well as at three months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Once-daily low molecular weight heparin appears to be as effective and safe as twice-daily administration for the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism. However, there is inadequate data from studies that directly compared once-daily and twice-daily administration to be able to exclude the possibility of a higher frequency of fatal bleeding with once-daily therapy.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2000

Safety of withholding heparin in pregnant women with a history of venous thromboembolism. Recurrence of Clot in This Pregnancy Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Women with a history of venous thromboembolism may be at increased risk for venous thromboembolic events during pregnancy. In these women, the decision to give or withhold heparin in the antepartum period is controversial, because accurate estimates of the frequency of recurrent thromboembolic events if antepartum heparin is withheld are not available. METHODS: We prospectively studied 125 pregnant women with a single previous episode of venous thromboembolism. Antepartum heparin was withheld, but anticoagulant therapy was given for four to six weeks post partum. Our primary objective was to determine the rate of antepartum recurrence of venous thromboembolism. Laboratory studies were performed to identify thrombophilia in 95 women. RESULTS: Three of the 125 women (2.4 percent) had an antepartum recurrence of venous thromboembolism (95 percent confidence interval, 0.2 to 6.9 percent). There were no recurrences in the 44 women who had no evidence of thrombophilia and who also had a previous episode of thrombosis that was associated with a temporary risk factor. Among the 51 women with abnormal laboratory results or a previous episode of idiopathic thrombosis, or both, 3 (5.9 percent) had an antepartum recurrence of venous thromboembolism (95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 16.2 percent). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of recurrent antepartum venous thromboembolism in women with a history of venous thromboembolism is low, and therefore routine antepartum prophylaxis with heparin is not warranted.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Optimal dosing of subcutaneous unfractionated heparin for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis.

Twice-daily, inpatient, subcutaneous unfractionated heparin is at least as effective and safe as continuous intravenous unfractionated heparin for the treatment of acute deep vein thrombosis. Subcutaneous unfractionated heparin therefore may be suitable for outpatient treatment of deep vein thrombosis. The purpose of this study was to develop a dosing nomogram for a dose each 12 hours (2 doses per day) 12-hourly subcutaneous unfractionated heparin that is suitable for outpatient treatment of acute deep vein thrombosis. A cohort study was performed in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis in two phases. In both phases, the first subcutaneous loading dose of unfractionated heparin was 317 U/kg, and the second dose was 231 U/kg. The activated partial thromboplastin time was measured daily, 6 hours after the morning injection, and subsequent doses of unfractionated heparin were adjusted according to a nomogram, which was modified for phase II. Warfarin was started with unfractionated heparin. In phase I (14 outpatients), activated partial thromboplastin time results were frequently subtherapeutic (9:14) the day after starting unfractionated heparin (day 1), and were frequently supratherapeutic (27:40) after the first 2 days of unfractionated heparin therapy. In phase II (21 patients), to explain the frequently subtherapeutic activated partial thromboplastin time results that were obtained on day 1, the activated partial thromboplastin time results were measured after the initial loading dose. Mean activated partial thromboplastin time results of 86 and 61 seconds were obtained 6 and 12 hours after this dose, suggesting that 317 U/kg is a suitable subcutaneous loading dose. In contrast to phase I, in phase II, unfractionated heparin dose was not increased on day 1 in response to a low activated partial thromboplastin time result. This reduced the frequency of supratherapeutic activated partial thromboplastin time results during the early days of therapy without increasing the frequency of subtherapeutic results. Warfarin therapy had a substantal effect on the activated partial thromboplastin time that appeared to account for a high frequency of supratherapeutic results during the later days of unfractionated heparin therapy; the activated partial thromboplastin time increased by 20 seconds (95% CI, 14-27 seconds) with each increase in the International Normalized Ratio of 1.0. We had limited success at developing a dosing nomogram for subcutaneous unfractionated heparin that reliably achieved activated partial thromboplastin time results within the therapeutic range. However, as oral anticoagulants directly increased activated partial thromboplastin time results, we suggest that adjusting unfractionated heparin dose to achieve prespecified activated partial thromboplastin time results may not be appropriate in patients who are receiving concomitant warfarin therapy.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2000

Long-term treatment for venous thromboembolism.

Anticoagulation is the corner stone of therapy for venous thromboembolism. The optimal duration of this therapy depends on the balance between the risk of recurrent thrombosis if anticoagulants are stopped, and the risk of bleeding if patients remain on treatment. The risk of recurrence is low if thrombosis was precipitated by a major reversible risk factor such as surgery. Patients with idiopathic thrombosis (no apparent risk factor) and those with persistent risk factors (eg, cancer), have a high risk of recurrence. Some hereditary (eg, protein C, protein S or antithrombin deficiency; homozygous factor V Leiden) and acquired (eg, antiphospholipid antibodies) thrombophilic states are also risk factors for recurrence. Three months of anticoagulation is recommended when the risk of recurrence is low, whereas the duration of therapy should be extended to 6 months or longer when this risk is high, depending on the balance between the risk of recurrence and the risk of bleeding in each individual patient. Heparin preparations, at doses intermediate to those used for the acute treatment of venous thromboembolism and for primary prophylaxis, are an alternative to oral anticoagulants during the maintenance phase of treatment.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed2000

Management of patients with hereditary hypercoagulable disorders.

The inherited hypercoagulable states can be divided into those that are common and associated with a modest risk of thrombosis (i.e. factor V Leiden and G20210A prothrombin gene) and those that are uncommon but associated with a high risk of thrombosis. There is no convincing evidence that, independent of other clinical factors, the presence of factor V Leiden or the prothrombin gene mutation should influence the use of primary prophylaxis or the duration of anticoagulant therapy following an episode of thrombosis. Indirect evidence suggests that the presence of antithrombin, protein C deficiency, or protein S deficiency justifies avoiding additional risk factors for thrombosis, such as estrogen therapy, and justifies use of more aggressive primary prophylaxis when additional risk factors cannot readily be avoided (e.g. pregnancy). The presence of one of these three abnormalities also favors more prolonged anticoagulant therapy following venous thrombosis. However, their presence or absence appears to have less influence on the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism than whether thrombosis was provoked by a major reversible risk factor, such as surgery.

Activated Protein C Resistance↗
PubMed2000

Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED D-dimer.

We have previously demonstrated that a clinical model can be safely used in a management strategy in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). We sought to simplify the clinical model and determine a scoring system, that when combined with D-dimer results, would safely exclude PE without the need for other tests, in a large proportion of patients. We used a randomly selected sample of 80% of the patients that participated in a prospective cohort study of patients with suspected PE to perform a logistic regression analysis on 40 clinical variables to create a simple clinical prediction rule. Cut points on the new rule were determined to create two scoring systems. In the first scoring system patients were classified as having low, moderate and high probability of PE with the proportions being similar to those determined in our original study. The second system was designed to create two categories, PE likely and unlikely. The goal in the latter was that PE unlikely patients with a negative D-dimer result would have PE in less than 2% of cases. The proportion of patients with PE in each category was determined overall and according to a positive or negative SimpliRED D-dimer result. After these determinations we applied the models to the remaining 20% of patients as a validation of the results. The following seven variables and assigned scores (in brackets) were included in the clinical prediction rule: Clinical symptoms of DVT (3.0), no alternative diagnosis (3.0), heart rate >100 (1.5), immobilization or surgery in the previous four weeks (1.5), previous DVT/PE (1.5), hemoptysis (1.0) and malignancy (1.0). Patients were considered low probability if the score was <2.0, moderate of the score was 2.0 to 6.0 and high if the score was over 6.0. Pulmonary embolism unlikely was assigned to patients with scores < or =4.0 and PE likely if the score was >4.0. 7.8% of patients with scores of less than or equal to 4 had PE but if the D-dimer was negative in these patients the rate of PE was only 2.2% (95% CI = 1.0% to 4.0%) in the derivation set and 1.7% in the validation set. Importantly this combination occurred in 46% of our study patients. A score of <2.0 and a negative D-dimer results in a PE rate of 1.5% (95% CI = 0.4% to 3.7%) in the derivation set and 2.7% (95% CI = 0.3% to 9.0%) in the validation set and only occurred in 29% of patients. The combination of a score < or =4.0 by our simple clinical prediction rule and a negative SimpliRED D-Dimer result may safely exclude PE in a large proportion of patients with suspected PE.

Algorithms↗
PubMed1999

Recurrent venous thrombosis and heparin therapy: an evaluation of the importance of early activated partial thromboplastin times.

BACKGROUND: The presence of an association between early subtherapeutic activated partial thromboplastin times (aPTTs) and recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relation between early subtherapeutic aPTTs and recurrent VTE in patients who were treated with intravenous (i.v.) unfractionated heparin (UFH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 961 patients with acute VTE who received i.v. UFH in 3 randomized trials that compared the use of i.v. UFH (loading dose: 5000 U i.v.; initial infusion, 1250-1280 U/h) with that of subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin. According to aPTT criteria, patients were classified as being in a subtherapeutic or a therapeutic state during the first 24 and 48 hours of treatment. All episodes of possible recurrent VTE were adjudicated by an independent committee that was unaware of the aPTTs. RESULTS: At 24 hours, in 886 patients who were eligible for the analysis, the rate of recurrent VTE in the subtherapeutic group was 6.7% (11/163) compared with 5.3% (38/723) in the therapeutic group. The odds ratio for recurrence in patients in the subtherapeutic vs the therapeutic group at 24 hours was 1.30 (95% confidence interval: 0.64-2.63; P = .46). At 48 hours, in 917 patients who were eligible for the analysis, the rate of recurrent VTE in the subtherapeutic group was 7.8% (5/64) compared with 5.7% (49/853) in the therapeutic group. The odds ratio for recurrence in patients in the subtherapeutic vs the therapeutic group at 48 hours was 1.32 (95% confidence interval: 0.51-3.44; P = .56). CONCLUSION: In patients with acute VTE who receive an i.v. bolus of 5000 U, followed by a starting dose of at least 1250 U/h of UFH, a subtherapeutic aPTT response during the first 48 hours of treatment is not associated with a large increase in the risk of recurrent VTE.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

Clinical utility of a rapid whole-blood D-dimer assay in patients with cancer who present with suspected acute deep venous thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Although D-dimer assays have high negative predictive values for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis, their accuracy in patients with cancer is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical utility of a whole-blood D-dimer assay for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis in patients with and those without cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of three prospective studies. SETTING: Two tertiary care hospitals. PATIENTS: 1068 consecutive outpatients with suspected deep venous thrombosis. MEASUREMENTS: All patients underwent D-dimer testing and assessment with a priori diagnostic strategies that incorporated impedance plethysmography, compression ultrasonography, or contrast venography. Patients in whom deep venous thrombosis was not diagnosed initially were followed for 3 months for the development of thrombosis. Results of D-dimer testing were assessed according to the final diagnosis based on objective testing and clinical follow-up. Cancer status was identified at presentation. RESULTS: The prevalence of deep venous thrombosis was 48.8% in 121 patients with cancer and 14.6% in 947 patients without cancer. Although the sensitivity of the D-dimer assay was similar in patients with and those without cancer (86.4% [95% CI, 75.0% to 94.0%] and 82.6% [CI, 75.2% to 88.5%], respectively), the specificity was significantly lower in patients with cancer (48.4% [CI, 35.5% to 61.4%] and 82.2% [CI, 79.4% to 84.8%]), as was the negative predictive value (78.9% [CI, 62.7% to 90.4%] and 96.5% [CI, 94.9% to 97.8%]). In contrast, the likelihood ratios of a negative test result (0.28 [CI, 0.14 to 0.56] and 0.21 [CI, 0.15 to 0.31]) did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: A negative D-dimer test result in patients with cancer does not reliably exclude deep venous thrombosis because the negative predictive value of the test is significantly lower in these patients than in patients without cancer.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1999

A comparison of three months of anticoagulation with extended anticoagulation for a first episode of idiopathic venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have a first episode of venous thromboembolism in the absence of known risk factors for thrombosis (idiopathic thrombosis) are often treated with anticoagulant therapy for three months. Such patients may benefit from longer treatment, however, because they appear to have an increased risk of recurrence after anticoagulant therapy is stopped. METHODS: In this double-blind study, we randomly assigned patients who had completed 3 months of anticoagulant therapy for a first episode of idiopathic venous thromboembolism to continue receiving warfarin, with the dose adjusted to achieve an international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.0, or to receive placebo for a further 24 months. Our goal was to determine the effects of extended anticoagulant therapy on rates of recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism and bleeding. RESULTS: A prespecified interim analysis of efficacy led to the early termination of the trial after 162 patients had been enrolled and followed for an average of 10 months. Of 83 patients assigned to continue to receive placebo, 17 had a recurrent episode of venous thromboembolism (27.4 percent per patient-year), as compared with 1 of 79 patients assigned to receive warfarin (1.3 percent per patient-year, P<0.001). Warfarin resulted in a 95 percent reduction in the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (95 percent confidence interval, 63 to 99 percent). Three patients assigned to the warfarin group had nonfatal major bleeding (two had gastrointestinal bleeding and one genitourinary bleeding), as compared with none of those assigned to the placebo group (3.8 vs. 0 percent per patient-year, P=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a first episode of idiopathic venous thromboembolism should be treated with anticoagulant agents for longer than three months.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed1999

A randomized trial comparing 5-mg and 10-mg warfarin loading doses.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin sodium therapy is usually initiated with a loading dose to reduce the time required to elevate the international normalized ratio (INR). Warfarin loading doses are associated with early overanticoagulation and the development of a potential hypercoagulable state; they also may not hasten achieving an INR value between 2.0 and 3.0. This study was designed to prospectively confirm our observation that a 5-mg warfarin sodium loading dose is as effective as a 10-mg loading dose in achieving a therapeutic INR for 2 consecutive days on days 3 and 4 or 4 and 5 of therapy. METHODS: Fifty-three patients initiating warfarin therapy with a target INR of 2.0 to 3.0 were randomly allocated to receive an initial dose of 5 or 10 mg of warfarin. Subsequent doses were based on dosing algorithms. The INR was measured daily for 5 days. The primary end point of the study was the proportion of patients whose INR values were between 2.0 and 3.0 on 2 consecutive daily determinations on days 3, 4, or 5 of the study and whose INR did not exceed 3.0 at any point during the study. RESULTS: Five (24%) of 21 patients in the 10-mg group and 21 (66%) of 32 patients in the 5-mg group achieved the primary end point (relative risk 2.22, 95% confidence interval 1.30-3.70 [P < .003]). A trend toward less overanticoagulation was seen in the 5-mg warfarin group. CONCLUSION: A 10-mg loading dose of warfarin is unlikely to be more effective than a 5-mg loading dose in achieving an INR of 2.0 to 3.0 by day 4 or 5 of therapy.

Aged↗