Prophylaxis in Hemophilia A Patients with Inhibitors

The development of antibodies to factor VIII is one of the most serious complications of haemophilia treatment. Approximately 30% of patients with severe haemophilia develop neutralizing inhibitors to replacement FVIII. Although most patients with inhibitors do not bleed more frequently than patients without inhibitors, bleeding is more difficult to control and this patients suffer more severe bleeding and have greater morbidity and mortality. Patients with persistent high-titer inhibitor who are not candidates or fail ITI, pose a great challenge to haemophilia management. The efficacy and safety of prophylaxis with bypassing agents in reducing bleeding tendency, has been described in numerous studies. Patients and methods: We report tree adult severe haemophilia A patients, two with persistent high-titre inhibitors and one who failed ITI, on prophylactic treatment after several significant musculoskeletal and life-threatening haemorrhagic episodes (intrabdominal/intramuscular) and pseudotumor haemorrhage. Treatment regimens consisted of APCC (Feiba®) in doses of 60-70UKg-1, 2-3 times per week, according underlying bleeding phenotype. Breakthrough bleeds were treated with either APCC (Feiba®) or rFVIIa (NovoSeven®). Results and Conclusion: There was reduction in total bleeding episodes in two patients (43% to 80%) and one patient remained stable, while receiving prophylaxis. Absence of severe and life threatening bleeding episodes, as well as inpatient stays, contributing to a better quality of life in those patients, was observed. APCC (Feiba®) was well tolerated and no thrombotic events were observed.

Reducing Discomfort While Measuring Crown-Heel Length in Neonates

To assess the degree of discomfort caused by length measurement in neonates, performed with one or both lower limbs extended, on the first and second day after birth, with either one or both lower limbs extended. METHODS: Healthy full-term neonates were systematically sampled during the months of February and March 2004. Crown-heel length was measured, using a 1-mm precision neonatometer, at approximately 8 h and 32 h after birth, with one and both lower limbs extended. The Neonatal Facial Coding System was used to assess discomfort during measurements. Data were analysed by parametric and non-parametric tests as appropriate. RESULTS: Whatever the measurement technique, discomfort scores are significantly higher during the length measurement than at baseline. Whenever length measurements are performed, discomfort scores are significantly higher when extending both lower limbs rather than one lower limb (p < 0.006). The measured length is greater with one lower limb extended; however, the difference decreases over time, being 0.19 cm (95% CI 0.1-0.3; p < 0.001) at approximately 32 h of age. No significant differences in length were found between measurements at approximately 8 or 32 h, regardless of the technique used. The best correlation between length measurements with one or both lower limbs extended was observed at approximately 32 h after birth (r = 0.98). CONCLUSION: Measuring crown-heel length is a distressful procedure for the neonate. Measurements with one lower limb extended result in less discomfort than when both lower limbs are extended, without decreasing the accuracy.