Streptokinase and Enoxaparin as an Alternative to Fibrin-Specific Lytic-Based Regimens An ExTRACT-TIMI 25 Analysis

Background: Enoxaparin was superior to unfractionated heparin (UFH), regardless of fibrinolytic agent in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients receiving fibrinolytic therapy in ExTRACT-TIMI 25 (Enoxaparin and Thrombolysis Reperfusion for Acute Myocardial Infarction Treatment Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 25) trial. Objective: This post hoc analysis compared outcomes with streptokinase plus enoxaparin to the standard regimen of fibrin-specific lytic (FSL) plus UFH and to the newer combination of FSL plus enoxaparin. Methods: In ExTRACT-TIMI 25, STEMI patients received either streptokinase or a FSL (alteplase, reteplase or tenecteplase) at the physician`s discretion and were randomized to enoxaparin or UFH, stratified by fibrinolytic type. Thirty-day outcomes were adjusted for baseline characteristics, region, in-hospital percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and a propensity score for the choice of lytic. Results: The primary trial endpoint of 30-day death/myocardial infarction (MI) occurred in fewer patients in the streptokinase-enoxaparin cohort (n = 2083) compared with FSL-UFH (n = 8141) [10.2% vs 12.0%, adjusted odds ratio [OR(adj)] 0.76; 95% CI 0.62, 0.93; p = 0.008]. Major bleeding was significantly increased with streptokinase-enoxaparin compared with FSL-UFH (ORadj 2.74; 95% CI 1.81; 4.14; p < 0.001) but intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) was similar (OR(adj) 0.90; 95% CI 0.40, 2.01; p = 0.79). Net clinical outcomes, defined as either death/MI/major bleeding or as death/MI/ICH tended to favour streptokinase-enoxaparin compared with FSL-UFH (OR(adj) 0.88; 95% CI 0.73, 1.06; p = 0.17; and OR(adj) 0.77; 95% CI 0.63, 0.93; p = 0.008, respectively). Patients receiving FSL-enoxaparin (n = 8142) and streptokinase-enoxaparin therapies experienced similar adjusted rates of the primary endpoint (OR(adj) 1.08; 95% CI 0.87, 1.32; p = 0.49) and net clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Our results suggest that fibrinolytic therapy with the combination of streptokinase and the potent anticoagulant agent enoxaparin resulted in similar adjusted outcomes compared with more costly regimens utilizing a FSL.

Fondaparinux verses enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembelism

Venous thromboembolism is a frequent, life-threatening, postoperative complication of hip-fracture and total-knee-replacement surgery. Fondaparinux is a synthetic polysaccharide that selectively binds to antithrombin, the primary endogenous regulator of blood coagulation. Low molecular weight heparins, such as enoxaparin, are less specific inhibitors of coagulation. In patients undergoing hip-fracture surgery, fondaparinux is more effective than once-daily enoxaparin as prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism. Fondaparinux (25 mg/day s.c.) was also more effective than enoxaparin (30 mg s.c. b.i.d.) as prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in elective knee surgery. These differences may be explained by the fact that there is less prophylaxis cover with enoxaparin, as it has a much shorter duration of action than fondaparinux. Thus, with the present dosing regimens, fondaparinux is probably preferable to enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism.

Incidence and consequence of major bleeding in primary percutaneous intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the era of radial access: an analysis of the international randomized Acute myocardial infarction Treated with primary angioplasty and intravenous enoxaparin Or unfractionated heparin to Lower ischemic and bleeding events at short- and Long-term follow-up trial.

AIMS: The aims of the study are to compare the outcome with and without major bleeding and to identify the independent correlates of major bleeding complications and mortality in patients described in the ATOLL study. METHODS: The ATOLL study included 910 patients randomly assigned to either 0.5 mg/kg intravenous enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin before primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Incidence of major bleeding and ischemic end points was assessed at 1 month, and mortality, at 1 and 6 months. Patients with and without major bleeding complication were compared. A multivariate model of bleeding complications at 1 month and mortality at 6 months was realized. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed. RESULTS: The most frequent bleeding site appears to be the gastrointestinal tract. Age >75 years, cardiac arrest, and the use of insulin or >1 heparin emerged as independent correlates of major bleeding at 1 month. Patients presenting with major bleeding had significantly higher rates of adverse ischemic complications. Mortality at 6 months was higher in bleeders. Major bleeding was found to be one of the independent correlates of 6-month mortality. The addition or mixing of several anticoagulant drugs was an independent factor of major bleeding despite the predominant use of radial access. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that major bleeding is independently associated with poor outcome, increasing ischemic events, and mortality in primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed mostly with radial access.

Indirect comparison meta-analysis of two enoxaparin regimens in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. Impact on the interpretation of thromboprophylactic effects of new anticoagulant drugs.

Two enoxaparin dosage regimens are used as comparators to evaluate new anticoagulants for thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery, but so far no satisfactory direct comparison between them has been published. Our objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of enoxaparin 3,000 anti-Xa IU twice daily and enoxaparin 4,000 anti-Xa IU once daily in this clinical setting by indirect comparison meta-analysis, using Bucher's method. We selected randomised controlled trials comparing another anticoagulant, placebo (or no treatment) with either enoxaparin regimen for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after hip or knee replacement or hip fracture surgery, provided that the second regimen was assessed elsewhere versus the same comparator. Two authors independently evaluated study eligibility, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary efficacy outcome was the incidence of venous thomboembolism. The main safety outcome was the incidence of major bleeding. Overall, 44 randomised comparisons in 56,423 patients were selected, 35 being double-blind (54,117 patients). Compared with enoxaparin 4,000 anti-Xa IU once daily, enoxaparin 3,000 anti-Xa IU twice daily was associated with a reduced risk of venous thromboembolism (relative risk [RR]: 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40 to 0.69), but an increased risk of major bleeding (RR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.23 to 3.29). In conclusion, when interpreting the benefit-risk ratio of new anticoagulant drugs versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after major orthopaedic surgery, the apparently greater efficacy but higher bleeding risk of the twice-daily 3,000 anti-Xa IU enoxaparin regimen compared to the once-daily 4,000 anti-Xa IU regimen should be taken into account.

An open-label, comparative study of the efficacy and safety of once-daily dose of enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in the treatment of proximal lower limb deep-vein thrombosis

Background: Treatment of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) with a once-daily regimen of enoxaparin, rather than a continuous infusion of unfractionated heparin (UFH) is more convenient and allows for home care in some patients. This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of these two regimens for the treatment of patients with proximal lower limb DVT. Methods: 201 patients with proximal lower limb DVT from 13 centers in Brazil were randomized in an open manner to receive either enoxaparin [1.5 mg/kg subcutaneous (s.c.) OD] or intravenous (i.v.) UFH (adjusted to aPTT 1.5-2.5 times control) for 5-10 days. All patients also received warfarin (INR 2-3) for at least 3 months. The primary efficacy endpoint Was recurrent DVT (confirmed by venography or ultrasonography), and safety endpoints included bleeding and serious adverse events. The rate of pulmonary embolism (PE) was also collected. Hospitalization was at the physician's discretion. Results: Baseline patient characteristics were comparable between groups. The duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter with enoxaparin than with UFH (3 versus 7 days). In addition, 36% of patients receiving enoxaparin did not need to be hospitalized, whereas all of the patients receiving UFH were! hospitalized. The treatment duration was slightly longer with enoxaparin (8 versus 7 days). There was a nonsignificant trend toward a reduction in the rate of recurrent DVT with enoxaparin versus UFH, and similar safety. Conclusions: A once-daily regimen of enoxaparin 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneous is at least as effective and safe as conventional treatment with a continuous intravenous infusion of UFH. However, the once daily enoxaparin regimen is easier to administer (subcutaneous versus intravenous), does not require aPTT monitoring, and leads to both a reduced number of hospital admissions and an average 4-day-shorter hospital stay. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of new anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgeries, compared with enoxaparin

Background: In the past 10 years, new anticoagulants (NACs) have been studied for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Objective: To evaluate the risk/benefit profile of NACs versus enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgery. Methods: A systematic review of double-blind randomized phase III studies was performed. The search strategy was run from 2000 to 2011 in the main medical electronic databases in any language. Independent extraction of articles was performed by 2 authors using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators. Results: Fifteen published clinical trials evaluating fondaparinux, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban were included. Primary efficacy (any deep vein thrombosis [DVT], nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or all-cause mortality) favored fondaparinux (relative risk [RR] 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39, 0.63) and rivaroxaban (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.34, 0.73) over enoxaparin, although significant heterogeneity was observed in both series. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 220 mg, apixaban, and bemiparin were similar, with RRs of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.86, 1.20), 0.63 (95% CI, 0.39, 1.01), and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.65, 1.17), respectively. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 150 mg (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03, 1.41), was inferior to enoxaparin. The incidence of proximal DVT favored apixaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0.75) only. Rivaroxaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0,77) and apixaban (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.90) produced significantly lower frequencies of symptomatic DVT. The incidence of major VTE favored rivaroxaban (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.25, 0.81), only. Bleeding risk was similar for all NACs, except fondaparinux (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.55), which exhibited a significantly higher any-bleeding risk compared with enoxaparin, and apixaban (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99), which was associated with a reduced risk of any bleeding. Alanine amino transferase was significantly lower with 220 mg of dabigatran, (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99) than with enoxaparin. Conclusions: NACs can be considered alternatives to conventional thromboprophylaxis regimens in patients undergoing elective major orthopedic surgery, depending on clinical characteristics and cost-effectiveness. The knowledge of some differences concerning efficacy or safety profile, pointed out in this systematic review, along with the respective limitations, may be useful in clinical practice. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The effect of anticoagulation on the restoration of range of motion after total knee arthroplasty: Enoxaparin versus aspirin

Anticoagulation used for thromboembolic prophylaxis following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) could interfere with movement. This study compares the effect of 2 anticoagulants, enoxaparin and aspirin, on restoration of range of motion (ROM) after TKA. Two groups of 75 consecutive patients, matched for age, arthritic severity, and preoperative ROM, underwent TKA. Flexion and extension milestone measures were recorded daily. Results show a highly statistically significant difference (P

Development of a dosage strategy in patients receiving enoxaparin by continuous intravenous infusion using modelling and simulation

Aim To develop an appropriate dosing strategy for continuous intravenous infusions (CII) of enoxaparin by minimizing the percentage of steady-state anti-Xa concentration (C-ss) outside the therapeutic range of 0.5-1.2 IU ml(-1). Methods A nonlinear mixed effects model was developed with NONMEM (R) for 48 adult patients who received CII of enoxaparin with infusion durations that ranged from 8 to 894 h at rates between 100 and 1600 IU h(-1). Three hundred and sixty-three anti-Xa concentration measurements were available from patients who received CII. These were combined with 309 anti-Xa concentrations from 35 patients who received subcutaneous enoxaparin. The effects of age, body size, height, sex, creatinine clearance (CrCL) and patient location [intensive care unit (ICU) or general medical unit] on pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were evaluated. Monte Carlo simulations were used to (i) evaluate covariate effects on C-ss and (ii) compare the impact of different infusion rates on predicted C-ss. The best dose was selected based on the highest probability that the C-ss achieved would lie within the therapeutic range. Results A two-compartment linear model with additive and proportional residual error for general medical unit patients and only a proportional error for patients in ICU provided the best description of the data. Both CrCL and weight were found to affect significantly clearance and volume of distribution of the central compartment, respectively. Simulations suggested that the best doses for patients in the ICU setting were 50 IU kg(-1) per 12 h (4.2 IU kg(-1) h(-1)) if CrCL < 30 ml min(-1); 60 IU kg(-1) per 12 h (5.0 IU kg(-1) h(-1)) if CrCL was 30-50 ml min(-1); and 70 IU kg(-1) per 12 h (5.8 IU kg(-1) h(-1)) if CrCL > 50 ml min(-1). The best doses for patients in the general medical unit were 60 IU kg(-1) per 12 h (5.0 IU kg(-1) h(-1)) if CrCL < 30 ml min(-1); 70 IU kg(-1) per 12 h (5.8 IU kg(-1) h(-1)) if CrCL was 30-50 ml min(-1); and 100 IU kg(-1) per 12 h (8.3 IU kg(-1) h(-1)) if CrCL > 50 ml min(-1). These best doses were selected based on providing the lowest equal probability of either being above or below the therapeutic range and the highest probability that the C-ss achieved would lie within the therapeutic range. Conclusion The dose of enoxaparin should be individualized to the patients' renal function and weight. There is some evidence to support slightly lower doses of CII enoxaparin in patients in the ICU setting.

Using a clinical pathway and education to reduce inappropriate prescribing of enoxaparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a controlled study

Aims: To evaluate efficacy of a pathway-based quality improvement intervention on appropriate prescribing of the low molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin, in patients with varying risk categories of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods: Rates of enoxaparin use retrospectively evaluated before and after pathway implementation at an intervention hospital were compared to concurrent control patients at a control hospital; both were community hospitals in south-east Queensland. The study population was a group of randomly selected patients (n = 439) admitted to study hospitals with a discharge diagnosis of chest pain, angina, or myocardial infarction, and stratified into high, intermediate, low-risk ACS or non-cardiac chest pain: 146 intervention patients (September-November 2003), 147 historical controls (August-December 2001) at the intervention hospital; 146 concurrent controls (September-November 2003) at the control hospital. Interventions were active implementation of a user-modified clinical pathway coupled with an iterative education programme to medical staff versus passive distribution of a similar pathway without user modification or targeted education. Outcome measures were rates of appropriate enoxaparin use in high-risk ACS patients and rates of inappropriate use in intermediate and low-risk patients. Results: Appropriate use of enoxaparin in high-risk ACS patients was above 90% in all patient groups. Inappropriate use of enoxaparin was significantly reduced as a result of pathway use in intermediate risk (9% intervention patients vs 75% historical controls vs 45% concurrent controls) and low-risk patients (9% vs 62% vs 41%; P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Pathway use was associated with a 3.5-fold (95% CI: 1.3-9.1; P = 0.012) increase in appropriate use of enoxaparin across all patient groups. Conclusion: Active implementation of an acute chest pain pathway combined with continuous education reduced inappropriate use of enoxaparin in patients presenting with intermediate or low-risk ACS.

Application of Monte Carlo simulations to identify an appropriate dosage strategy for patients receiving a continuous intravenous infusion of enoxaparin

Aim: To identify an appropriate dosage strategy for patients receiving enoxaparin by continuous intravenous infusion (CII). Methods: Monte Carlo simulations were performed in NONMEM, (200 replicates of 1000 patients) to predict steady state anti-Xa concentrations (Css) for patients receiving a CII of enoxaparin. The covariate distribution model was simulated based on covariate demographics in the CII study population. The impact of patient weight, renal function (creatinine clearance (CrCL)) and patient location (intensive care unit (ICU)) were evaluated. A population pharmacokinetic model was used as the input-output model (1-compartment first order output model with mixed residual error structure). Success of a dosing regimen was based on the percent of Css that is between the therapeutic range of 0.5 IU/ml to 1.2 IU/ml. Results: The best dose for patients in the ICU was 4.2IU/kg/h (success mean 64.8% and 90% prediction interval (PI): 60.1–69.8%) if CrCL60ml/min, the best dose was 8.3IU/kg/h (success mean 65.4%, 90% PI: 58.5–73.2%). Simulations suggest that there was a 50% improvement in the success of the CII if the dose rate for ICU patients with CrCL