Dr. MJ Bazos MD,
Patient Handout
Venous
Thromboembolism (VTE)
Patient population: Adults with suspected
acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremity, pulmonary embolus
(PE), or both. Prophylaxis and upper-extremity thrombosis are beyond the scope
of this document.
Objectives: (1)
Improve the recognition of VTE and selection of appropriate testing for VTE. (2)
Shorten resolution time for clinical symptoms. (3) Reduce incidence of pulmonary
embolism. (4) Reduce mortality. (5) Reduce bleeding complications. (6) Reduce
costs of hospitalization and occurrence of
complications.
Key
Points
_
Initiate treatment immediately.
Patients without contraindications to heparin should begin fulldose
heparinization at once [evidence:
A*]. If PE is clinically likely,
initiation should not await testing; if only DVT is suspected and testing will
be prompt, initiation may await testing. Therapeutic levels should be achieved
as quickly as possible. Warfarin should be initiated on day 1 of treatment,
after heparin loading is
complete.
_
Diagnosis
.
Clinical findings uncertain. Symptoms and signs (see Table 1) are not
adequately sensitive or specific for diagnosis or exclusion of
DVT.
. Lower extremity DVT: Venous
duplex imaging is the standard for
diagnosis.
. Pulmonary
embolism
- Lab tests inadequate.
ECG and laboratory (including blood gas determination) are
not
adequately sensitive or specific to
diagnose or exclude PE.
- Clinical
findings + V/Q scan. Diagnosis requires a combination of clinical
likelihood
estimation plus
ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scanning (See Figure 1 and Table
5).
- Pulmonary angiography is
indicated: When the clinical likelihood estimate yields
a
reasonable likelihood of PE but V/Q
results are neither high probability nor normal and lower extremity Doppler
studies are negative, and when the risk of complications of treatment is
high.
_
Treatment
.
Heparin
- Low molecular weight
heparin (LMWH) preferred for DVT. LMWH is preferred over unfractionated
heparin (UFH) for treatment of DVT for both safety and cost reasons
[evidence:A*].
PE should be treated with full-dose IV UFH at this
time.
- Outpatient use of LMWH. LMWH
is appropriate for selected patients to use at home after initial brief hospital
admission and stabilization. It may be appropriate for use
without
admission, but patient selection
criteria for such use are not yet
defined.
- Unfractionated heparin.
If UFH is used, it should be initiated and dosed in a
structured
manner (examples attached as
Tables 2 and 3), in order to achieve therapeutic levels
quickly
and without excessive adjustment of
dosing [evidence:
A*].
- Minimum time period.
Heparin must be continued for at least five days in order to minimize the
risk of extension of thrombosis or occurrence or recurrence of embolism
[evidence:
B*].
. Warfarin. Patients should
begin warfarin on day one of heparin therapy after heparin loading is complete,
and INRs must be in the 2-3 range before discontinuation of heparin
[evidence:
A,B*].
.
If heparin contraindicated. Patients who are not candidates for heparin
anticoagulation due to risk of major bleeding or to drug sensitivity should have
an inferior vena cava filter placed to prevent pulmonary embolization
[evidence:
B*].
. If warfarin contraindicated.
Patients who can receive heparin but cannot take warfarin (e.g., during
pregnancy) may be anticoagulated for several months with full-dose subcutaneous
heparin [evidence:
A*], preferably
LMWH.
* Levels of evidence
reflect the best available literature in support of an intervention or
test:
A=randomized controlled
trials; B=controlled trials, no randomization; C=observational trials; D=opinion
of expert panel.
2
UMHS Venous Thromboembolism
Guideline, June 1998
Table 1. Clinical
Findings Possibly Associated with Pulmonary Embolism*
- Clinical situation
- Elderly or chronically ill, e.g.
malignancy
- Prolonged immobility
- Post-operative state
- Trauma
- Prior venous thromboembolism
- Prothrombic disorder (e.g. factor V
Leiden,
- prothrombin (Factor II) variant 20210 G to
A,
- hyperhomocystinuria, protein C or S
- deficiency, antithrombin III
deficiency
- Chest X-ray Elevated hemidiaphragm (loss of lung
volume)
- Infiltrate
- Pleural effusion
- Atelectasis
- Symptoms Dyspnea
- Chest pain (pleuritic)
- Hemoptysis
- Syncope
- Apprehension
- Cough
- Diaphoresis
- Electrocardiogram***
- Sinus tachycardia
- S1Q3T3
- Rightward QRS axis
- Transient RBBB
- T wave inversion, ST segment depression
in
- right precordial leads
- P pulmonale pattern
- ST segment elevation in lead III
- Signs Tachypnea
- Tachycardia
- Evidence of lower extremity DVT
- Hypotension
- Fever
- Crackles
- Loud P2
- Gallop rhythm
- Arterial
- Blood
- Gases
- (ABGs)**
- Hypoxia
- Hypocapnia
- Increased A-a
gradient
*Within each category
findings are listed in approximate order of positive predictive value based on
expert opinion.
**Cannot use normal ABGs to
exclude PE. In one study, for patients with suspected PE and with normal paO2,
paCO2, and P(A-a)O2, 38% were found to have
PE.
***Changes found in fewer than 10% of
cases of PE.
Table 3. Duration
of Anticoagulant Therapy: Clinical
Considerations
Patient Subgroup
Recommendation
Calf-vein thrombosis
with no previous venous thromboembolism: 3 months of anticoagulant
therapy
Proximal deep-vein thrombosis or
pulmonary embolism with no previous venous thromboembolism: 3-6 months of
anticoagulant therapy
Metastatic cancer: 6
months of anticoagulant therapy or long-term anticoagulant
therapy
Congenital or acquired risk factor
present: a
6 months of anticoagulant therapy or
long-term
anticoagulant
therapy
Recurrent venous thromboembolism: 1
year up to indefinite duration anticoagulant
therapy
Venous thromboembolism during
pregnancy: SQ adjusted-dose UFH b
or SQ fixed-dose low-molecularweight heparin
until delivery, then warfarin for 4-6 weeks
post-partum
Adapted with modification
from Ginsberg JS. Management of Venous Thromboembolism. N Engl J Med.
1996;335:1816-1828.
Note: These general
guidelines are based upon clinical trials and expert opinion. Each patient must
be managed individually, which may require an alternative treatment plan to that
suggested above.
a
Thrombophilic risk factors include congenital
resistance to activated protein C (i.e. factor V Leiden); prothrombin (factor
II) variant 20210 G to A; hyperhomocystinemia; congenital deficiencies of
protein C, protein S, antithrombin III, or plasminogen; and antiphospholipid
antibodies.
b
Doses should be adjusted to prolong a
mid-interval APTT (i.e., one measured six hours after injection) into
the
therapeutic
range.
Clinical
Background
Clinical Problem and
Current Dilemma
Deep venous thrombosis
(DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) together comprise the spectrum of venous
thromboembolic disease (VTE). VTE is one of the most frequent causes of
hospitalization for adults and often complicates surgery and childbirth, carries
significant risk of death and of long-term sequelae such as postphlebitic
syndrome. Historically, prior to the widespread use of heparin, approximately
12% of all patients with clinically evident DVT died, most often from PE.
Clinical findings are not adequate for diagnosis or exclusion. New imaging
modalities are important, but their characteristics need to be understood and
incorporated into cost-effective diagnostic strategies. Management of
heparinization is variable. Over- and undershooting target levels is commonplace
and extends hospital stays. Some patients are not able to receive warfarin, and
some cannot receive any anticoagulation at all, complicating management of their
VTE. The state of the art in managing VTE is changing rapidly with the
introduction of low-molecular-weight heparin. LMWH may soon supplant UFH for
most or all indications. Throughout this document DVT of the veins distal to the
knee is not distinguished from proximal DVT. There has been an informal clinical
tradition of regarding below-knee DVT as not requiring treatment, or being
amenable to observation. However, studies of PE rates find that
over
30% of distal DVTs embolize (compared
to 50% of proximal ones), and symptomatic recurrence rates for untreated distal
DVT exceed 30%. The risks posed by distal DVTs are lower than proximal DVT, but
not greatly so, and not enough to merit less serious
treatment.
Rationale for
Recommendations
Diagnosis of Deep
Venous Thrombosis
Clinical
recognition of possible DVT.
The
clinical diagnosis of DVT is challenging and characterized by uncertainty. DVT
may be suspected in the settings listed under “Clinical situation”
in Table 1, but is by no means limited to these settings. Typical symptoms and
signs include swelling and tenderness of the calf, and Homan’s sign
(slight pain at the back of the knee or calf when the ankle is slowly and gently
dorsiflexed, with the knee bent). However, half of significant DVTs are without
clinical symptoms or signs, so these may not be relied on for diagnosis.
Superficial thrombophlebitis may closely resemble DVT, as may ruptured
Baker’s cyst, gastrocnemius-soleus muscle injuries, and other conditions.
The diagnosis cannot be made or excluded on clinical grounds, therefore
threshold for testing should be
low.
Testing for DVT.
The standard clinical practice for the
diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis has become venous duplex imaging, with its
most recent innovation being the use of color. The test characteristics of
venous duplex imaging are presented in Table 4. The high negative predictive
values (NPV) suggest that withholding anticoagulation on the basis of a negative
study is appropriate. In the asymptomatic patient, there is wider range of
positive predictive values (PPV). Below knee PPV for DVT diagnosis ranges as low
as 75% to as high as 100%. NPVs remain good at the below-knee location, again
suggesting that withholding anticoagulation on the basis of a negative study is
appropriate. As noted in the table, color duplex is superior to grey scale and
significant improvement in the sensitivity at the
below
knee level has been found with the
addition of color to duplex imaging. The use of venous duplex imaging for upper
extremity deep venous thrombosis has also been documented. Venous duplex imaging
is superior to indirect tests such as continuous wave doppler for DVT diagnosis
and has markedly decreased the need for phlebography. Phlebography carries
appreciable local morbidity, the risk of contrast administration, and is
technically inadequate in 7-20% of studies. It is appropriate for use when
falsenegative duplex imaging results are suspected on clinical grounds, or when
the duplex study is technically
inadequate.
Diagnosis of Pulmonary
Embolism
Clinical recognition of
possible PE.
There is no definitive
set of bedside diagnostic findings. Clinicians select patients for testing for
PE based on a high index of suspicion and awareness of clinical findings of PE
illustrated in Table 1. The clinical features in Table 1 are listed in
approximate order of positive predictive value, within each category. However,
specific test characteristics for each finding are not available. The clinical
detection of PE is not amenable to checklist or rule-based diagnosis; it remains
a patternrecognition task, requiring the skills of an experienced clinician.
Clinicians less familiar with PE are encouraged to consult an expert when the
question arises.
Testing for PE.
The initial basis of testing for PE is
ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scanning. From 30-70%
of
patients will need no other test, and a
normal scan effectively excludes PE (see Figure 1 and Table 5). For other than
normal tests, V/Q scanning returns a probability statement as a result, that
must be evaluated in conjunction with the clinical findings (see Table 5). For
example, the positive predictive value (PPV) of an indeterminate probability V/Q
scan is 16% for patients where PE is considered clinically unlikely (middle
section of Table 5); is 66% for patients where PE is considered likely (bottom
section of Table 5), and 28% among those considered clinically uncertain. The
algorithm in Figure 1 illustrates the approach taken with various combinations
of clinical suspicion and V/Q findings. In general the only V/Q interpretations
permitting direct clinical decisions are normal (no treatment) and
high-probability (treatment). Pulmonary angiography is widely considered the
reference standard for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Without a higher
standard to appeal to, we cannot discuss specificity and sensitivity of
pulmonary angiography, using commonly accepted definitions of these terms.
Instead, the accuracy of pulmonary angiography is discussed in terms of
interobserver variability in the reading of pulmonary angiograms obtained in the
context of large multicenter trials. Studies demonstrate that the larger the
embolus, the larger the interobserver agreement. For segmental and larger
emboli, agreement exceeds 95%. For subsegmental emboli, agreement is
considerably less.
Future
developments in testing.
The accuracy
of pulmonary angiography rests on the direct visualization of the intra-arterial
thrombus. Helical computer tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MRI)
angiography also allow direct visualization of the thrombus. Both tests appear
reasonably sensitive for the diagnosis of large central pulmonary emboli. The
exact role for these tests will depend on further development in two areas. (1)
New technical developments (for example, faster data acquisition in CT or new
pulse sequences in MR imaging) may make it possible to achieve acceptable levels
of diagnostic accuracy in segmental as opposed to lobar pulmonary emboli. (2)
Even with significant technical advances, neither helical CT nor MR angiography
appear likely to allow accurate diagnosis of subsegmental pulmonary emboli.
However, the interobserver variability even for invasive pulmonary angiographic
diagnosis of emboli in this size range is substantial. The justification for the
current usual practice of treating subsegmental emboli as equivalent to
segmental or larger emboli is based on sparse and dated clinical data, and on
the lack of any criteria which would identify candidates for withholding
treatment. Improved assays for D-dimer may in the future permit reliable
exclusion of DVT, though at the present time specificity remains low. The FDA
may soon approve a technetium-labeled protein specific for platelet surface
receptors, which can diagnose approximately 80% of
DVTs.
Heparin
Anticoagulation
Demonstration of
efficacy.
Anticoagulation with heparin
followed by warfarin reduces the incidence of recurrent thrombosis and pulmonary
embolism in patients with lower extremity DVT by more than 55 per 100 patients.
It also reduces mortality in patients with PE from about 25-30% to about 2.5%.
Warfarin alone is inadequate. A study testing an oral-agentonly approach (using
acenocoumarol) was
6
UMHS Venous Thromboembolism
Guideline, June 1998
Table 5. Test
Characteristics of V/Q Scanning Scan Report Incidence of
PE
Overall
performance
Normal scan
<<1%
Low probability scan
14%
Intermediate probability scan
30%
High probability scan
90%
Low clinical
likelihood
Normal scan
<<1%
Low probability scan
4%
Intermediate probability scan
16%
High probability scan
80%
High clinical
likelihood
Normal scan
<1%
Low probability scan
14%
Intermediate probability scan
66%
High probability scan
from PIOPED data
>90% terminated early due to an absolute
risk excess for asymptomatic pulmonary embolism of 13 per 100
patients.
There was no reduction in
incidence of bleeding complications with the acenocoumarol-only
strategy.
Preference for LMWH in
DVT.
A number of high-quality
randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the several preparations of
LMWH to UFH in the treatment of DVT. As summarized in two recent meta-analyses,
LMWH for venous thrombosis confers a much lower risk of major bleeding
complication (absolute risk reduction approximately 2 per 100 patients treated;
relative risk
reduction of 58-68%), lower
risk of recurrent thromboembolic disease (RRR 53-68%), and lower risk of death
(RRR 47%). The data for pulmonary embolism are limited; to date LMWH appears as
good as UFH for that indication, but sufficient data for recommendation for
pulmonary embolism do not yet exist. Most studies of LMWH compare fixed-dose or
weightadjusted-dose LMWH given subcutaneously to APTTadjusted- dose UFH given
intravenously. It is not necessary to monitor LMWH therapy, and there are no
routine clinical tests for doing
so.
Dosing of LMWH.
Eight LMWHs are currently marketed.
Each is dosed differently. The common factor is that doses are fixed in total
amount or by body weight, not adjusted by APTT or TCT. Some may be given IV or
SQ, some SQ only.
UMMC currently stocks
enoxaparin (Lovenox) and dalteparin (Fragmin). Enoxaparin package insert calls
for 1mg/kg SQ q12hr for DVT, and dalteparin insert calls for 120 anti-Xa
units/kg SQ q12hr. Other dosing regimens, including larger amounts given as
single daily doses, are supported by data in peer-reviewed literature. These
agents are new and recommendations may change; clinicians should consult the
product information enclosed with the vials of the agent chosen, consult
pharmacy staff, or refer to the continuously updated dosing data on Micromedex
through the INS mainframe computer system. Outpatient treatment has been
demonstrated in several trials but the clinical situations for which outpatient
therapy is appropriate and safe are not yet defined adequately for routine
clinical use of this strategy. In the several trials reported as outpatient
therapy studies, roughly half the patients were hospitalized for two to three
days. LMWH is less costly in overall treatment expense though its acquisition
cost is higher. Shorter, or even no,
hospital
stays account for some of that
advantage. However, even in the inpatient setting the costs of IV administration
and monitoring make UFH costlier than
LMWH.
Dosing UFH.
Careful monitoring of UFH therapy must
be performed at regular intervals to ensure that this agent is effective and
safe; see “Monitoring Therapy” below. Six hours after initiation of
standard heparin therapy for VTE approximately 1/3 of patients will have a
sub-therapeutic APTT, 1/3 will have an APTT within the therapeutic range, and
1/3 will have a supratherapeutic APTT. Failure to achieve a therapeutic APTT is
associated with a marked increase in recurrent thrombotic events. If heparin is
administered in adequate amounts to patients with DVT, symptomatic PE will occur
in only 5% of patients, and fatal PE will occur in < 0.5%. Combined analysis
of 7 studies in which patients with VTE received a 5000 U bolus of heparin and a
continuous infusion of 30,000-40,000 U/24 hr indicates that the risk of
recurrent thrombosis is 5.7%.
Optimal duration.
For UFH, a five day course has been shown
to be as effective as longer courses of treatment in preventing recurrent
thrombosis, provided that warfarin is started early (usually within 24 hours of
diagnosis) and therapeutic oral anticoagulation is achieved prior to
discontinuing heparin. LMWH has not been specifically tested but is believed to
behave similarly.
Route of
administration.
LMWH is normally
administered subcutaneously. Full dose UFH can be administered either by
continuous intravenous (IV) infusion or by intermittent subcutaneous (SQ)
injection. However, analyses of multiple randomized trials suggest that SQ UFH
is as effective as IV UFH in the treatment of DVT, provided that an initial IV
bolus dose (5- 10,000 U) is given, large doses of heparin are administered
(usually > 17,500 U SQ BID), and heparin therapy
is
monitored closely. Pulmonary embolus is
currently treated with IV UFH. UFH can be administered as continuous IV
infusion,intermittent IV boluses, or SQ boluses.
Continuous
infusion is more readily
monitored and adjusted, and probably achieves therapeutic levels more rapidly;
hence it is the standard in our institution. There is only a single small study
of patient preferences, which found that most patients preferred SQ
administration, but IV equipment was not portable in that study.
7
UMHS Venous Thromboembolism
Guideline, June 1998
Monitoring
therapy.
LMWH does not require
monitoring for therapeutic effect, and does not prolong APTT or TCT at
therapeutic levels as much as does standard UFH. The effectiveness of UFH
therapy is usually monitored by the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT)
or the thrombin time (also referred to as the thrombin clotting time, or TCT).
The APTT is readily available and relatively inexpensive. Several studies have
shown that anticoagulation guided by nomograms is superior to individual
physician-guided therapy, which varies significantly. Published nomograms have
been based on the APTT. Table 2 is one such nomogram, in which initial heparin
dose is based on patient weight (the best predictor of heparin requirements),
and subsequent dose changes are based on the APTT. An APTT ratio of 1.5-2.5 x
control is generally considered therapeutic. Unlike the APTT, the TCT does not
require addition of a thromboplastin, and it is not affected by acute phase
increases in plasma proteins or coagulation factors, such as factor VIII, that
occur in acutely ill patients. The TCT also exhibits a more linear relationship
to plasma heparin concentrations than the APTT, especially in the
supratherapeutic range. Therefore in hospitals in which the TCT is performed, a
reasonable approach for dosing heparin is to calculate bolus and initial
maintenance doses based on patient weight (bolus 80 U/kg, maintenance 18
U/kg/hr), and to base subsequent adjustments in heparin dose on the TCT (which
is reported both in seconds and heparin units), aiming for a therapeutic range
of 0.2-0.4 heparin units. In patients whose baseline APTT is prolonged (e.g. due
to lupus-type inhibitor), the TCT is preferred over the APTT for monitoring
heparin therapy. The APTT or TCT is usually measured every 6 hours until stable
anticoagulation is achieved, then each morning. In patients receiving SQ heparin
every 12 hours, clotting times are measured 6 hours after injection. Daily
platelet counts are recommended for patients receiving UFH due to the
approximately 5% incidence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). A modest
and clinically unimportant reduction in platelet counts is more common than HIT.
HIT is a serious complication of heparin therapy that can cause arterial and
venous thrombosis, and less often bleeding. It is caused by a heparin-dependent
platelet antibody that leads to platelet aggregation. The diagnosis should be
suspected in a patient who develops thrombosis on heparin or when there is a
fall
in platelet count to <100,000 or a
decline by ≥50% from baseline counts during heparin therapy, or the
appearance of venous or arterial thrombi. Monitoring of platelet counts should
begin after the 4th day of heparin therapy, but earlier if the patient has
previously been exposed to heparin. If the syndrome is suspected, stop heparin
at once and consult with a specialist for testing and treatment
options.
Overlap of Heparin and
Warfarin
Heparin and warfarin therapy
should overlap during the acute management of venous thrombosis. Clinical trials
suggest that heparin can be discontinued safely once the INR enters the
therapeutic range (2-3) if the patient has received > 5 days of heparin
therapy. Some recommend that heparin be continued until the INR has been in the
therapeutic range for > 2 days, since the antithrombotic effect of warfarin
may be delayed relative to its effect on the prothrombin time. However, clinical
trials have not tested whether this approach offers greater protection against
thrombosis than discontinuation of heparin as soon as the INR is
therapeutic.
Warfarin
Anticoagulation
Efficacy.
Warfarin and other vitamin K
antagonists reduce he incidence of recurrence of thrombosis in patients with DVT
and pulmonary embolism by 30 or more per 100 patients treated.
Administration and monitoring.
Warfarin should be started early,
usually within the first 24 hours of heparin therapy after heparin is
therapeutic. Initial warfarin dosing is typically 10 mg on the first day
followed by 5 mg qd thereafter, with doses given in the evenings. A target INR
of 2.0-3.0 is effective in preventing thrombus extension or recurrence and is
associated with a relatively low risk of bleeding. Combined analysis of 7
studies reveals that 19 of 1283 patients (1.5%) with venous thromboembolism
experienced major bleeding during a 3 month course of warfarin with target INR
2.0-3.0. This equates to a major bleeding risk of 6%/yr in this patient
population. Some patients, such as those with venous thrombosis and
antiphospholipid antibodies, may require more intense warfarin therapy (i.e. INR
3.0-4.0). However, this point is controversial, and adequate studies addressing
this specific issue are
lacking.
Duration.
The optimal duration of warfarin
therapy after DVT or PE depends upon clinical circumstances (see Table 3).
Natural history studies suggest that after a first DVT the risk of recurrent
thrombosis (PE or DVT) is 17.5% at 2 years, 25% at 5 years, and 30% at 8 years.
Patients with continuing risk factors for thrombosis, such as malignancy,
cardiomyopathy, immobility, or hypercoagulable states, are at higher risk, while
patients who experience thrombosis under transient circumstances (e.g.
post-operatively) are at lower risk of recurrence. In general, patients with a
first episode of venous thrombosis should receive 3-6 months of warfarin (Table
3). Some studies suggest that patients with transient risk factors for recurrent
thrombosis (e.g. post-operative DVT) can be safely treated with as few as 4
weeks of warfarin. However, these studies involved small numbers of patients,
and one required documentation of a normal non-invasive venous study prior to
stopping warfarin at 4 weeks. Given the low risk of major bleeding during
properly monitored warfarin therapy (particularly in patients with transient
risk factors for thrombosis), we recommend at least 3 months of warfarin after
confirmed venous thrombosis. Six months of warfarin therapy after a first
episode of DVT results in a lower rate of recurrence than 6 weeks of
therapy.
8
UMHS Venous Thromboembolism
Guideline, June 1998
Patients with a
second episode of venous thromboembolism have a significantly lower rate of
recurrence if they receive warfarin indefinitely (2.6% risk during 4 years of
followup) as opposed to 6 months (20.7% risk of recurrence). However, this
exposes the patient to a higher risk of bleeding complications. Prospective
clinical trials addressing the optimal duration of warfarin therapy in patients
with a first episode of venous thrombosis and an irreversible risk factor
considered to place the patient at high risk of recurrence (e.g. malignancy,
identifiable thrombophilia such as factor V Leiden) are lacking. However, recent
studies suggest that certain patients within this heterogeneous group are at
high risk of recurrent DVT. For example, the risk of recurrent DVT in patients
with a first DVT who carry the factor V Leiden mutation is approximately 25% at
1 year. Therefore, some patients with a first episode of DVT and an irreversible
thrombotic risk factor should be considered for indefinite warfarin therapy.
However, each patient must be considered individually, and determination of the
duration of therapy depends upon consideration of bleeding and thrombotic
risks.
Other considerations.
The frequency of monitoring warfarin
anticoagulation has not been rigorously studied. The frequency needed varies
with both the patient's clinical condition and the stability of the PT level
achieved. Monitoring daily is necessary at initiation, and weekly or more often
during the first few weeks of therapy. Patients on long-established doses may be
monitored as seldom as monthly. Patients on warfarin therapy should also be
aware of the effect of both diet and drug interactions on their anticoagulation
status. Information on dietary sources of vitamin K which can reduce the effect
of warfarin should be provided as part of patient education, as should warning
about OTC vitamin supplementation. Since the list of medications which interact
with warfarin is lengthy, anticoagulated patients should be advised to ask their
physician’s advice before taking any prescription or OTC medications, and
be given a written list of potential interactions (such as a package insert or
patient education sheet). Home monitoring of PT is being tested at the present
time. Though not yet sufficiently advanced for this guideline to recommend it
now, it may be addressed in future
revisions.
Inferior Vena Cava
Filters
There are situations in which
anticoagulation is either contraindicated or has failed. Vena cava filters are
used in these cases to prevent pulmonary emboli. Experts estimate that
approximately 50% of patients with untreated proximal DVT sustain pulmonary
emboli, 30% of which are fatal. Summaries of case series suggest that 1.9% to
2.4% of patients will have pulmonary embolization after filter placement, far
lower than the embolism rate for untreated
DVT.
Indications for IVC
filters. Indications are:
.
Contraindication to anticoagulation
- Fresh
surgical wound
- Active GI or other
bleeding (not occult blood)
- Recent
hemorrhagic CVA
- Multiple/major
trauma
- Recent
neurosurgery
- Inability or unwillingness
to comply with oral anticoagulation
.
Complications of anticoagulation
- Major
bleeding
- Heparin-induced
thrombocytopenia*
- Warfarin-induced skin
necrosis
. Failure of
anticoagulation
. Pulmonary
embolectomy
*Two alternative
agents are available through the
UMHS
Hematology Service for many
patients with HIT.
Prophylactic placement
of IVC filters is common clinical practice in addition to anticoagulation for
patients with poorly-adherent free-floating thrombus (though the only
prospective study does not support this indication), and for patients with
malignancy at risk of hemorrhage if anticoagulated. Some advocate IVC filters
prophylactically for elderly patients with isolated long bone fractures,
comatose patients with severe head injury, patients with multiple long bone and
pelvic fractures, and spinal cord patients with para- or quadriplegia, because
case studies from the surgical literature suggest an approximate
75%
absolute risk reduction for
PE.
Complications. The use of
IVC filters may result in the following
complications:
.
DVT at insertion
site
.
Change in filter position (tilting,
migration)
.
Perforation of inferior vena
cava
.
IVC
thrombosis
.
Local trauma to skin, vessels, nerves at
insertion site
What the Patient Should
Know
Serious condition. Venous
thromboembolism is a serious condition caused by a blood clot forming in the
deep venous system.
Blood thinner.
Treatment requires the use of blood thinners. A balance must be made between
blood clotting so easily that veins are blocked or blood not clotting enough to
stop bleeding. Patients are usually hospitalized while determining the amount of
blood thinner they need.
Other
medicines. If you are on warfarin (Coumadin), always consult your doctor
before beginning any new medication, even over the counter
medications.
Check regularly. Have
your blood tested as regularly as your doctor
recommends.
Abnormal bleeding. Call
your doctor if you have any abnormal bleeding while on warfarin
(Coumadin).
Emergency: chest pain or
breathing problem. Seek emergency care if you develop
- sudden chest pain or
- shortness of
breath.
Pregnancy.
Warfarin can cause birth defects. Notify your doctor if you are
pregnant.