LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Impact of antithrombin III and enoxaparin dosage adjustment on prophylactic anti-Xa concentrations in trauma patients at high risk for venous thromboembolism: a randomized pilot trial

Photo by jessbaileydesigns from unsplash

The impact of antithrombin III activity (AT-III) on prophylactic enoxaparin anti-factor Xa concentration (anti-Xa) is unknown in high-risk trauma patients. So too is the optimal anti-Xa-adjusted enoxaparin dosage. This prospective,… Click to show full abstract

The impact of antithrombin III activity (AT-III) on prophylactic enoxaparin anti-factor Xa concentration (anti-Xa) is unknown in high-risk trauma patients. So too is the optimal anti-Xa-adjusted enoxaparin dosage. This prospective, randomized, pilot study sought to explore the association between AT-III and anti-Xa goal attainment and to preliminarily evaluate two enoxaparin dosage adjustment strategies in patients with subprophylactic anti-Xa. Adult trauma patients with Risk Assessment Profile (RAP) ≥ 5 prescribed enoxaparin 30 mg subcutaneously every 12 h were eligible. AT-III and anti-Xa were drawn 8 h after the third enoxaparin dose and compared between patients with anti-Xa ≥ 0.1 IU/mL (goal; control group) or anti-Xa < 0.1 IU/mL (subprophylactic; intervention group). The primary outcome was difference in baseline AT-III. Subsequently, intervention group patients underwent 1:1 randomization to either enoxaparin 40 mg every 12 h (up to 50 mg every 12 h if repeat anti-Xa < 0.1 IU/mL) (enox12) or enoxaparin 30 mg every 8 h (enox8) with repeat anti-Xa assessments. The proportion of patients achieving goal anti-Xa after dosage adjustment were compared. A total of 103 patients were included. Anti-Xa was subprophylactic in 50.5%. Baseline AT-III (median [IQR]) was 87% [80–98%] in control patients versus 82% [71–96%] in intervention patients (p = 0.092). Goal trough anti-Xa was achieved on first assessment in 38.1% enox12 versus 50% enox8 patients (p = 0.67), 84.6% versus 53.3% on second assessment (p = 0.11), and 100% vs. 54.5% on third trough assessment (p = 0.045). AT-III activity did not differ between high-risk trauma patients with goal and subprophylactic enoxaparin anti-Xa concentrations, although future investigation is warranted. Enoxaparin dose adjustment rather than frequency adjustment may be associated with a higher proportion of patients achieving goal anti-Xa over time.

Keywords: iii; goal; adjustment; enoxaparin; trauma patients; dosage

Journal Title: Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
Year Published: 2021

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.