• Rahat A Abdoellakhan, Nakisa Khorsand, Ewoud Ter Avest, Heleen Lameijer, Laura M Faber, Paula F Ypma, Laurens Nieuwenhuizen, VeegerNic J G MNJGMDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands., and Karina Meijer.
• Department of Haematology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: r.a.abdoellakhan@umcg.nl.
• Ann Emerg Med. 2022 Jan 1; 79 (1): 20-30.

Study ObjectiveTo determine if a fixed dose of 1000 IU of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) is as effective as traditional variable dosing based on body weight and international normalized ratio (INR) for reversal of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) anticoagulation.MethodsIn this open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial, patients with nonintracranial bleeds requiring VKA reversal with 4F-PCC were allocated to either a 1,000-IU fixed dose of 4F-PCC or the variable dose. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with effective hemostasis according to the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis definition. The design was noninferiority with a lower 95% confidence interval of no more than -6%. When estimating sample size, we assumed that fixed dosing would be 4% superior.ResultsFrom October 2015 until January 2020, 199 of 310 intended patients were included before study termination due to decreasing enrollment rates. Of the 199 patients, 159 were allowed in the per-protocol analysis. Effective hemostasis was achieved in 87.3% (n=69 of 79) in fixed compared to 89.9% (n=71 of 79) in the variable dosing cohort (risk difference 2.5%, 95% confidence interval -13.3 to 7.9%, P=.27). Median door-to-needle times were 109 minutes (range 16 to 796) in fixed and 142 (17 to 1076) for the variable dose (P=.027). INR less than 2.0 at 60 minutes after 4F-PCC infusion was reached in 91.2% versus 91.7% (P=1.0).ConclusionThe large majority of patients had good clinical outcome after 4F-PCC use; however, noninferiority of the fixed dose could not be demonstrated because the design assumed the fixed dose would be 4% superior. Door-to-needle time was shortened with the fixed dose, and INR reduction was similar in both dosing regimens.Copyright © 2021 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

22 keywords...

hide…