• Cassie A Barton, Marissa Hom, Nathan B Johnson, Jon Case, Ran Ran, and Martin Schreiber.
• Department of Pharmacy, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, OR 97239, USA. Electronic address: bartonc@ohsu.edu.
• Am. J. Surg. 2018 May 1; 215 (5): 775-779.

IntroductionLife-threatening bleeding can complicate warfarin therapy. Rapid anticoagulant reversal via replacement of vitamin-K dependent clotting factors is essential for hemostasis. We compare two methods of rapid factor replacement for warfarin reversal.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of warfarin-treated patients experiencing life-threatening bleeding who received a reversal protocol comprised of 4F PCC or 3F PCC and rFVIIa was performed. Demographic, clinical and anticoagulant reversal information, and all adverse events attributed to warfarin reversal were recorded.Results195 patients were included in final analysis. While baseline demographics were similar between groups, the 3F-PCC group had a longer ICU LOS and higher in-hospital mortality (p < .01, .01). Pre-reversal INR was similar between both groups, but post-reversal INR was significantly lower in the 3F-PCC group, 0.8 versus 1.3 (p < .01). Significantly more patients experienced thromboembolic complications in the 3F-PCC group than the 4F-PCC group (p < .01). Receipt of rFVIIa was significantly associated with thromboembolic complications.DiscussionA 4F PCC reversal strategy is efficacious in INR reversal and provides lower thromboembolic risk as compared to 3F PCC with rFVIIa.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

31 keywords...

hide…