Oral phytonadione achieved similar mean INR values at 24 hours compared to intravenous administration (2.6 vs 2.9) for excessive anticoagulation, despite a slower initial response.
RCT (n=61)
randomized
Excessive anticoagulation without bleeding (n=61)
Oral phytonadione vs Intravenous phytonadione (0.5 mg or 1 mg) (2.5 mg (for INR 6-10) or 5 mg (for INR >10))
Proportion of patients achieving therapeutic range (INR 2-4) at 12 hours (baseline INR 6-10)
Absolute Event Rate: 34.8% vs 66.7%
BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with excessive anticoagulation is routinely done by intravenous phytonadione (vitamin K1). Oral administration of phytonadione has been shown to be an effective alternative to the intravenous route, but these methods have never been compared directly. Our objective was to compare efficacy and safety of intravenous vs oral phytonadione treatment in patients with excessive anticoagulation without bleeding. METHODS: The study was a prospective randomized controlled trial of consecutive patients presenting with excessive anticoagulation without major bleeding. Patients with a baseline international normalized ratio (INR) of 6 to 10 (n = 44, 47 episodes) received either intravenous or oral phytonadione (0.5 mg or 2.5 mg, respectively), and patients with an INR greater than 10 (n = 17, 19 episodes) received 1 mg or 5 mg, respectively. Efficacy and safety end points were sequential INR changes and the proportion of patients achieving therapeutic range (INR, 2-4), overcorrection (INR4.0) INR values. RESULTS: Sixty-six episodes of excessive anticoagulation were studied. In patients with baseline INR 6-10 the response to intravenous phytonadione was more rapid than in the oral group, and the proportion of patients reaching therapeutic range INR at 6 hours (11/24 vs 0/23) and at 12 hours (16/24 vs 8/23) was significantly higher. However, mean +/- SD INR values were similar for both groups at 24 hours (2.9 +/- 0.8 vs 2.6 +/- 0.8). Patients in the intravenous group tended to be more often (7/24 vs 2/23) overcorrected (INR<2). In patients with baseline INR values greater than 10 efficacy and safety were comparable for both routes of administration. CONCLUSION: Oral administration of phytonadione had similar efficacy and safety as intravenously administered phytonadione and may be suitable for treatment of patients with excessive anticoagulation.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Aharon Lubetsky
Tel Aviv University
Hagith Yonath
Tel Aviv University
David Olchovsky
Tel Aviv University
Archives of Internal Medicine
Sheba Medical Center
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Lubetsky et al. (Mon,) conducted a rct in Excessive anticoagulation without bleeding (n=61). Oral phytonadione vs. Intravenous phytonadione (0.5 mg or 1 mg) was evaluated on Proportion of patients achieving therapeutic range (INR 2-4) at 12 hours (baseline INR 6-10). Oral phytonadione achieved similar mean INR values at 24 hours compared to intravenous administration (2.6 vs 2.9) for excessive anticoagulation, despite a slower initial response.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0a584597b2cd656859160a — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.163.20.2469
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: