A high percentage of patients undergoing peri-procedural bridging with therapeutic enoxaparin have high residual anti-Xa levels that do not correlate with clinical variables, making the usefulness of routine monitoring unclear.
Residual anti-Xa levels during enoxaparin bridging lack correlation with clinical variables; leaves open the utility of routine monitoring for peri-procedural decisions.
Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) are commonly used as peri-procedural bridging anticoagulants. The usefulness of measurement of anti-factor Xa activity (anti-Xa) to guide bridging therapy with LMWH is unknown. It was the objective of this study to determine levels of anti-Xa during standard bridging therapy with enoxaparin, and to examine predictors for residual anti-Xa. Consecutive patients receiving enoxaparin at a dosage of 1 mg/kg body weight/12 hours for temporary interruption of phenprocoumon were prospectively enrolled to the study. Blood-samples were obtained 14 hours after LMWH-application immediately pre- procedurally. Procedural details, clinical and demographic data were collected and subsequently analyzed. Seventy patients were included (age 75.2 +/- 10.8 years, Cr Cl 55.7 +/- 21.7ml/min, body mass index [BMI] 27.1 +/- 4.9). LMWH- therapy was for a mean of 4.2 +/- 1.6 days; overall anti-Xa was 0.58 +/- 0.32 U/ml. In 37 (52.8%) of patients anti-Xa was > or U/ml, including 10 (14.3%) patients with anti-Xa > 1U/ml. Linear regression analysis of single variables and logistic multivariable regression analysis failed to prove a correlation between anti-Xa and single or combined factors. No major bleeding, no thromboembolism and four (5.7%) minor haemorrhages were observed. When bridging OAC with therapeutic doses of enoxaparin a high percentage of patients undergo interventions with high residual anti-Xa. The levels of anti-Xa vary largely and are independent of single or combined clinical variables. Since the anti-Xa-related outcome of patients receiving bridging therapy with LMWH is not investigated, no firm recommendation on the usefulness of monitoring of anti-Xa can be given at this stage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Omran et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: