Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare andexanet alfa and 4-factor prothrombin complex for the reversal of factor Xa-inhibitor bleeding.
Does andexanet alfa improve effective hemostasis compared to 4-factor prothrombin complex in patients with factor Xa-inhibitor related bleeding?
Does andexanet alfa improve effective hemostasis compared to 4-factor prothrombin complex in patients with factor Xa-inhibitor related bleeding?
In a small retrospective cohort, andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC demonstrated similar rates of effective hemostasis and thromboembolic events for the reversal of factor Xa-inhibitor related bleeding.
Hypothesis-generating for andexanet alfa versus 4F-PCC; prospective RCTs needed before practice change.
The aim of this retrospective study was to compare andexanet alfa and 4-factor prothrombin complex (4F-PCC) for reversal of factor Xa (FXa)-inhibitor bleeding. Patients that received andexanet alfa for reversal were included. An equivalent number of patients administered 4F-PCC for FXa-inhibitor bleeding were randomly selected as historical controls. The primary outcome was effective hemostasis achievement within 12 h, defined using ANNEXA-4 criteria. Thromboembolic events and mortality within 30 days were also evaluated. A total of 32 patients were included. Baseline characteristics were not statistically different between andexanet alfa (n = 16) and 4F-PCC (n = 16). Intracranial bleeding was the primary reversal indication in 43.8% versus 62.5% of patients, respectively. Effective hemostasis was reached in 75.0% of andexanet alfa patients compared to 62.5% of 4F-PCC patients ( P = .70). Thromboembolic events occurred in 4 (25.0%) patients and 3 (18.8%) patients, respectively ( P = .99). Mortality incidence was 12.5% and 31.3%, respectively ( P = .39). Andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC attained hemostasis in a majority of patients. A high, but a similar rate of thromboembolic events was seen with both treatments. Prospective studies are needed to elucidate comparative risks and benefits of the 2 agents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stevens et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: