Key result
In patients with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage receiving 4FPCC, there was no significant difference in ICH expansion between those on DOACs versus warfarin.
Why the study?
Four factor prothrombin complex concentrate is indicated for warfarin reversal and frequently used for direct-acting oral anticoagulants, but its comparative safety and efficacy in traumatic intracranial hemorrhage required evaluation.
Does 4FPCC prevent ICH expansion similarly in DOAC-anticoagulated patients compared to warfarin-anticoagulated patients with traumatic ICH?
Observational (n=102)
No
Does 4FPCC prevent ICH expansion similarly in DOAC-anticoagulated patients compared to warfarin-anticoagulated patients with traumatic ICH?
4FPCC appears similarly effective and safe for preventing ICH expansion in patients with traumatic ICH on DOACs compared to those on warfarin.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
4FPCC may support similar ICH control in traumatic cases on DOACs versus warfarin; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
Background Patients receiving oral anticoagulation who experience a traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) should receive anticoagulation reversal. Four factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4FPCC) is indicated for reversal of warfarin, and is frequently used for reversal of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The purpose of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of 4FPCC reversal for traumatic ICH in DOAC- and warfarin-anticoagulated patients. Methods This was a single-center, retrospective review of adult patients with traumatic ICH who received 4FPCC for reversal of anticoagulation between April 2013 and August 2018. The ICH volume on the pre- and post-reversal head CT scans was measured. The primary endpoint was the incidence of expansion of ICH volume of blood using pre-and post-4FPCC imaging. Results A total of 102 patients meeting inclusion criteria were identified with 75 patients in the warfarin group and 27 patients in the DOAC group. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups except DOAC patients had larger ICH volumes at baseline as compared to warfarin patients (23.4 mm 3 vs 3.7 mm 3 , p = 0.0001). There was neither a statistical difference in change in ICH volume pre-and post-4FPCC administration, nor in the rate of >20% ICH expansion between the warfarin and DOAC groups. There was no difference in the rate of adverse events compared between groups. Conclusion There was no difference in the either the change in ICH volume or the rate of >20% ICH expansion in patients receiving 4FPCC for reversal DOAC versus warfarin anticoagulation. Rates of complications were low in both groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moore et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) on oral anticoagulation (n=102). DOAC anticoagulation vs. Warfarin anticoagulation was evaluated on Incidence of expansion of ICH volume of blood using pre-and post-4FPCC imaging. In patients with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage receiving 4FPCC, there was no significant difference in ICH expansion between those on DOACs versus warfarin.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: