Key result
A higher intended INR range of 3.5-4.5 during acenocoumarol therapy was associated with a higher rate of hemorrhagic complications compared to an INR range of 2.0-3.0 (8.2% vs. 1.5%).
Why the study?
What are the risk factors for major bleeding in outpatients treated with chronic oral acenocoumarol?
Cohort (n=811)
What are the risk factors for major bleeding in outpatients treated with chronic oral acenocoumarol?
Absolute Event Rate: 8.2% vs 1.5%
Intensity of anticoagulation and INR variability are the most important risk factors for major bleeding in patients taking acenocoumarol.
Caution advised against higher INR targets with acenocoumarol; leaves open need for randomized confirmation of bleeding risk.
We studied major bleeding complications, death related to hemorrhage, and tried to identify predisposing factors for bleeding in outpatients treated with acenocoumarol. We evaluated 811 outpatients attending a specialized anticoagulant therapy unit. The intended INR range was 3.5-4.5 for mechanical heart valve replacement (N= 384) and 2.0-3.0 for other indications (N= 427). The variability of INR for the total follow-up and the 2 months before the hemorrhage was calculated. The total follow-up was 1,963.26 years with 27,321 control tests. We observed 47 major bleeding episodes, including 2 fatal (central nervous system hemorrhages), in 37 patients. 49.5% of the patients had underlying diseases. The rate of major and fatal hemorrhage was 2.39 and 0.10 episodes per 100 patients year, respectively. Hemorrhagic complications were more frequently observed in patients with a more intense intended range (8.2% in the INR 3.5-4.5 group vs. 1.5% in the 2.0-3.0 INR group). The risk of major bleeding increased in patients with an achieved INR higher than 6 and in those with higher INR variability during follow-up. The estimated probability of bleeding also increased with time: it was 0.102% at 78 months, and at the beginning of therapy it was 0.006% and 0.007% at 1 and 4 months, respectively. The intensity of anticoagulation and the deviation of the INR from the target are the most important risk factors for bleeding in patients taking acenocoumarol. Monitoring the variability of INR can help identifying patients predisposed to bleeding. However, the screening for underlying disease should always be performed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Casais et al. (2000) conducted a cohort in Chronic oral anticoagulation (n=811). Intended INR range 3.5-4.5 vs. Intended INR range 2.0-3.0 was evaluated on Hemorrhagic complications. A higher intended INR range of 3.5-4.5 during acenocoumarol therapy was associated with a higher rate of hemorrhagic complications compared to an INR range of 2.0-3.0 (8.2% vs. 1.5%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: