Key result
Antithrombotics and apheresis lack evidence for treating suspected post-COVID-19 microclots outside trials.
Why the study?
The pathophysiology of the post-COVID-19 condition is debated, with a hypothesis that persistent prothrombotic changes cause symptoms lacking critical appraisal.
The hypothesis that microclots cause post-COVID-19 condition lacks robust evidence, and off-label use of antithrombotics or apheresis is currently unjustified.
Does not justify off-label antithrombotics or apheresis for post-COVID-19 condition; leaves open microclot causality pending rigorous trials.
People with the post-COVID-19 condition suffer symptoms that persist beyond 12 weeks following acute COVID-19 infection. Fatigue, shortness of breath, and cognitive dysfunction ("brain fog") are common. Scientists, clinicians, and patients debate the pathophysiology. One pathophysiological hypothesis is that prothrombotic changes associated with acute COVID-19 persist, causing clots that lead to symptoms. This theory, arising from a research team in South Africa and supported by a paper in Nature Medicine, has been widely disseminated on social media and entered the public narrative as a cause of the post-COVID-19 condition. We describe the development of this theory, examine the findings of a Cochrane review that critically appraises the "microclot" beliefs, and critically appraise the influential study relating clotting biomarkers to cognitive deficits. We conclude the inferences for the hypothesis are not based on evidence, unlicensed use of antithrombotic medication is not justified, and apheresis should not be considered outside of a well-designed clinical trial.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hunt et al. (2024) conducted a review in post-COVID-19 condition. Antithrombotic medication and apheresis was evaluated. The hypothesis that microclots cause post-COVID-19 condition lacks evidence, and unlicensed use of antithrombotic medication or apheresis is not justified outside of well-designed clinical trials.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: