Search

Treatment of patients with inherited bleeding disorders (PWIBD) in the emergency department (ED) is challenging. In 2010, a project was started involving all eight hemophilia centers (HC) and all 44 EDs of the Region of Emilia-Romagna (Italy) to improve emergency care for PWIBD. The project incorporates guidelines for emergency treatment, education for ED staff, and a dedicated Web site providing extensive information, proposing treatments, and sharing data with patients' electronic clinical records. A Web algorithm, accessible to PWIBD as well as ED and HC staff, suggests the first dose of concentrate for each type and severity of bleed or trauma. Following training courses in each ED, the network was activated. During 2012 and 2013, the site was visited 14,000 times, the EDs accessed the Web site 1,739 times, and used the algorithms 206 times. In two reference EDs, triage-assessment and triage-treatment times were reduced in 2013 and 2012 (27/20 and 110/71.5 minutes, respectively) and medical advice from the HC increased (54 vs. 24% cases). The main advantages of this system are better management of patients in ED (shorter triage-to-treatment times) and improved collaboration between HCs and EDs. The most critical point remaining is staff turnover in EDs, necessitating continual training., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

Although desmopressin (DDAVP) is considered as the treatment of choice for many patients with mild hemophilia A, several aspects of DDAVP therapy remain unclear, including the rate and type of response and the molecular determinants of its clinical efficacy. To investigate these issues, we retrospectively studied all patients with mild hemophilia A followed up at the Parma Hemophilia Center. A total of 75 patients were enrolled who underwent a DDAVP test, and out of whom, 76% (57/75) had a complete or partial response. Response to DDAVP was significantly correlated to the patients' age (median age of responders and nonresponders: 24 and 18 y, respectively; p = 0.04) and type of mutation (all the 10 patients with mutations in the promoter region were nonresponders). The median basal factor VIII (FVIII):C level was significantly lower in responders than in nonresponders (0.14 vs. 0.19 IU/mL, respectively; p = 0.01); this was mainly due to nonresponders with promoter region mutations who had higher basal FVIII:C levels. During the 12-year follow-up, 82 of 237 (35%) bleeding episodes occurring in 27 responder patients were treated with 246 DDAVP infusions with complete or partial efficacy in 92% (75/82). Overall, 142 events were managed with 253 prophylactic DDAVP infusions, which were hemostatically effective in 96% of cases. No severe adverse reactions to DDAVP administration were recorded during the study period. These results document the safety and efficacy of DDAVP as a treatment or prevention of bleeding in patients with mild hemophilia A, also in the context of home treatment, and encourage the more widespread use of this product., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

To evaluate the role of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as an alternative to oral anticoagulants in the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism, we compared in a randomized trial conventional warfarin treatment with a three-month course of enoxaparin 4000 anti-Xa units once a day subcutaneously. 187 patients with symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (DVT), diagnosed by strain-gauge plethysmography plus D-dimer latex assay and confirmed by venography in most cases, were treated with full-dose subcutaneous heparin for ten days and then randomized to secondary prophylaxis. During the 3-month treatment period, 6 of the 93 patients who received LMWH (6%) and 4 of the 94 patients on warfarin (4%) had symptomatic recurrence of venous thromboembolism confirmed by objective testing (p = 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference, -3% to 7%). Four patients in the LMWH group had bleeding complications as compared with 12 in the warfarin group (p = 0.04; 95% CI for the difference, 4% to 14%). In the 9-month follow-up period, during which 34 patients on warfarin prolonged treatment for other 3 months and 14 up to one year, 10 patients in the enoxaparin group and 4 patients in the warfarin group suffered a documented recurrence of venous thromboembolism. Of these 14 late recurrences, just one occurred in patients with postoperative DVT. After one year there were 16 recurrences (17%) in the LMWH group and 8 (9%) in the warfarin group (p = 0.07; 95% CI for the difference, 1% to 16%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

In our Center for the Surveillance of Anticoagulant Treatment, most of the 1700 patients followed-up are traditionally treated with acenocoumarol, while warfarin is administered nowadays to an increasing proportion of patients. To assess if the difference in the pharmacokinetics of these two drugs may determine a different laboratory quality of treatment, a retrospective study was performed on the computerized files of all 142 patients on treatment with warfarin for more than 100 days and on a control group of 142 patients treated with acenocoumarol, matched for age, sex, disease state and duration of oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT). The study considered 7071 assays for a total of 432 patient-years of treatment. The overall quality of treatment was significantly better in patients treated with warfarin (72% of controls within the therapeutic range versus 67% on acenocoumarol, p < 0.001). Also the individual quality of therapy, which was assessed as the percentage of patients with 75% or more assays in range, was in favour of warfarin (50.7% vs 34.5%, p < 0.05). Warfarin therapy was more stable and fewer assays were required for treatment monitoring. Confounding factors possibly influencing the treatment stability, such as interfering drugs, diagnostic or therapeutical procedures requiring withdrawal of anticoagulation, were evaluated and no significant difference between the two groups was found. The difference in the laboratory quality of OAT was marked in patients treated for prevention of arterial thromboembolism, while it was negligible in patients with venous thromboembolic disease, whose mean duration of OAT was considerably shorter. Since there is no evidence that acenocoumarol is more efficacious or safer than warfarin, the latter seems to be preferable for patients who are candidate to very prolonged OAT.