A prospective study of an aggressive warfarin dosing algorithm to reach and maintain INR 2 to 3 after heart valve surgery

Summary

Good anticoagulation control in patients during the first months after heart valve surgery is important to prevent thrombotic complications. This is difficult to achieve, partly because the sensitivity to warfarin decreases progressively during approximately three months after valve surgery. A recently developed, simple but aggressive algorithm might improve anticoagulation control in this patient group. It was the objective of this study to evaluate the level of anticoagulation control when a specialised anticoagulation clinic changed from empirical dosing to the use of this new algorithm. In a before-and-after design, a cohort of consecutive patients managed with a new, aggressive dosing algorithm (‘Algorithm cohort’) was compared to a ‘Retrospective cohort’ of similar patients dosed empirically. Primary endpoint was individual time in therapeutic range (ITTR) during the first three months of warfarin therapy. Secondary endpoints included proportion of extreme International Normalised Ratio (INR) results, thrombotic and bleeding complications. Ninety-eight patients were included in the Algorithm cohort, 94 of whom were warfarin-naïve. Two hundred patients were included in the Retrospective cohort. Mean ITTR was 60.1% in the Algorithm cohort versus 48.7% in the Retrospective cohort (p <0.001). Patients in the Algorithm cohort spent 0.5% of time at an INR >5, versus 0.2 % in the Retrospective cohort. There was no major bleeding in either cohort; one patient in each cohort had a thrombotic complication. We demonstrate an improvement of the level of anticoagulation control with the use of a condition-specific, aggressive algorithm, as compared to standard dosing, in patients after heart valve surgery.

Keywords

Cardiology - management of disease - stroke/prevention

• References

• 1 Salem DN, O’Gara PT, Madias C. et al. Valvular and structural heart disease: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Chest 2008; 133 (Suppl. 06) 593S-629S.
• 2 Veeger NJ, Piersma-Wichers M, Hillege HL. et al. Early detection of patients with a poor response to vitamin K antagonists: the clinical impact of individual time within target range in patients with heart disease. J Thromb Haemost 2006; 4: 1625-1627.
• 3 Eitz T, Schenk S, Fritzsche D. et al. International normalized ratio self-management lowers the risk of thromboembolic events after prosthetic heart valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85: 949-954.
• 4 Butchart EG, Payne N, Li HH. et al. Better anticoagulation control improves survival after valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002; 123: 715-723.
• 5 Kulik A, Rubens FD, Wells PS. et al. Early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve replacement: a systematic review. Ann Thorac Surg 2006; 81: 770-781.
• 6 Dunn AS, Turpie AG. Perioperative management of patients receiving oral anticoagulants: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 901-908.
• 7 Torn M, Rosendaal FR. Oral anticoagulation in surgical procedures: risks and recommendations. Br J Haematol 2003; 123: 676-682.
• 8 Ageno W, Turpie AG. Exaggerated initial response to warfarin following heart valve replacement. Am J Cardiol 1999; 84: 905-908.
• 9 Cade JF, Hirsh J, Clarebrough JK. Anticoagulants after open-heart surgery. Med J Aust 1970; 2: 5-6.
• 10 Meijer K, Kim YK, Schulman S. Decreasing warfarin sensitivity during the first three months after heart valve surgery: Implications for dosing. Thromb Res 2010; 125: 224-229.
• 11 Kim YK, Nieuwlaat R, Connolly SJ. et al. Effect of a simple two-step warfarin dosing algorithm on anticoagulant control as measured by time in therapeutic range: a pilot study. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8: 101-106.
• 12 Schulman S, Kearon C. Definition of major bleeding in clinical investigations of antihemostatic medicinal products in non-surgical patients. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3: 692-694.
• 13 Rosendaal FR, Cannegieter SC, van der Meer FJ. et al. A method to determine the optimal intensity of oral anticoagulant therapy. Thromb Haemost 1993; 69: 236-239.
• 14 Veeger NJ, Piersma-Wichers M, Tijssen JG. et al. Individual time within target range in patients treated with vitamin K antagonists: main determinant of quality of anticoagulation and predictor of clinical outcome. A retrospective study of 2300 consecutive patients with venous thromboembolism. Br J Haematol 2005; 128: 513-519.
• 15 Chatellier G, Colombet I, Degoulet P. Computer-adjusted dosage of anticoagulant therapy improves the quality of anticoagulation. Stud Health Technol Inform 1998; 52: 819-823.
• 16 Poller L, Keown M, Ibrahim S. et al. A multicentre randomised clinical endpoint study of PARMA 5 computer-assisted oral anticoagulant dosage. Br J Haematol 2008; 143: 274-283.
• 17 Poller L, Keown M, Ibrahim S. et al. A multicentre randomised assessment of the DAWN AC computer-assisted oral anticoagulant dosage program. Thromb Haemost 2009; 101: 487-494.
• 18 Aramendi JI, Mestres CA, Martinez-Leon J. et al. Triflusal versus oral anticoagulation for primary prevention of thromboembolism after bioprosthetic valve replacement (trac): prospective, randomized, co-operative trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2005; 27: 854-860.
• 19 Ansell J, Hirsh J, Hylek E. et al. Pharmacology and management of the vitamin K antagonists: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Chest 2008; 133 (Suppl. 06) 160S-198S.