Thombosis, major bleeding, and survival in COVID-19 supported by veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the first vs second wave: a multicenter observational study in the United Kingdom

Background Bleeding and thrombosis are major complications of veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Objectives To assess thrombosis, major bleeding (MB), and 180-day survival in patients supported by VV-ECMO between the first (March 1 to May 31, 2020) and second (June 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021) waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods An observational study of 309 consecutive patients (aged ≥18years) with severe COVID-19 supported by VV-ECMO was performed in 4 nationally commissioned ECMO centers in the United Kingdom. Results Median age was 48 (19-75) years, and 70.6% were male. Probabilities of survival, thrombosis, and MB at 180 days in the overall cohort were 62.5% (193/309), 39.8% (123/309), and 30% (93/309), respectively. In multivariate analysis, an age of >55 years (hazard ratio [HR], 2.29; 95% CI, 1.33-3.93; P = .003) and an elevated creatinine level (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.19-3.08; P = .008) were associated with increased mortality. Correction for duration of VV-ECMO support, arterial thrombosis alone (HR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-5.9; P = .002) or circuit thrombosis alone (HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.4-6.3; P < .001) but not venous thrombosis increased mortality. MB during ECMO had a 3-fold risk (95% CI, 2.6-5.8, P < .001) of mortality. The first wave cohort had more males (76.7% vs 64%; P = .014), higher 180-day survival (71.1% vs 53.3%; P = .003), more venous thrombosis alone (46.4% vs 29.2%; P = .02), and lower circuit thrombosis (9.2% vs 28.1%; P < .001). The second wave cohort received more steroids (121/150 [80.6%] vs 86/159 [54.1%]; P < .0001) and tocilizumab (20/150 [13.3%] vs 4/159 [2.5%]; P = .005). Conclusion MB and thrombosis are frequent complications in patients on VV-ECMO and significantly increase mortality. Arterial thrombosis alone or circuit thrombosis alone increased mortality, while venous thrombosis alone had no effect. MB during ECMO support increased mortality by 3.9-fold. Keywords: COVID-19; extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; hemorrhage; mortality; thrombosi

Management of direct oral anticoagulants in women of childbearing potential: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH: reply

We thank Dr Desborough and colleagues for their response to the recently published guidance from the SSC of the ISTH on the management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in women of childbearing potential [1,2]. We have carefully examined their view and seriously considered their proposal regarding the recommendation of this guidance as detailed below. We hereby, provide a detailed response to their letter. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserve

Six month mortality in patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 viral pneumonitis managed with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

A significant proportion of patients with COVID-19 develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with high risk of death. The efficacy of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) for COVID-19 on longer-term outcomes, unlike in other viral pneumonias, is unknown. In this study, we aimed to compare the 6 month mortality of patients receiving VV-ECMO support for COVID-19 with a historical viral ARDS cohort. Fifty-three consecutive patients with COVID-19 ARDS admitted for VV-ECMO to the Royal Brompton Hospital between March 17, 2020 and May 30, 2020 were identified. Mortality, patient characteristics, complications, and ECMO parameters were then compared to a historical cohort of patients with non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia. At 6 months survival was significantly higher in the COVID-19 than in the non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia cohort (84.9% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.040). Patients with COVID-19 had an increased Murray score (3.50 vs. 3.25, p = 0.005), a decreased burden of organ dysfunction (sequential organ failure score score [8.76 vs. 10.42, p = 0.004]), an increased incidence of pulmonary embolism (69.8% vs. 24.5%, p < 0.001) and in those who survived to decannulation longer ECMO runs (19 vs. 11 days, p = 0.001). Our results suggest that survival in patients supported with EMCO for COVID-19 are at least as good as those treated for non-COVID-19 viral ARDS

Clinical outcomes and the impact of prior oral anticoagulant use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to hospitals in the UK — a multicentre observational study

Coagulation dysfunction and thrombosis are major complications in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients on oral anticoagulants (OAC) prior to diagnosis of COVID-19 may therefore have better outcomes. In this multicentre observational study of 5 883 patients (≥18 years) admitted to 26 UK hospitals between 1 April 2020 and 31 July 2020, overall mortality was 29·2%. Incidences of thrombosis, major bleeding (MB) and multiorgan failure (MOF) were 5·4%, 1·7% and 3·3% respectively. The presence of thrombosis, MB, or MOF was associated with a 1·8, 4·5 or 5·9-fold increased risk of dying, respectively. Of the 5 883 patients studied, 83·6% (n = 4 920) were not on OAC and 16·4% (n = 963) were taking OAC at the time of admission. There was no difference in mortality between patients on OAC vs no OAC prior to admission when compared in an adjusted multivariate analysis [hazard ratio (HR) 1·05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0·93–1·19; P = 0·15] or in an adjusted propensity score analysis (HR 0·92 95% CI 0·58–1·450; P = 0·18). In multivariate and adjusted propensity score analyses, the only significant association of no anticoagulation prior to diagnosis of COVID-19 was admission to the Intensive-Care Unit (ICU) (HR 1·98, 95% CI 1·37–2·85). Thrombosis, MB, and MOF were associated with higher mortality. Our results indicate that patients may have benefit from prior OAC use, especially reduced admission to ICU, without any increase in bleeding

Clinical outcomes and the impact of oral anticoagulants prior to diagnosis of COVID-19 on clinical outcomes in patients admitted to hospitals in the UK – a multicentre observational study

Coagulation dysfunction and thrombosis are major complications in patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Patients on oral anticoagulants prior to diagnosis of COVID-19 may therefore have better outcomes. We aimed: To first document the frequency of thrombosis, major bleeding and multiorgan failure (MOF) in patients admitted with COVID-19 and the contribution of these complications to 90-day mortality. To then determine the effects of oral anticoagulation, use prior to admission on the same outcomes as well as the requirement for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, when compared to a propensity matched cohort of patients not taking oral anticoagulants prior to admission. Methods: This was a multicentre observational cohort including adult patients (≥18 years) admitted to 26 UK hospitals between 1st of April 2020 and 31 July 2020. Findings: A total of 5883 patients were included in the study. Overall mortality was 29.2%. Incidences of thrombosis, major bleeding and MOF were 5.4%,1.7% and 3.3% respectively. The presence of thrombosis, major bleeding, or MOF were associated with a 1.8, 4.5 or 5.9-fold increased risk of dying, respectively. Of the 5883 patients studied, 83.6% (n= 4920) were not on oral anticoagulants (OAC) and 16.4% (n=963) were taking OAC at the time of admission. There was no difference in mortality between patients on OAC vs no OAC prior to admission when compared in an adjusted multivariate analysis (HR 1.05 (95%CI 0.93-1.19) P=0.15) or in an adjusted propensity score analysis (HR 0.92 (95%CI 0.58-1.450, P=0.18). In multivariate and adjusted propensity score analyses, the only significant association of no anticoagulants prior to admission was treatment in ICU (HR 1.98 [95%CI 1.37-2.85]). Interpretation: Thrombosis, major bleeding, and MOF were associated with higher mortality. Our results indicate that patients may continue to benefit from OAC after admission, especially reduced admission to ICU, without any increase in bleeding. Funding: Bayer plc supported the study by providing the investigator-initiated funding (P87339) to setup the multicentre database of the study. Declaration of Interest: DJA received funding from Bayer plc to setup the multicentre database of the study as an investigator-initiated funding and received research grant from Leo Pharma. ML received consultation and speaker fees from Astra-Zeneca, Sobi, Leo-Pharma, Takeda and Pfizer. PN received research grants from Novartis, Principia and Rigel, unrestricted grants from Sanofi, Chugai and Octapharma and honoraria from Bayer. RA received fees from Alexion, Bayer, BMS, Pfizer and Portola. SS has received meeting sponsorship, speaker fees and/or consultancy from Bayer, Pfizer, NovoNordisk, Sobi, Chugai/Roche and Shire/Takeda. SS receives funding support from the Medical Research Council (MR/T024054/1). The research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). SL has received speaker fees from Bayer, BMS and Pfizer. Others have no conflict of interests to declare. Ethical Approval: The study was approved by the Health Research Authority (HRA), Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW) and received local Caldicott Guardian support in Scotland (reference number: 20/HRA/1785). Data was collected both retrospectively and prospectively from patient clinical records by the treating medical team with no breach of privacy or anonymity by allocating a unique study number with no direct patient identifiable data; therefore, consent was waived by the HRA