Dosing Of Thromboprophylaxis And Mortality In Critically Ill Covid-19 Patients

Sandra Jonmarker; Jacob Hollenberg; Martin Dahlberg; Otto Stackelberg; Jacob Litorell; Åsa H Everhov; Hans Järnbert-Pettersson; Mårten Söderberg; Jonathan Grip; Anna Schandl; Mattias Günther; Maria Cronhjort

doi:10.1101/2020.09.17.20195867

ABSTRACT

Background A substantial proportion of critically ill COVID-19 patients develop thromboembolic complications, but it is unclear whether higher doses of thromboprophylaxis are associated with lower mortality rates. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the association of initial dosing strategy of thromboprophylaxis in critically ill COVID-19 patients and the risk of death, thromboembolism, and bleeding.

Method All critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to two intensive care units in March and April 2020 were eligible. Patients were categorized into three groups according to initial daily dose of thromboprophylaxis; low (2500-4500 IU tinzaparin or 2500-5000 IU dalteparin), medium (>4500 IU but <175 IU/kilogram, kg, of body weight tinzaparin or >5000 IU but <200 IU/kg of body weight dalteparin), and high dose (≥ 175 IU/kg of body weight tinzaparin or ≥200 IU/kg of body weight dalteparin). Thromboprophylaxis dosage was based on local standardized recommendations, not on degree of critical illness or risk of thrombosis. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios with corresponding 95% confidence intervals of death within 28 days from ICU admission. Multivariable models were adjusted for sex, age, body-mass index, Simplified Acute Physiology Score III, invasive respiratory support, and initial dosing strategy of thromboprophylaxis.

Results A total of 152 patients were included; 67 received low, 48 medium, and 37 high dose thromboprophylaxis. Baseline characteristics did not differ between groups. Mortality was lower in high (13.5%) vs medium (25.0%) and low dose thromboprophylaxis (38.8%) groups, p=0.02. The hazard ratio of death was 0.33 (95% confidence intervals 0.13 – 0.87) among those who received high dose, respectively 0.88 (95% confidence intervals 0.43 – 1.83) among those who received medium dose, as compared with those who received low dose thromboprophylaxis. There were fewer thromboembolic events in the high (2.7%) vs medium (18.8%) and low dose thromboprophylaxis (17.9%) groups, p=0.04, but no difference in the proportion of bleeding events, p=0.16.

Conclusions Among critically ill COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure, high dose thromboprophylaxis was associated with a lower risk of death and a lower cumulative incidence of thromboembolic events compared with lower doses.

Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04412304 June 2 2020, retrospectively registered

Competing Interest Statement

M. Cronhjort has honoraria for lectures from B. Braun. With this exception the authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Clinical Trial

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04412304 June 2 2020, retrospectively registered due to heavy workload

Funding Statement

No external funding has been received.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study was approved by the regional ethical review board in Uppsala, Sweden, (Dnr: 2020-01302, amendment 2020-02890) and informed consent was waived

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

The datasets generated and analyzed during current study are not publicly available due to patient records regulations but can be made available from corresponding author on request.