Hospital patient with medical equipment

Heparin Dosing in Critically Ill Patients: Are We Getting It Right?

"A closer look at whether standard heparin doses are effective for preventing blood clots in obese ICU patients."


Venous thromboembolism (VTE), encompassing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), poses a significant threat to hospitalized patients. These conditions contribute to increased morbidity and mortality, making prevention a top priority. Critically ill individuals admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) face heightened VTE risks that can persist long after discharge.

The incidence of pulmonary embolism in the United States is estimated to affect 1 in every 1,000 individuals annually, resulting in 200,000 to 300,000 hospitalizations. Studies suggest that a concerning 5% to 10% of all in-hospital deaths are attributed to pulmonary embolism, highlighting the urgency for effective preventive strategies.

While sequential compression devices (SCDs) are commonly used, the American College of Physicians (ACP) recommends chemical prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or other anticoagulants as a first-line defense, unless bleeding risks outweigh the benefits. Similarly, the American College of Chest Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) advocate for fixed low-dose UFH (5,000 units every 8-12 hours) for adult DVT prophylaxis.

The Challenge of Heparin Dosing in Obese Patients

Hospital patient with medical equipment

Traditional UFH dosing for thromboprophylaxis has been evaluated primarily based on clinical outcomes such as DVT, PE, major bleeding, and death. However, there is limited data on the correlation between UFH dosing, laboratory values like Anti-Xa levels, and the prevention of thromboembolic events, especially in obese, critically ill patients. Fixed UFH dosing (5,000 units every 8-12 hours) may be suboptimal in this population because heparin pharmacokinetics depend on factors like adipose tissue thickness.

Monitoring Anti-Xa levels may offer a more tailored approach to heparin thromboprophylaxis, particularly in severe obesity, unexpected bleeding complications, renal failure, and pregnancy. The goal is to determine if current UFH dosing recommendations are appropriate for obese, critically ill patients by assessing Anti-Xa levels. Adjusting doses based on Anti-Xa levels could improve outcomes in preventing thromboembolism in the ICU.

  • Study Design: A retrospective chart review was conducted on critically ill patients in the Surgical Intensive Care Unit (SICU) and Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU) at Long Island Jewish Medical Center. Patients aged 18+ who received at least three doses of subcutaneous UFH for thromboprophylaxis and had a recorded Anti-Xa level 4-5 hours post-administration were included.
  • Patient Groups: Patients were divided into two groups based on BMI: BMI<30 kg/m² (non-obese) and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m² (obese). Data collected included age, weight, height, ideal body weight (IBW), UFH dose, Anti-Xa levels, and serum creatinine (SCr).
  • Outcomes Measured: The primary outcome was Anti-Xa heparin activity levels (0.11-0.25 IU/mL). Secondary outcomes included the incidence of deep venous thromboembolism (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE). Creatinine clearance (CrCl) was calculated using the Cockcroft and Gault equation.
  • Statistical Analysis: Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare Anti-Xa levels between the two groups.
The study included 130 SICU and MICU patients (71 non-obese, 59 obese). The mean age was 72.45 ± 15.8 years in the non-obese group and 61.29 ± 16.08 years in the obese group. There was no statistically significant difference in Anti-Xa heparin activity levels between the two groups (p=0.1785). The median Anti-Xa level was 0.11 (0.08-0.15) IU/ml in the non-obese group and 0.10 (0.08-0.12) IU/ml in the obese group. No thromboembolic events (DVT or PE) were reported in either group.

What Does This Mean for Heparin Dosing?

The study suggests that current UFH dosing regimens (5,000 units every 8 hours) achieve adequate Anti-Xa levels in both obese and non-obese critically ill patients. Both groups achieved the desired anti-Xa levels for thromboprophylaxis, and no thromboembolic events were observed. These data suggest that fixed UFH dosing may be appropriate for obese patients. Limitations include the small sample size and the lack of clinical events, necessitating larger, multicenter, randomized trials.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.21767/2471-8505.100070, Alternate LINK

Title: Evaluation Of Unfractionated Heparin Dosing For Thromboprophylaxis Using Anti-Xa Levels In Obese Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Study

Subject: General Medicine

Journal: Journal of Intensive and Critical Care

Publisher: Scitechnol Biosoft Pvt. Ltd.

Authors: Joaquin Cagliani, Kusuma Nio, Wenchen Wu, Candace J Smith, Ernesto P Molmenti, Jeffrey Nicastro, Gene F Coppa, Rafael Barrera

Published: 2017-01-01

Everything You Need To Know

1

What is the primary concern regarding venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized patients, and what specific conditions are involved?

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major threat to hospitalized patients, with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) being the primary conditions of concern. These conditions significantly increase morbidity and mortality, highlighting the critical need for effective prevention strategies. The article emphasizes the urgency due to the high incidence of PE and its contribution to in-hospital deaths.

2

What are the recommended approaches for preventing blood clots in critically ill patients, and how does unfractionated heparin (UFH) fit into these recommendations?

The American College of Physicians (ACP) recommends chemical prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or other anticoagulants as a first-line defense, unless bleeding risks are high. The American College of Chest Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) support fixed low-dose UFH (5,000 units every 8-12 hours) for adult DVT prophylaxis. SCDs (Sequential Compression Devices) are also a common preventative measure. UFH is a key component of the recommended chemical prophylaxis.

3

Why is the standard fixed dosing of unfractionated heparin (UFH) potentially problematic in obese, critically ill patients, and what alternative approaches are being considered?

Traditional UFH dosing might be suboptimal in obese, critically ill patients because factors like adipose tissue thickness can affect heparin pharmacokinetics. There is limited data on how fixed dosing of UFH correlates with preventing thromboembolic events and Anti-Xa levels, particularly in this patient population. Monitoring Anti-Xa levels offers a more tailored approach. Dose adjustments based on Anti-Xa levels could potentially improve outcomes in preventing thromboembolism in the ICU.

4

What were the key findings of the study regarding unfractionated heparin (UFH) dosing in obese versus non-obese critically ill patients?

The study included 130 patients, comparing obese and non-obese groups. The results showed no statistically significant difference in Anti-Xa heparin activity levels between the two groups. Both the non-obese and obese groups achieved the desired Anti-Xa levels (0.11 (0.08-0.15) IU/ml and 0.10 (0.08-0.12) IU/ml, respectively) when using fixed UFH dosing. No thromboembolic events (DVT or PE) were reported in either group, suggesting that current UFH dosing regimens achieve adequate Anti-Xa levels.

5

What are the implications of this study's findings on unfractionated heparin (UFH) dosing for obese patients, and what further research is needed?

The study suggests that current UFH dosing regimens, such as 5,000 units every 8 hours, may be appropriate for obese, critically ill patients as they achieved adequate Anti-Xa levels. However, the study acknowledges limitations, primarily the small sample size and the lack of observed clinical events, such as DVT or PE. Larger, multicenter, randomized trials are therefore necessary to validate these findings and explore the long-term impact and efficacy of fixed UFH dosing in obese patients within the ICU setting.

Newsletter Subscribe

Subscribe to get the latest articles and insights directly in your inbox.