ArticleNeurocritical care2017
Low-dose Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Warfarin-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage with INR Less Than 2.0.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Effectiveness of Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate in Special Populations with INR Below 2: A Post-Marketing Surveillance Study.Cardiology and therapy · 2024Article
- Real-World Safety and Effectiveness of a 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate in Japanese Patients Experiencing Major Bleeding: A Post-marketing Surveillance Study.Cardiology and therapy · 2024Article
- JCS/JHRS 2020 Guideline on Pharmacotherapy of Cardiac Arrhythmias.Journal of arrhythmia · 2022Article
- Pharmacometric modeling to explore 4F-PCC dosing strategies for VKA reversal in patients with INR below 2.Blood advances · 2020Article
- Low-dose compared to manufacturer-recommended dose four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for acute warfarin reversal.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProthrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) have become the first-line therapy for warfarin reversal in the setting of central nervous system (CNS) hemorrhage. Randomized, controlled studies comparing agents for warfarin reversal excluded patients with international normalized ratio (INR) <2, yet INR values of 1.6-1.9 are also associated with poor outcomes.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed our use of a low-dose (15 units/kg) strategy of 4-factor PCC (4F-PCC) on warfarin reversal (INR 1.6-1.9) in the setting of both traumatic and spontaneous intracranial bleeding.
resultsA total of 21/134 (15.7%) patients with either spontaneous or traumatic intracranial hemorrhage presented with an INR value of 1.6-1.9. Nine patients (43%) presented with traumatic bleeding and 12 (57%) with spontaneous bleeding. The median (IQR) presenting INR was 1.8 (1.7, 1.9) which decreased to 1.3 (1.2, 1.3) following the administration of low-dose 4F-PCC (median dose = 1062 units; 15.2 units/kg). A total of 19/20 (95%) patients achieved a goal INR value of ≤1.5 on the first check following dosing and 17/20 (85%) achieved an INR value ≤1.3. One patient did not have follow-up INR testing due to withdrawal of life support. No patient experienced hematoma expansion within 48 h of 4F-PCC, and there were no thromboembolic events within 72 h of administration.
conclusionsThe administration of low dose (15 units/kg) of 4F-PCC for urgent warfarin reversal in the setting of CNS hemorrhage was effective in correcting the INR in patients presenting with INR values of 1.6-1.9. Further assessment of low-dose PCC for urgent reversal of modest INR elevation is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.