Medical Department, Geriatric Unit, Azienda ULSS [Unità Locale Socio Sanitaria] 3 "Serenissima", Dolo-Mirano District, Venice, Italy.
Primary Care Department, Azienda ULSS 3 [Unità Locale Socio Sanitaria] "Serenissima", Dolo-Mirano District, Via Murano, 17 Spinea, Venice, Italy.
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2021 Jan;33(1):213-217. doi: 10.1007/s40520-020-01750-6. Epub 2020 Nov 16.
Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is a global outbreak. COVID-19 patients seem to have relevant coagulative abnormalities, even if they are not typical of disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC) of the kind seen in septicaemia. Therefore, anticoagulant therapy with heparins is increasing in interest for a clinical approach to these patients, particularly if older. Studies comparing if prophylactic doses are more effective than therapeutic ones are still missing.
Data were collected in the Geriatric Section of the Dolo Hospital, ULSS 3 "Serenissima", Venice from 31st March to 01st May 2020. Heparins (calciparin, fondaparinux, enoxaparine) were divided into prophylactic or therapeutic doses. People previously treated with oral anticoagulants were removed. Vital status was assessed using administrative data. Cox's regression analysis, adjusted for potential confounders, was used for assessing the strength of the association between heparins and mortality. The data were reported as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
81 older people (mean age 84.1 years; females = 61.9%) were included. No significant differences in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics emerged between people treated with prophylactic or therapeutic doses, including age, gender, X-rays findings or severity of disease. Therapeutic doses were not associated to a better survival rate (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.47-2.60; p = 0.89), even after adjusting for 15 confounders related to mortality (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.30-2.71; p = 0.84).
Our paper indicates that in older people affected by COVID-19 there is no justification for using therapeutic doses instead of prophylactic ones, having a similar impact on mortality risk.
新型冠状病毒病(COVID-19)是一种全球性的爆发。COVID-19 患者似乎存在相关的凝血异常,即使它们不是败血症中所见的弥散性血管内凝血(DIC)的典型表现。因此,肝素类抗凝治疗对这些患者的临床治疗方法越来越感兴趣,特别是对于老年人。目前仍缺乏比较预防性剂量是否比治疗性剂量更有效的研究。
我们于 2020 年 3 月 31 日至 5 月 1 日在威尼斯 ULSS3“Serenissima”的多洛医院老年科收集数据。肝素(钙泊三醇、磺达肝素、依诺肝素)分为预防性或治疗性剂量。去除之前接受口服抗凝治疗的患者。使用行政数据评估生命状态。采用 Cox 回归分析,调整潜在混杂因素,评估肝素与死亡率之间的关联强度。数据以风险比(HR)和 95%置信区间(CI)报告。
共纳入 81 名老年人(平均年龄 84.1 岁;女性占 61.9%)。预防性和治疗性剂量组之间在人口统计学和临床特征方面没有显著差异,包括年龄、性别、X 射线表现或疾病严重程度。治疗性剂量与生存率的提高无关(HR 1.06;95% CI 0.47-2.60;p=0.89),即使在调整了与死亡率相关的 15 个混杂因素后(HR 0.89;95% CI 0.30-2.71;p=0.84)。
我们的研究表明,在 COVID-19 感染的老年人中,没有理由使用治疗性剂量而不是预防性剂量,因为这对死亡率风险没有影响。