Introduction: Emerging evidence points to an association between severe clinical presentation of COVID-19 and increased risk of thromboembolism. One-third of patients hospitalized due to severe COVID-19 develops macrovascular thrombotic complications, including venous thromboembolism, myocardial injury/infarction and stroke. Concurrently, the autopsy series indicate multiorgan damage pattern consistent with microvascular injury. Prophylaxis, diagnosis and treatment: COVID-19 associated coagulopathy has distinct features, including markedly elevated D-dimers concentration with nearly normal activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin time and platelet count. The diagnosis may be challenging due to overlapping features between pulmonary embolism and severe COVID-19 disease, such as dyspnoea, high concentration of D-dimers, right ventricle with dysfunction or enlargement, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Both macro- and microvascular complications are associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Therefore, early recognition of coagulation abnormalities among hospitalized COVID-19 patients are critical measures to identify patients with poor prognosis, guide antithrombotic prophylaxis or treatment, and improve patients’ clinical outcomes. Recommendations for clinicians: Most of the guidelines and consensus documents published on behalf of professional societies focused on thrombosis and hemostasis advocate the use of anticoagulants in all patients hospitalized with COVID-19, as well as 2-6 weeks post hospital discharge in the absence of contraindications. However, since there is no guidance for deciding the intensity and duration of anticoagulation, the decision-making process should be made in individual-case basis. Conclusions: Here, we review the mechanistic relationships between inflammation and thrombosis, discuss the macrovascular and microvascular complications and summarize the prophylaxis, diagnosis and treatment of thromboembolism in patients affected by COVID-19.

Background International guidelines have endorsed the use of edoxaban or rivaroxaban as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients. Recently, a large randomized controlled trial of apixaban versus dalteparin in patients with cancer was completed. We performed an updated meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus LMWH in patients with cancer-associated VTE. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry) were systematically searched up to March 30, 2020 for randomized controlled trials comparing DOACs versus LMWH for the treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. The two coprimary outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding at 6 months. Data were pooled by the Mantel–Haenszel method and compared by relative risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Four randomized controlled studies (2,894 patients) comparing apixaban, edoxaban, or rivaroxaban with dalteparin were included in the meta-analysis. Recurrent VTE occurred in 75 of 1,446 patients (5.2%) treated with oral factor Xa inhibitors and in 119 of 1,448 patients (8.2%) treated with LMWH (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.43–0.91; I ², 30%). Major bleeding occurred in 62 (4.3%) and 48 (3.3%) patients receiving oral factor Xa inhibitors or LMWH, respectively (RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.83–2.08; I ², 23%). Conclusion In patients with cancer-associated VTE, oral factor Xa inhibitors reduced the risk of recurrent VTE without a significantly higher likelihood of major bleeding at 6 months compared with LMWH.

Background and Purpose—: Despite treatment with oral anticoagulants, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) may experience ischemic cerebrovascular events. The aims of this case-control study in patients with AF were to identify the pathogenesis of and the risk factors for cerebrovascular ischemic events occurring during non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) therapy for stroke prevention. Methods—: Cases were consecutive patients with AF who had acute cerebrovascular ischemic events during NOAC treatment. Controls were consecutive patients with AF who did not have cerebrovascular events during NOACs treatment. Results—: Overall, 713 cases (641 ischemic strokes and 72 transient ischemic attacks; median age, 80.0 years; interquartile range, 12; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale on admission, 6.0; interquartile range, 10) and 700 controls (median age, 72.0 years; interquartile range, 8) were included in the study. Recurrent stroke was classified as cardioembolic in 455 cases (63.9%) according to the A-S-C-O-D (A, atherosclerosis; S, small vessel disease; C, cardiac pathology; O, other causes; D, dissection) classification. On multivariable analysis, off-label low dose of NOACs (odds ratio [OR], 3.18; 95% CI, 1.95–5.85), atrial enlargement (OR, 6.64; 95% CI, 4.63–9.52), hyperlipidemia (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.83–3.16), and CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc score (OR, 1.72 for each point increase; 95% CI, 1.58–1.88) were associated with ischemic events. Among the CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc components, age was older and presence of diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, and history of stroke or transient ischemic attack more common in patients who had acute cerebrovascular ischemic events. Paroxysmal AF was inversely associated with ischemic events (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33–0.61). Conclusions—: In patients with AF treated with NOACs who had a cerebrovascular event, mostly but not exclusively of cardioembolic pathogenesis, off-label low dose, atrial enlargement, hyperlipidemia, and high CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc score were associated with increased risk of cerebrovascular events.

Background: In patients with atrial fibrillation who suffered an ischemic stroke while on treatment with nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, rates and determinants of recurrent ischemic events and major bleedings remain uncertain. Methods: This prospective multicenter observational study aimed to estimate the rates of ischemic and bleeding events and their determinants in the follow-up of consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation who suffered an acute cerebrovascular ischemic event while on nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant treatment. Afterwards, we compared the estimated risks of ischemic and bleeding events between the patients in whom anticoagulant therapy was changed to those who continued the original treatment. Results: After a mean follow-up time of 15.0±10.9 months, 192 out of 1240 patients (15.5%) had 207 ischemic or bleeding events corresponding to an annual rate of 13.4%. Among the events, 111 were ischemic strokes, 15 systemic embolisms, 24 intracranial bleedings, and 57 major extracranial bleedings. Predictive factors of recurrent ischemic events (strokes and systemic embolisms) included CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc score after the index event (odds ratio [OR], 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0–1.3] for each point increase; P =0.05) and hypertension (OR, 2.3 [95% CI, 1.0–5.1]; P =0.04). Predictive factors of bleeding events (intracranial and major extracranial bleedings) included age (OR, 1.1 [95% CI, 1.0–1.2] for each year increase; P =0.002), history of major bleeding (OR, 6.9 [95% CI, 3.4–14.2]; P =0.0001) and the concomitant administration of an antiplatelet agent (OR, 2.8 [95% CI, 1.4–5.5]; P =0.003). Rates of ischemic and bleeding events were no different in patients who changed or not changed the original nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants treatment (OR, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.8–1.7]). Conclusions: Patients suffering a stroke despite being on nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant therapy are at high risk of recurrent ischemic stroke and bleeding. In these patients, further research is needed to improve secondary prevention by investigating the mechanisms of recurrent ischemic stroke and bleeding.