Direct Oral Anticoagulants as Primary or Secondary Treatment for Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) and Associated Thromboembolism (HITT)-A Meta-Analysis.

George Galyfos; Argyris Athanasiou; Athanasios Emmanuel; Nikolaos Intzes; Eleni Kitsou; Panagiotis Theodorou; Sami Hatzikalil; Georgios Sigounas; Frangiska Sigala; Konstantinos Filis

doi:10.1111/ejh.70238

PubMed · 42306844

Direct Oral Anticoagulants as Primary or Secondary Treatment for Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) and Associated Thromboembolism (HITT)-A Meta-Analysis.

George Galyfos·Argyris Athanasiou·Athanasios Emmanuel·Nikolaos Intzes·Eleni Kitsou·Panagiotis Theodorou·Sami Hatzikalil·Georgios Sigounas·Frangiska Sigala·Konstantinos Filis

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is associated with a high risk for thrombosis. The role of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is still emerging and data are limited considering efficacy and safety among patients with HIT. The aim of this review is to evaluate current data on DOACs as primary or secondary treatment among patients with HIT. METHODS: This is a systematic review utilising Pubmed, Scopus and Embase online databases. Eligible studies were published up to December 2024 evaluating DOACs as primary or secondary treatment among patients with HIT and/or associated thrombosis (HITT). Primary outcomes included thrombosis rate (TR) and bleeding rate (BR) during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 44 publications were included (29 case reports, 5 case studies and 10 cohort studies [n > 10 patients]). Regarding treatment, 19 articles evaluated only rivaroxaban, 7 articles only apixaban, 11 articles only dabigatran and 7 articles more than one regimen. A total of 352 patients were included. Overall, 190 patients (53.8%) were given DOAC as primary treatment whereas 162 patients were given a parenteral treatment first and continued with a DOAC. Mean nadir platelet count at diagnosis was 63 000/μL. HITT rate was 190/352 (53.9%; 8% had arterial thrombosis). Mean follow-up was 7.6 months. TR was 20/352 (Pooled proportion = 0.064 [95% CI = 0.042-0.092]) (30% of them were new thromboses without initial thrombosis), and BR was 9/352 (Pooled proportion = 0.039 [95% CI = 0.022-0.062]). Finally, there was no difference found regarding TR and BR between primary or secondary treatment, and among different regimens. CONCLUSIONS: DOACs are associated with low rates of thrombosis and major bleeding among patients treated for HIT or HITT, either as primary or secondary treatment. However, the certainty of evidence is very low because of the quality and limitations of the available studies.

Explore related subjects

Humans Thrombocytopenia Heparin Administration, Oral Anticoagulants Thromboembolism Treatment Outcome Hemorrhage Platelet Count bleeding direct oral anticoagulants heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia thrombosis Journal Article Meta-Analysis Systematic Review

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

George Galyfos, Argyris Athanasiou, Athanasios Emmanuel, Nikolaos Intzes, Eleni Kitsou, Panagiotis Theodorou, Sami Hatzikalil, Georgios Sigounas, Frangiska Sigala, Konstantinos Filis. 2026-06-17. Direct Oral Anticoagulants as Primary or Secondary Treatment for Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) and Associated Thromboembolism (HITT)-A Meta-Analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejh.70238

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Systematic Review resource Administration, Oral subject Anticoagulants subject Humans subject Journal Article subject Meta-Analysis subject Platelet Count subject Systematic reviews study

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in Low and Non-Low Bleeding Risk Patients Undergoing Primary PCI for STEMI: The BRIGHT-4 Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the BRIGHT-4 trial, among 6,016 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a radial artery approach, procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin plus a post-PCI high-dose infusion for 2 to 4 hours reduced the 30-day primary composite outcome of all-cause death or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) types 3 to 5 bleeding, as well as death and bleeding individually, compared with heparin monotherapy. OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether the benefits of bivalirudin apply principally to patients who are at low bleeding risk (LBR) as well as non-LBR. METHODS: In a prespecified analysis from BRIGHT-4, outcomes were examined by baseline bleeding risk, with LBR defined as a CRUSADE score <30. RESULTS: At baseline, 4,581 patients (76.1%) were categorized as LBR. Non-LBR patients had higher rates of the 30-day primary endpoint (8.6% vs 2.2%; HR: 4.08 [95% CI: 3.14-5.31]; P < 0.0001), driven by both greater mortality and BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding. In non-LBR patients, the primary outcome occurred in 8.1% of patients randomized to bivalirudin vs 9.2% of those randomized to heparin (difference: -1.1% [95% CI: -4.0% to 1.8%]; HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.62-1.26]). In LBR patients, the primary outcome occurred in 1.4% of patients randomized to bivalirudin vs 2.9% of those randomized to heparin (difference: -1.5% [95% CI: -2.3% to -0.6%]; HR: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.32-0.75]) (Pabsolute interaction = 0.81; Prelative interaction = 0.04). The effects of bivalirudin compared with heparin in reducing all-cause death were as robust in LBR patients compared with non-LBR patients (Pabsolute interaction = 0.67; Prelative interaction = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI with radial artery access, procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin plus a high-dose post-PCI infusion for 2 to 4 hours reduced the 30-day risk of all-cause death and major bleeding in patients at low bleeding risk as well as in patients at higher-risk of bleeding. (Bivalirudin With Prolonged Full Dose Infusion Versus Heparin Alone During Emergency PCI [BRIGHT-4; NCT03822975]).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety and Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-associated thrombosis is a condition associated with high mortality rates, yet limited evidence exists regarding the safety and effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), focusing on a fixed follow-up period based on clinical practice guideline recommendations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of DOACs versus LMWH in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis over a 6-month follow-up period. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to 30 June, 2025. Recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials and 28 cohort studies were included in our systematic review. After applying the criteria for a 6-month follow-up period, five randomized controlled trials and 16 cohort studies with 49,824 patients were analyzed in the meta-analysis. In randomized controlled trials, DOACs showed a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism recurrence (relative risk [RR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.87) compared with LMWH, with a non-significant increase in major bleeding (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.87-1.88) and no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.18). Cohort studies demonstrated a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism recurrence (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.62-0.76) with DOACs, a non-significant reduction in major bleeding (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68-1.07), and a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cancer-associated thrombosis, DOACs demonstrated a decrease in recurrent venous thromboembolism without increasing the risk of all-cause mortality. A non-significant increase in the risk of major bleeding was recorded in randomized controlled trials, but not in cohort studies. DOACs may provide greater effectiveness for cancer-associated thrombosis compared with LMWH.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Recombinant Human Thrombopoietin Reduces the Need for Platelet Transfusion in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease and Thrombocytopenia.

Chronic liver disease (CLD)-related thrombocytopenia can limit the feasibility of invasive procedures. Recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) has demonstrated a favorable safety profile without hepatotoxicity. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of rhTPO in patients with CLD-related thrombocytopenia who were undergoing elective invasive procedures. In this multicenter, randomized (2:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial, 120 adult Chinese patients with CLD-related thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 50 × 109/L) received rhTPO (n = 80) or placebo (n = 40) once daily for up to 5 or 7 days. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with sustained platelet counts ≥ 50 × 109/L from 24 h before invasive procedure to 7 days post-procedure, without requiring emergency bleeding management. The primary endpoint was achieved by 85.0% of patients in the rhTPO group versus 12.5% in the placebo group (p < 0.0001). Preoperatively, platelet counts ≥ 50 × 109/L were achieved in 92.5% and 20.0% of patients in the rhTPO and placebo groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). Platelet transfusion was avoided in 92.5% of rhTPO-treated patients versus 25.0% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.0001). The median duration of platelet counts ≥ 50 × 109/L was significantly longer with rhTPO than with placebo (21.0 vs. 3.0 days, p = 0.0007). Treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 12.5% of patients in both the rhTPO and placebo groups. No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. Overall, rhTPO was effective and well tolerated in patients with CLD-related thrombocytopenia and may represent a viable therapeutic option for those undergoing elective invasive procedures. Trial Registration: www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn: number CTR20230919.

Humans↗