Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Warfarin”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) vs. non-PCC strategies for warfarin reversal in left ventricular assist device recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) prolong survival in end-stage heart failure, and warfarin thromboprophylaxis is recommended to prevent device thrombosis and thromboembolic complications. When bleeding occurs or emergency surgery is required, rapid anticoagulation reversal is critical. Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) provides rapid reversal; however, its risk-benefit profile in LVAD recipients remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing PCC with non-PCC strategies for warfarin reversal in LVAD recipients. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were searched through June 2025 for studies of PCC versus non-PCC strategies for warfarin reversal in LVAD recipients. Two reviewers independently extracted data. Random-effects models were used to pool arm-level estimates and to pool head-to-head comparisons using mean differences or risk ratios (RRs). RESULTS: Eighteen studies involving 779 patients were included. Arm-level pooled estimates for PCC versus non-PCC comparators were 24.0% versus 15.8% for mortality, 16.5% versus 12.1% for thrombotic events, and 3.1 versus 5.7 for FFP units. Arm-level time to INR correction was longer with PCC overall (16.5 versus 13.6 h), driven by one elective cohort, but faster within the ICH subgroup (6.0 versus 13.7 h). In head-to-head comparisons, PCC achieved faster INR correction than non-PCC comparators (mean difference - 7.6 h; p = 0.001) and required fewer FFP units (-2.6 units; p = 0.019), with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.14; p = 0.490) or thrombotic events (RR 1.43; p = 0.176). CONCLUSIONS: In head-to-head studies, PCC was associated with faster INR correction and lower FFP requirements than non-PCC strategies, whereas mortality and thrombotic events did not differ significantly. Given the observational evidence, wide confidence intervals, and heterogeneity, equivalent safety cannot be established, and prospective studies are needed to define the relative safety and effectiveness of the two approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: PCC-based strategies may be considered for urgent warfarin reversal in LVAD recipients, particularly when rapid INR reduction or avoidance of large-volume plasma transfusion is clinically important. Treatment decisions should account for the indication, bleeding severity, and underlying thrombotic risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42024573925.

Humans

Pharmacogenomic and drug interactions risk in cardio-oncology: A precision medicine perspective for India.

Cardio-oncology patients may face complex treatment regimens due to the concurrent existence of cancer and cardiovascular disease, leading to a considerable polypharmacy burden. This significantly increases the prospect of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and gene-drug interactions. The majority of these interactions arise from comparable pharmacokinetic and pharmacological pathways associated with drug transporters and cytochrome P450 enzymes. The significance of pharmacogenomics in tailored treatment strategies are emphasised by the fact that genetic variability enhances individual differences in drug response, safety, and efficacy. This narrative review focus on the effects of key genetic polymorphisms (e.g., DPYD, CYP2C19, and CYP2C9) on the metabolism and efficacy of commonly prescribed anticancer and cardiovascular medications such as fluoropyrimidines, clopidogrel, and warfarin. In addition it explore the role of pharmacogenomic variants on drug-drug interactions within the field of cardio-oncology. The study ultimately emphasizes the necessity of precision medicine in India to address the genetic diversity and underrepresentation in global genomic databases. The absence of pharmacogenomic testing, infrastructural deficiencies, financial constraints, and insufficient clinical integration hinder the widespread use of this technology in India. The Genome India Project and other national initiatives establish the foundation for pharmacogenomic-guided therapy. Utilizing genetic data, together with artificial intelligence-based predictive tools, for clinical decision-making may enhance medication safety and yield optimal outcomes in Indian cardio-oncology patients.

Humans