Charles-Marc Samama’s research while affiliated with Université Paris Cité and other places

Background Severe trauma represents a major global public health burden and the management of post-traumatic bleeding continues to challenge healthcare systems around the world. Post-traumatic bleeding and associated traumatic coagulopathy remain leading causes of potentially preventable multiorgan failure and death if not diagnosed and managed in an appropriate and timely manner. This sixth edition of the European guideline on the management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following traumatic injury aims to advise clinicians who care for the bleeding trauma patient during the initial diagnostic and therapeutic phases of patient management. Methods The pan-European, multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma included representatives from six European professional societies and convened to assess and update the previous version of this guideline using a structured, evidence-based consensus approach. Structured literature searches covered the period since the last edition of the guideline, but considered evidence cited previously. The format of this edition has been adjusted to reflect the trend towards concise guideline documents that cite only the highest-quality studies and most relevant literature rather than attempting to provide a comprehensive literature review to accompany each recommendation. Results This guideline comprises 39 clinical practice recommendations that follow an approximate temporal path for management of the bleeding trauma patient, with recommendations grouped behind key decision points. While approximately one-third of patients who have experienced severe trauma arrive in hospital in a coagulopathic state, a systematic diagnostic and therapeutic approach has been shown to reduce the number of preventable deaths attributable to traumatic injury. Conclusion A multidisciplinary approach and adherence to evidence-based guidelines are pillars of best practice in the management of severely injured trauma patients. Further improvement in outcomes will be achieved by optimising and standardising trauma care in line with the available evidence across Europe and beyond.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with an inflammatory cytokine burst and a prothrombotic coagulopathy. Platelets may contribute to microthrombosis, and constitute a therapeutic target in COVID-19 therapy. Aim: To assess if platelet activation influences mortality in COVID-19. Methods: We explored two cohorts of patients with COVID-19. Cohort A included 208 ambulatory and hospitalized patients with varying clinical severities and non-COVID patients as controls, in whom plasma concentrations of the soluble platelet activation biomarkers CD40 ligand (sCD40L) and P-selectin (sP-sel) were quantified within the first 48hours following hospitalization. Cohort B was a multicentre cohort of 2878 patients initially admitted to a medical ward. In both cohorts, the primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Results: In cohort A, median circulating concentrations of sCD40L and sP-sel were only increased in the 89 critical patients compared with non-COVID controls: sP-sel 40,059 (interquartile range 26,876-54,678)pg/mL; sCD40L 1914 (interquartile range 1410-2367)pg/mL (P<0.001 for both). A strong association existed between sP-sel concentration and in-hospital mortality (Kaplan-Meier log-rank P=0.004). However, in a Cox model considering biomarkers of immunothrombosis, sP-sel was no longer associated with mortality, in contrast to coagulopathy evaluated with D-dimer concentration (hazard ratio 4.86, 95% confidence interval 1.64-12.50). Moreover, in cohort B, a Cox model adjusted for co-morbidities suggested that prehospitalization antiplatelet agents had no significant impact on in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.80-1.37; P=0.73). Conclusions: Although we observed an association between excessive biomarkers of platelet activation and in-hospital mortality, our findings rather suggest that coagulopathy is more central in driving disease progression, which may explain why prehospitalization antiplatelet drugs were not a protective factor against mortality in our multicentre cohort.

Recommendations from the International Consensus Meeting (ICM) for Venous Thromboembolism (VTE): Trauma

Objective The clinical relevance of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) in COVID‐19 is controversial. This study was undertaken to investigate the prevalence and prognostic value of conventional and nonconventional aPLs in patients with COVID‐19. Methods This was a multicenter, prospective observational study in a French cohort of patients hospitalized with suspected COVID‐19. Results Two hundred forty‐nine patients were hospitalized with suspected COVID‐19, in whom COVID‐19 was confirmed in 154 and not confirmed in 95. We found a significant increase in lupus anticoagulant (LAC) positivity among patients with COVID‐19 compared to patients without COVID‐19 (60.9% versus 23.7%; P < 0.001), while prevalence of conventional aPLs (IgG and IgM anti–β2‐glycoprotein I and IgG and IgM anticardiolipin isotypes) and nonconventional aPLs (IgA isotype of anticardiolipin, IgA isotype of anti‐β2‐glycoprotein I, IgG and IgM isotypes of anti–phosphatidylserine/prothrombin, and IgG and IgM isotypes of antiprothrombin) was low in both groups. Patients with COVID‐19 who were positive for LAC, as compared to patients with COVID‐19 who were negative for LAC, had higher levels of fibrinogen (median 6.0 gm/liter [interquartile range 5.0–7.0] versus 5.3 gm/liter [interquartile range 4.3–6.4]; P = 0.028) and C‐reactive protein (CRP) (median 115.5 mg/liter [interquartile range 66.0–204.8] versus 91.8 mg/liter [interquartile range 27.0–155.1]; P = 0.019). Univariate analysis did not show any association between LAC positivity and higher risks of venous thromboembolism (VTE) (odds ratio 1.02 [95% confidence interval 0.44–2.43], P = 0.95) or in‐hospital mortality (odds ratio 1.80 [95% confidence interval 0.70–5.05], P = 0.24). With and without adjustment for CRP level, age, and sex, Kaplan‐Meier survival curves according to LAC positivity confirmed the absence of an association with VTE or in‐hospital mortality (unadjusted P = 0.64 and P = 0.26, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio 1.13 [95% confidence interval 0.48–2.60] and 1.80 [95% confidence interval 0.67–5.01], respectively). Conclusion Patients with COVID‐19 have an increased prevalence of LAC positivity associated with biologic markers of inflammation. However, LAC positivity at the time of hospital admission is not associated with VTE risk and/or in‐hospital mortality.

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is associated with a high risk of recurrent venous thromboembolic events (VTE) that require extended anticoagulation in patients with active cancer, putting them at risk of bleeding.The aim of the API-CAT study (NCT03692065) is to assess whether a reduced-dose regimen of apixaban (2.5 mg twice daily [bid]) is non-inferior to a full-dose regimen of apixaban (5 mg bid) for the prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with active cancer who have completed ≥6 months of anticoagulant therapy for a documented index event of proximal deep-vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism.APICAT is an international, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, non-inferiority trial with blinded adjudication of outcome events. Consecutive patients are randomized to receive apixaban 2.5 mg or 5 mg bid for 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome is a composite of recurrent symptomatic or incidental VTE during the treatment period. The principal safety endpoint is clinically relevant bleeding, defined as a composite of major bleeding or non-major clinically relevant bleeding. Assuming a 12-month incidence of the primary outcome of 4% with apixaban and an upper limit of the 2-sided 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio <2.0, 1722 patients will be randomized,assuming an up to 10% loss in total patient-years (β = 80%; α 1-sided = 0.025). This trialhas the potential to demonstrate that a regimen of extended treatment for patients with CAT beyond an initial 6 months, with a reduced apixaban dose,has an acceptable risk of recurrent VTE recurrence and decreases the risk of bleeding.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is a respiratory disease associated with vascular inflammation and endothelial injury. Objectives Correlate circulating angiogenic markers VEGF‐A, PlGF and FGF‐2 to in‐hospital mortality in COVID‐19 adult patients. Methods Consecutive ambulatory and hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 infection were enrolled. VEGF‐A, PlGF and FGF‐2 were measured in each patient ≤48 h following admission. Results Study enrolled 237 patients with suspected COVID‐19: 208 patients had a positive diagnostic for COVID‐19 of whom 23 were mild outpatients and 185 patients hospitalized after admission. Levels of VEGF‐A, PlGF and FGF‐2 significantly increase with the severity of the disease (p<0.001). Using a logistic regression model we found a significant association between the increase of FGF‐2 or PlGF and mortality (OR 1.11, 95% CI [1.07–1.16], p<0.001 for FGF‐2 and OR 1.07 95% CI [1.04–1.10], p<0.001 for PlGF) while no association were found for VEGF‐A levels. ROC curve analysis was performed and we identified PlGF above 30 pg/mL as the best predictor of in‐hospital mortality in COVID‐19 patients. Survival analysis for PlGF confirmed its interest for in‐hospital mortality prediction, by using a Kaplan‐Meier survival curves (p=0.001) and a Cox proportional hazard model adjusted to age, body mass index, D‐dimer and CRP (3.23 95% CI [1.29–8.11], p=0.001). Conclusion Angiogenic factor PlGF is a relevant predictive factor for in‐hospital mortality in COVID‐19 patients. More than a biomarker, we hypothesize that PlGF blocking strategies could be a new interesting therapeutic approach in COVID‐19.

Background Severe traumatic injury continues to present challenges to healthcare systems around the world, and post-traumatic bleeding remains a leading cause of potentially preventable death among injured patients. Now in its fifth edition, this document aims to provide guidance on the management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following traumatic injury and encourages adaptation of the guiding principles described here to individual institutional circumstances and resources. Methods The pan-European, multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was founded in 2004, and the current author group included representatives of six relevant European professional societies. The group applied a structured, evidence-based consensus approach to address scientific queries that served as the basis for each recommendation and supporting rationale. Expert opinion and current clinical practice were also considered, particularly in areas in which randomised clinical trials have not or cannot be performed. Existing recommendations were re-examined and revised based on scientific evidence that has emerged since the previous edition and observed shifts in clinical practice. New recommendations were formulated to reflect current clinical concerns and areas in which new research data have been generated. Results Advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of post-traumatic coagulopathy have supported improved management strategies, including evidence that early, individualised goal-directed treatment improves the outcome of severely injured patients. The overall organisation of the current guideline has been designed to reflect the clinical decision-making process along the patient pathway in an approximate temporal sequence. Recommendations are grouped behind the rationale for key decision points, which are patient- or problem-oriented rather than related to specific treatment modalities. While these recommendations provide guidance for the diagnosis and treatment of major bleeding and coagulopathy, emerging evidence supports the author group’s belief that the greatest outcome improvement can be achieved through education and the establishment of and adherence to local clinical management algorithms. Conclusions A multidisciplinary approach and adherence to evidence-based guidance are key to improving patient outcomes. If incorporated into local practice, these clinical practice guidelines have the potential to ensure a uniform standard of care across Europe and beyond and better outcomes for the severely bleeding trauma patient. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2347-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.