↓ Skip to main content

A French multicenter randomised trial comparing two dose-regimens of prothrombin complex concentrates in urgent anticoagulation reversal

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A French multicenter randomised trial comparing two dose-regimens of prothrombin complex concentrates in urgent anticoagulation reversal
Published in
Critical Care, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc11923
Pubmed ID
Authors

Delphine Kerebel, Luc-Marie Joly, Didier Honnart, Jeannot Schmidt, Damien Galanaud, Claude Negrier, Friedrich Kursten, Pierre Coriat, Lex206 Investigator Group

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) are haemostatic blood preparations indicated for urgent anticoagulation reversal, though the optimal dose for effective reversal is still under debate. The latest generation of PCCs include four coagulation factors, the so-called 4-factor PCC. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of two doses, 25 and 40 IU/kg, of 4-factor PCC in vitamin K antagonist (VKA) associated intracranial haemorrhage. METHODS: We performed a phase III, prospective, randomised, open-label study including patients with objectively diagnosed VKA-associated intracranial haemorrhage between November 2008 and April 2011 in 22 centres in France. Patients were randomised to receive 25 or 40 IU/kg of 4-factor PCC. The primary endpoint was the international normalised ratio (INR) 10 minutes after the end of 4-factor PCC infusion. Secondary endpoints were changes in coagulation factors, global clinical outcomes and incidence of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 59 patients were randomised: 29 in the 25 IU/kg and 30 in the 40 IU/kg group. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were comparable between the groups. The mean INR was significantly reduced to 1.2 - and ≤1.5 in all patients of both groups - 10 minutes after 4-factor PCC infusion. The INR in the 40 IU/kg group was significantly lower than in the 25 IU/kg group 10 minutes (P = 0.001), 1 hour (P = 0.001) and 3 hours (P = 0.02) after infusion. The 40 IU/kg dose was also effective in replacing coagulation factors such as PT (P = 0.038), FII (P = 0.001), FX (P <0.001), protein C (P = 0.002) and protein S (0.043), 10 minutes after infusion. However, no differences were found in haematoma volume or global clinical outcomes between the groups. Incidence of death and thrombotic events was similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid infusion of both doses of 4-factor PCC achieved an INR of 1.5 or less in all patients with a lower INR observed in the 40 IU/kg group. No safety concerns were raised by the 40 IU/kg dose. Further trials are needed to evaluate the impact of the high dose of 4-factor PCC on functional outcomes and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudra CT number 2007-000602-73.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 15 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,047,316
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,931
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,584
of 290,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#16
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 290,212 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.