A systematic approach to controlling problem bleeds in patients with severe congenital haemophilia A and high-titre inhibitors

• Published in: Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia Vol. 13; no. 3; pp. 256 - 263
• Main Authors: TEITEL, J., BERNTORP, E., COLLINS, P., D'OIRON, R., EWENSTEIN, B., GOMPERTS, E., GOUDEMAND, J., GRINGERI, A., KEY, N., LEISSINGER, C., MONAHAN, P., YOUNG, G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01-05-2007
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Algorithms; bleeding; Blood Coagulation Factor Inhibitors; Child; Child, Preschool; Clinical Medicine; consensus; Drug Administration Schedule; guidelines; haemophilia; Hematologi; Hematology; Hemophilia A - drug therapy; Hemorrhage - drug therapy; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; inhibitors; Klinisk medicin; management; Medical and Health Sciences; Medicin och hälsovetenskap; Practice Guidelines as Topic
• ISSN: 1351-8216; 1365-2516
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2007.01449.x

The presence of inhibitory antibodies to clotting factors complicates the treatment of bleeding in haemophilia patients. For patients with high‐titre inhibitors, bypassing agents are essential to haemostatic management. To determine optimal treatment practices, an international panel of physicians convened to develop a systematic treatment approach for problem bleeds (i.e. bleeds that are unresponsive to initial therapy with a single agent within a reasonable amount of time) in haemophilia patients with inhibitors. Aim: The goal of this panel was to develop a consensus algorithm that would aid physicians in considering a variety of treatment approaches to optimize patient care by preventing extensive therapy with inadequate treatments that may lead to suboptimal patient outcomes and unnecessary costs. Methods: Consensus opinions were analyzed for clinical preferences at different time periods, depending on patient response to treatment. Decision‐making points were defined based on the type of bleed: every 8–12 h for the first 24 h, then every 24 h thereafter for limb‐threatening bleeds; every 2–4 h for 2–7 days for life‐threatening bleeds. Results: The resultant consensus guidelines provide a generalized methodology to guide the treatment of problem bleeds in patients with severe haemophilia A and inhibitors, and emphasize changing treatment at the first sign of an inadequate haemostatic response. The treatment algorithms apply to both paediatric and adult patients, although the differences between the two groups were reviewed. Conclusion: These guidelines are focused on optimising the timing of treatment decisions, which may lead to faster responses and improved outcomes.