Systematic review: Benefits and harms of in-hospital use of recombinant factor viia for off-label indications

Veronica Yank, Vaughan Tuohy, Aaron C. Logan, Dena M. Bravata, Kristan Staudenmayer, Robin Eisenhut, Vandana Sundaram, Donal McMohan, Ingram Olkin, Kathryn M. McDonald, Douglas K. Owens, Randall S. Stafford

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

185 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa), a hemostatic agent approved for hemophilia, is increasingly used for off-label indications.Purpose: To evaluate the benefits and harms of rFVIIa use for 5 off-label, in-hospital indications: intracranial hemorrhage, cardiac surgery, trauma, liver transplantation, and prostatectomy.Data Sources: Ten databases (including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library) queried from inception through December 2010. Articles published in English were analyzed.Study Selection: Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts to identify clinical use of rFVIIa for the selected indications and identified all randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies for full-text review.Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently assessed study characteristics and rated study quality and indication-wide strength of evidence.Data Synthesis: 16 RCTs, 26 comparative observational studies, and 22 noncomparative observational studies met inclusion criteria. Identified comparators were limited to placebo (RCTs) or usual care (observational studies). For intracranial hemorrhage, mortality wasnot improved with rFVIIa use across a range of doses. Arterial thromboembolism was increased with medium-dose rFVIIa use (risk difference [RD], 0.03 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06]) and high-dose rFVIIa use (RD, 0.06 [CI, 0.01 to 0.11]). For adult cardiac surgery, there was no mortality difference, but there was an increased risk for thromboembolism (RD, 0.05 [CI, 0.01 to 0.10]) with rFVIIa. For body trauma, there were no differences in mortality or thromboembolism, but there was a reduced risk for the acute respiratory distress syndrome (RD, -0.05 [CI, -0.02 to -0.08]). Mortality was higher in observational studies than in RCTs.Limitations: The amount and strength of evidence were low for most outcomes and indications. Publication bias could not be excluded.Conclusion: Limited available evidence for 5 off-label indications suggests no mortality reduction with rFVIIa use. For some indications, it increases thromboembolism. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)529-540
Number of pages12
JournalAnnals of internal medicine
Volume154
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2011
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Systematic review: Benefits and harms of in-hospital use of recombinant factor viia for off-label indications'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this