Introduction Despite a marked recent increase in the number of publications describing the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Asia, and especially in mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, Japan and Singapore, there remains a lack of consensus on the true risks, and trends over time, to inform appropriate clinical practice. The purpose of this systematic review was therefore to examine evidence about the incidence of symptomatic VTE in Asia. Methods Databases were searched for studies from Asia, published between January 1995 and February 2016, on the incidence of symptomatic VTE, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism. Review of eligible studies was conducted independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted on incidence, predispositions and recurrence of VTE. Results One thousand nighty-five studies were identified, of which 73 were eligible for full text review and data extraction. Three population-wide estimates of VTE rates identified from Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong reported annual incidences of 13.8, 15.9 and 19.9 per 100,000, respectively. Nine studies of Asian hospital registries or databases reported VTE rates ranging from 11 to 88 cases per 10,000 admissions. Population-based estimates of post-surgical DVT rates ranged from 0.15 to 1.35%. Age was a significant risk factor for VTE in all population groups. Conclusion Population-wide incidence estimates in Asia were approximately 15 to 20% of the levels recorded in western countries but have increased over time. It is anticipated this synthesis of evidence on the incidence of VTE and its predisposing factors will increase awareness about VTE in Asian populations.

The group of new oral anticoagulants or NOACs, now termed direct oral anticoagulants or DOACs, with their favourable results from large scale phase III clinical trials, represent a major advancement and expanded armamentarium in antithrombotic therapy. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban are now in clinical routine use for prevention and treatment of arterial and venous thrombotic diseases as addressed in their clinical trials. Usage of the DOACs is expected to increase as clinicians gain more experience and reassurance with data from the real world studies which are generally consistent with that from clinical trials. Development of specific antidotes in management of bleeding complications and development of coagulation assays for their plasma levels will further boost the confidence in the DOACs. Nonetheless, there are still limitations associated with the DOACs. Many patients in need of anticoagulant therapy for indications not studied in the clinical trials will not be eligible for treatment with a DOAC. Conditions where more data is required include DOACs use in the paediatric age group, patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease, thrombosis associated with the anti-phospholipid syndrome and cancer associated thrombosis. The affordability and access to these drugs may pose an issue for many patients under healthcare systems not providing for these medications. With four new anticoagulants coming onboard very quickly, the focus has shifted to the practical approach and management in real life as many clinicians are not yet familiar with the DOACs. Clinicians need to be educated on how to manage this new class for drugs, from choosing the appropriate drug to prevention and managing bleeding complications as a lack of knowledge and understanding in these drugs will lead to inappropriate use and compromise on patient safety.

Point-of-care (POC) coagulometers are increasingly used by patients for self-monitoring of oral vitamin K antagonists therapy. We studied the feasibility of introducing POC international normalised ratio (INR) testing in place of standard laboratory assays in a hospital-based anticoagulation clinic with 250 active patients. The CoaguChek XS system was first validated in 253 INR samples and found to have a correlation of r = 0.945 with standard assays. Variations increased with INR readings above 3.5 and this was chosen as the cutoff for acceptance of POC INR results. POC testing was done for 1,332 clinic visits during the subsequent 6-month study. Rate of rejections of INR over 3.5 was 4.3% (95% CI 3.3-5.5%). POC testing reduced clinic visit duration by 35 min (p < 0.001, 95% CI 25-45) without cost increments to patients or the laboratory. Among 232 respondents surveyed, 87.5% (95% CI 82.5-91.5%) preferred POC INR monitoring. Rates of thrombosis and major bleeding complications were 1.2% (95% CI 0.2-3.5%) and 0.4% (95% CI 0.01-2.2%), respectively. In conclusion, provided mechanisms are in place to address increased variations of INR at higher ranges, POC testing can be successfully implemented in busy hospital-based anticoagulation clinics.

COVID-19 caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory viral (non-CoV-2-RV) infections are associated with thrombotic complications. The differences in prothrombotic potential between SARS-CoV-2 and non-CoV-2-RV have not been well characterised. We compared the thrombotic rates between these two groups of patients directly and further delved into their coagulation profiles. In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, all consecutive COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients admitted between January 15th and April 10th 2020 were included. Coagulation parameters studied were prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time and its associated clot waveform analysis (CWA) parameter, min1, min2 and max2. In the COVID-19 (n = 181) group there were two (1.0 event/1000-hospital-days) myocardial infarction events while one (1.8 event/1000-hospital-day) was reported in the non-CoV-2-RV (n = 165) group. These events occurred in patients who were severely ill. There were no venous thrombotic events. Coagulation parameters did not differ throughout the course of mild COVID-19. However, CWA parameters were significantly higher in severe COVID-19 compared with mild disease, suggesting hypercoagulability (min1: 6.48%/s vs 5.05%/s, P < 0.001; min2: 0.92%/s2 vs 0.74%/s2, P = 0.033). In conclusion, the thrombotic rates were low and did not differ between COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients. The hypercoagulability in COVID-19 is a highly dynamic process with the highest risk occurring when patients were most severely ill. Such changes in haemostasis could be detected by CWA. In our population, a more individualized thromboprophylaxis approach, considering clinical and laboratory factors, is preferred over universal pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for all hospitalized COVID-19 patients and such personalized approach warrants further research.

Rivaroxaban may be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin for the prevention of stroke in patients with AF in Singapore.