American Society of Hirudotherapy

Argatroban dosage requirements and outcomes in intensive care versus non-intensive care patients

Research article published in Pharmacotherapy (2009)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Research reportClinical TrialsSmythe et al. · Pharmacotherapy, 2009

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of reduced-dose argatroban therapy in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) with those of non-ICU patients. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review. SETTING: Large, academic, tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Thirty-eight ICU patients and 43 non-ICU patients who received the institutional protocol of argatroban 0.8 microg/kg/minute and 1.2 microg/kg/minute, respectively, between March 2004 and September 2005. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data on patient demographics, argatroban dosing, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia antibody results, activated partial thromboplastin times (aPTTs), new thrombotic events, and major bleeding events were extracted from medical records. Time-weighted mean +/- SD doses of argatroban were 0.82 +/- 0.3 microg/kg/minute for ICU patients and 1.25 +/- 0.29 microg/kg/minute for non-ICU patients. Mean aPTT ratios were similar between groups: 2.07 +/- 0.53 for ICU patients and 2.00 +/- 0.45 for non-ICU patients. More than 70% of all aPTT ratios were therapeutic. More than 95% of patients in both groups achieved a therapeutic aPTT ratio during therapy. Fewer ICU patients than non-ICU patients had all therapeutic aPTT ratios during argatroban therapy (29% vs 51%, p=0.07). Thrombotic events occurred in six (16%) ICU patients versus none of the non-ICU patients (p=0.009). Thrombotic events occurred in 4 (31%) of the 13 ICU patients with confirmed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Major bleeding occurred in four (11%) ICU patients versus none of the non-ICU patients (p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Both ICU and non-ICU patients require less than the manufacturer-recommended initial dosage of argatroban. However, ICU patients appear to be at an increased risk for bleeding and thrombotic events despite their attainment of therapeutic aPTTs.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Indexed MeSH termsAgedAged, 80 and overAnticoagulantsArginineCritical CareDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleHeparinHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle Aged

Summary

Peer-reviewed clinical and outcomes research relevant to anticoagulation, leech therapy, and microsurgical flap management. Indexed in PubMed and verified against the NCBI record.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This retrospective medical-record review compared reduced-dose argatroban in 38 ICU versus 43 non-ICU patients; per the abstract both groups required less than the manufacturer-recommended starting dose to reach therapeutic aPTT ratios, but ICU patients had significantly more thrombotic events (16% vs 0%, p=0.009) and major bleeding (11% vs 0%, p=0.04) despite achieving target aPTTs. For the hirudotherapy evidence picture this is relevant as direct-thrombin-inhibitor pharmacology context — argatroban occupies the same mechanistic niche as leech-derived hirudin, and the finding that therapeutic aPTTs did not protect sick patients speaks to the wider challenge of monitoring this drug class. Caveat: this is a small, single-center retrospective study of a synthetic agent, not a randomized trial and not leech therapy; the ICU-vs-non-ICU difference is confounded by overall illness severity, so it is descriptive rather than causal.

Citation

Argatroban dosage requirements and outcomes in intensive care versus non-intensive care patients.

Smythe et al. · Pharmacotherapy, 2009

Added to ASH library: May 28, 2026 · Site last updated: June 18, 2026

This website provides educational information and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment recommendations. Medicinal leech therapy carries clinically meaningful risks and should be performed only by qualified clinicians under institutionally approved protocols. FDA 510(k) clearance for medicinal leeches is limited to specific indications; investigational and off-label discussions are labeled accordingly. For patient-specific guidance, consult a qualified healthcare provider.