scholarly journals Clinical impact of the perioperative management of oral anticoagulants in bleeding after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shoko Ono ◽  
Marin Ishikawa ◽  
Kana Matsuda ◽  
Momoko Tsuda ◽  
Keiko Yamamoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Perioperative Management ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Antiplatelet Agents ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Clinical Impact ◽  
Antithrombotic Agents ◽  
Mucosal Resection

Abstract Background Heparin bridging therapy (HBT) is indeed related to a high frequency of bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). In this study, our aim was to investigate clinical impact of management of oral anticoagulants without HBT in bleeding after colonic EMR. Methods From data for patients who underwent consecutive colonic EMR, the relationships of patient factors and procedural factors with the risk of bleeding were analysed. Our management of antithrombotic agents was based on the shortest cessation as follows: the administration of warfarin was generally continued within the therapeutic range, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were not administered on the day of the procedure. We calculated bleeding risks after EMR in patients who used antithrombotic agents and evaluated whether perioperative management of anticoagulants without HBT was beneficial for bleeding. Results A total of 1734 polyps in 825 EMRs were analysed. Bleeding occurred in 4.0% of the patients and 1.9% of the polyps. The odds ratios for bleeding using multivariate logistic regression analysis were 3.67 in patients who used anticoagulants and 4.95 in patients who used both anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents. In patients with one-day skip of DOACs, bleeding occurred in 6.5% of the polyps, and there were no significant differences in bleeding risk between HBT and continuous warfarin or one-day skip DOACs. Conclusions The use of oral anticoagulants was related to bleeding after colonic EMR, and perioperative management of oral anticoagulants based on the shortest cessation without HBT would be clinically acceptable.

scholarly journals Combining antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy in cardiovascular disease

Hematology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 642-648
Author(s):  
Geoffrey D. Barnes
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Thrombotic Event ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Antithrombotic Agents ◽  
Thrombotic Risk ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Combined Use ◽  
Life Threatening

Abstract Up to 10% of the >3 million Americans with atrial fibrillation will experience an acute coronary syndrome or undergo percutaneous coronary intervention. Therefore, concurrent indications for multiple antithrombotic agents is a common clinical scenario. Although each helps reduce thrombotic risk, their combined use significantly increases the risk of major bleeding events, which can be life threatening. In the past 5 years, a number of randomized clinical trials have explored different combinations of anticoagulation plus antiplatelet agents aimed at minimizing bleeding risk while preserving low thrombotic event rates. In general, shorter courses with fewer antithrombotic agents have been found to be effective, particularly when direct oral anticoagulants are combined with clopidogrel. Combined use of very low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin has also demonstrated benefit in atherosclerotic diseases, including coronary and peripheral artery disease. Use of proton pump inhibitor therapy while patients are taking multiple antithrombotic agents has the potential to further reduce upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk in select populations. Applying this evidence to patients with multiple thrombotic conditions will help to avoid costly and life-threatening adverse medication events.

scholarly journals Multicenter Study of the Hemorrhage Risk after Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Associated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ritsu Yasuda ◽  
Naohisa Yoshida ◽  
Takaaki Murakami ◽  
Ryohei Hirose ◽  
Ken Inoue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Multicenter Study ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Major Complication ◽  
Postoperative Hemorrhage ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Associated Risk Factors ◽  
Endoscopic Clipping

Backgrounds and Aims. Recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have become widely used for preventing thromboembolism. However, postoperative hemorrhage (POH) is a major complication associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for colorectal lesions. In this multicenter study, we analyzed the incidence of POH after EMR associated with DOACs and explored the associated risk factors. Materials and Methods. This study was a multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted at 8 Japanese institutions. A total of 2062 cases that underwent EMR for colorectal lesions at these 8 institutions from October 2016 to September 2017 were analyzed. The cases were divided into 4 groups: the DOAC group (63 cases), warfarin group (34 cases), antiplatelet group (185 cases), and no antithrombotics group (1780 cases). In all lesions of the DOAC and warfarin groups, endoscopic clipping was performed after EMR. The rate of POH in the DOAC group, patients’ clinical characteristics, the risk factors of POH, and the rate of thromboembolism due to stopping DOACs were compared with other groups. Results. The rates of POH were 7.9%∗ (5/63), 2.9% (1/34), 3.2% (6/185), and 0.6%∗∗ (11/1780) in the DOAC, warfarin, antiplatelet, and no antithrombotics groups, respectively (∗ vs. ∗∗, p<0.001). Regarding risk factors, the tumor size with POH (mm) was significantly bigger than that without POH (16.2±8.3 vs. 7.2±4.9, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in the rates of POH based on the type of DOAC. In addition, no thromboembolisms occurred due to stopping of DOAC treatment. Conclusions. Patients receiving DOACs had significantly higher rates of POH after EMR than those without antithrombotics.

scholarly journals Management of DOAC in patients undergoing planned surgery or invasive procedure: FCSA position paper

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Squizzato ◽  
Daniela Poli ◽  
Doris Barcellona ◽  
Antonia Ciampa ◽  
Elvira Grandone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Perioperative Management ◽  
Total Population ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Invasive Procedure ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Of Bleeding ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Anticoagulated Patients

Patients on anticoagulant treatment are constantly increasing, with an estimated prevalence in Italy of 2% of the total population. About a quarter of the anticoagulated patients require temporary cessation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or vitamin K antagonists for a planned intervention within 2 years from anticoagulation inception. Several clinical issues about DOAC interruption remain unanswered: many questions are tentatively addressed daily by thousands of physicians worldwide through an experience-based balancing of thrombotic and bleeding risk. Among possible valuable answers the Italian Federation of Centers for the diagnosis of thrombotic disorders and the Surveillance of the Antithrombotic therapies (FCSA) proposes some experience-based suggestions and expert opinions. In particular, FCSA provides practical guidance on the following issues: 1) multiparametric assessment of thrombotic and bleeding risk based on patients’ individual and surgical risk factor, 2) testing of prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time and DOAC plasma levels before surgery or invasive procedure, 3) use of heparin, 4) restarting of full-dose of DOAC after high-risk of bleeding surgery, 5) practical non-pharmacological suggestions to manage patients perioperatively. Finally, FCSA suggests creating a multidisciplinary ‘Anticoagulation Team’ with the aim to define the optimal perioperative management of anticoagulation.

scholarly journals Perioperative management of patients on chronic antithrombotic therapy

Hematology ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 (1) ◽  
pp. 529-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Ortel
Keyword(s):  
Antithrombotic Therapy ◽  
Perioperative Management ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Preoperative Assessment ◽  
Antiplatelet Agents ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Reversal Agent ◽  
Perioperative Bleeding ◽  
Optimal Approach

Abstract Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy is a situation that occurs frequently and requires consideration of the patient, the procedure, and an expanding array of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents. Preoperative assessment must address each patient's risk for thromboembolic events balanced against the risk for perioperative bleeding. Procedures can be separated into those with a low bleeding risk, which generally do not require complete reversal of the antithrombotic therapy, and those associated with an intermediate or high bleeding risk. For patients who are receiving warfarin who need interruption of the anticoagulant, consideration must be given to whether simply withholding the anticoagulant is the optimal approach or whether a perioperative “bridge” with an alternative agent, typically a low-molecular-weight heparin, should be used. The new oral anticoagulants dabigatran and rivaroxaban have shorter effective half-lives, but they introduce other concerns for perioperative management, including prolonged drug effect in patients with renal insufficiency, limited experience with clinical laboratory testing to confirm lack of residual anticoagulant effect, and lack of a reversal agent. Antiplatelet agents must also be considered in the perioperative setting, with particular consideration given to the potential risk for thrombotic complications in patients with coronary artery stents who have antiplatelet therapy withheld.

scholarly journals Perioperative management of patients on chronic antithrombotic therapy

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (24) ◽  
pp. 4699-4705 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Ortel
Keyword(s):  
Antithrombotic Therapy ◽  
Perioperative Management ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Preoperative Assessment ◽  
Antiplatelet Agents ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Reversal Agent ◽  
Perioperative Bleeding ◽  
Optimal Approach

Abstract Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy is a situation that occurs frequently and requires consideration of the patient, the procedure, and an expanding array of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents. Preoperative assessment must address each patient's risk for thromboembolic events balanced against the risk for perioperative bleeding. Procedures can be separated into those with a low bleeding risk, which generally do not require complete reversal of the antithrombotic therapy, and those associated with an intermediate or high bleeding risk. For patients who are receiving warfarin who need interruption of the anticoagulant, consideration must be given to whether simply withholding the anticoagulant is the optimal approach or whether a perioperative “bridge” with an alternative agent, typically a low-molecular-weight heparin, should be used. The new oral anticoagulants dabigatran and rivaroxaban have shorter effective half-lives, but they introduce other concerns for perioperative management, including prolonged drug effect in patients with renal insufficiency, limited experience with clinical laboratory testing to confirm lack of residual anticoagulant effect, and lack of a reversal agent. Antiplatelet agents must also be considered in the perioperative setting, with particular consideration given to the potential risk for thrombotic complications in patients with coronary artery stents who have antiplatelet therapy withheld.

scholarly journals Novel bleeding risk score for patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulants, including direct oral anticoagulants

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luise Adam ◽  
Martin Feller ◽  
Lamprini Syrogiannouli ◽  
Cinzia Del‐Giovane ◽  
Jacques Donzé ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Bleeding Risk

Contemporary Clinical Use of Aspirin: Mechanisms of Action, Current Concepts, Unresolved Questions, and Future Perspectives

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikael Christiansen ◽  
Erik Lerkevang Grove ◽  
Anne-Mette Hvas
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Clinical Use ◽  
Action Current ◽  
Potential Clinical Benefit ◽  
Treatment Indications ◽  
Prevention Of Cardiovascular Disease

AbstractThe ability of aspirin to inhibit platelet aggregation has positioned this agent within the most frequently used drugs worldwide. The aim of this article is to review the contemporary clinical use of aspirin and also to discuss unresolved issues not yet translated into clinical practice. Results from several clinical trials have led to strong guideline recommendations for aspirin use in the acute management and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. On the contrary, guidelines regarding aspirin use as primary prevention of cardiovascular disease are almost conservative, supported by recent trials reporting that the bleeding risk outweighs the potential benefits in most patients. In pregnancy, aspirin has proved efficient in preventing preeclampsia and small-for-gestational-age births in women at high risk, and is hence widely recommended in clinical guidelines. Despite the vast amount of clinical data on aspirin, several unresolved questions remain. Randomized trials have reported that aspirin reduces the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism, but the clinical relevance remains limited, because direct oral anticoagulants are more effective. Laboratory studies suggest that a twice-daily dosing regimen or evening intake may lead to more efficient platelet inhibition, and the potential clinical benefit of such strategies is currently being explored in ongoing clinical trials. Enteric-coated formulations of aspirin are frequently used, but it remains unclear if they are safer and as efficient as plain aspirin. In the future, aspirin use after percutaneous coronary interventions might not be mandatory in patients who also need anticoagulant therapy, as several trials support shorter aspirin duration strategies. On the other hand, new treatment indications for aspirin will likely arise, as there is growing evidence that aspirin may reduce the risk of colorectal cancer and other types of cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document