Literature DB >> 19619702

Implantation of cardiac rhythm devices without interruption of oral anticoagulation compared with perioperative bridging with low-molecular weight heparin.

Alex Tischenko1, Lorne J Gula, Raymond Yee, George J Klein, Allan C Skanes, Andrew D Krahn.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of patients requiring arrhythmia device implantation are taking warfarin. The common practice of warfarin interruption and perioperative bridging with heparin is associated with a high rate of postoperative hemorrhagic complications. We assessed the safety of device implantation without interruption of warfarin therapy.
METHODS: Three patient groups were studied: Group 1 consisted of 117 consecutive patients on long-term warfarin therapy with significant risk of thromboembolism (atrial fibrillation with CHADS(2) score > or =2, mechanical heart valve, recent venous thromboembolism) who underwent arrhythmia device implantation without interruption of warfarin. Group 2 was 117 patients who served as age- and sex-matched controls matched to procedure type not taking warfarin. Group 3 consisted of 38 similar thromboembolic risk historical control patients who underwent interruption of warfarin therapy and bridging with dalteparin before and 24 hours after surgery. Active fixation leads were used by subclavian or axillary vein puncture, with septal fixation in the ventricle in 56% of patients. Hemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications were assessed at discharge and at 7 and 30 days after surgery.
RESULTS: During an 18-month period, 1,562 consecutive adult patients underwent heart rhythm device implantation or replacement. One hundred seventeen of the 447 patients on warfarin were considered high risk and remained on warfarin for their procedure. The mean international normalized ratio in group 1 patients was 2.2 +/- 0.4 (age 79 +/- 11 years, 73 male). Significant hematoma was noted in 9 patients (7.7%), and one required surgical revision (0.9%). Five group 2 patients (control) had significant hematomas (4.3%), none of which required revision (P = .41). In group 3, 9 patients developed significant hematomas (23.7%, P = .012), 3 of whom required reoperation (7.9%, P = .046). There were no deaths, thromboembolic events, cardiac tamponade, or hemothorax in any patient. The only risk factor for hematoma in the warfarin patients was the number of leads implanted.
CONCLUSIONS: Arrhythmia devices can be implanted safely in patients with high thromboembolic risk without interruption of warfarin. This strategy may be associated with reduced risk of significant pocket hematoma compared with dalteparin bridging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19619702     DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2009.06.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  10 in total

1.  Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  James D Douketis; Alex C Spyropoulos; Frederick A Spencer; Michael Mayr; Amir K Jaffer; Mark H Eckman; Andrew S Dunn; Regina Kunz
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 2.  Meta-analysis of bleeding complications associated with cardiac rhythm device implantation.

Authors:  Michael L Bernard; Matthew Shotwell; Paul J Nietert; Michael R Gold
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2012-04-24

3.  Association of Uninterrupted Oral Anticoagulation During Cardiac Device Implantation with Pocket Hematoma.

Authors:  Brittany L Melton; Patricia A Howard; Abby Goerdt; Jessica Casey
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2015-10-14

Review 4.  Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy in patients receiving cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hua He; Bing-Bing Ke; Yan Li; Fu-Sheng Han; Xiaodong Li; Yu-Jie Zeng
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 5.  Selecting antithrombotic therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Christine Tanaka-Esposito; Mina K Chung
Journal:  Cleve Clin J Med       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.321

6.  Anticoagulation management of patients with long-term warfarin therapy after valve replacement during the perioperative period of pacemaker implantation.

Authors:  Zhi-Hong Han; Xue-Jun Ren; Ye Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2013-08-01

7.  Incidence of pocket hematoma after electrophysiological device placement: dual antiplatelet therapy versus low-molecular-weight heparin regimen.

Authors:  Yan Chen; Yun-Tao Li; Ming-Dong Gao; Ze-Chun Zeng; Jin-Rong Zhang; Hong-Liang Cong; Yin Liu; Ru Zhao; Le-Feng Wang; Xin-Cun Yang; Kang Meng
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.327

8.  Incidence, predictors and outcomes of hematoma after ICD implantation: An analysis of a nationwide database of 85,276 patients.

Authors:  Arun Raghav Mahankali Sridhar; Vivek Yarlagadda; Arun Kanmanthareddy; Sravanthi Parasa; Ryan Maybrook; Buddhadeb Dawn; Yeruva Madhu Reddy; Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2016-10-21

Review 9.  Periprocedural heparin bridging in patients receiving oral anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jing Wen Yong; Li Xia Yang; Bright Eric Ohene; Yu Jie Zhou; Zhi Jian Wang
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 2.298

10.  Thromboembolic and bleeding risk of periprocedural bridging anticoagulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hsien-Cheng Kuo; Feng-Lin Liu; Jui-Tai Chen; Yih-Giun Cherng; Ka-Wai Tam; Ying-Hsuan Tai
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2020-01-16       Impact factor: 2.882

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.