Santosh B Murthy1, Ajay Gupta2, Alexander E Merkler2, Babak B Navi2, Pitchaiah Mandava2, Costantino Iadecola2, Kevin N Sheth2, Daniel F Hanley2, Wendy C Ziai2, Hooman Kamel2. 1. From the Department of Neurology (S.B.M., A.E.M., B.B.N., C.I., H.K.), Clinical and Translational Neuroscience Unit, Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (S.B.M., A.G., A.E.M., B.B.N., C.I., H.K.), and Department of Radiology (A.G.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; Stroke Outcomes Laboratory, Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine and the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX (P.M.); Division of Neurocritical Care and Emergency Neurology, Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (K.N.S.); Division of Brain Injury Outcomes (D.F.H.), and Division of Neurosciences Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD (W.C.Z.). sam9200@med.cornell.edu. 2. From the Department of Neurology (S.B.M., A.E.M., B.B.N., C.I., H.K.), Clinical and Translational Neuroscience Unit, Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (S.B.M., A.G., A.E.M., B.B.N., C.I., H.K.), and Department of Radiology (A.G.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; Stroke Outcomes Laboratory, Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine and the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX (P.M.); Division of Neurocritical Care and Emergency Neurology, Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (K.N.S.); Division of Brain Injury Outcomes (D.F.H.), and Division of Neurosciences Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD (W.C.Z.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The safety and efficacy of restarting anticoagulation therapy after intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the associations of anticoagulation resumption with the subsequent risk of ICH recurrence and thromboembolism. METHODS: We searched published medical literature to identify cohort studies involving adults with anticoagulation-associated ICH. Our predictor variable was resumption of anticoagulation. Outcome measures were thromboembolic events (stroke and myocardial infarction) and recurrence of ICH. After assessing study heterogeneity and publication bias, we performed a meta-analysis using random-effects models to assess the strength of association between anticoagulation resumption and our outcomes. RESULTS: Eight studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis, with 5306 ICH patients. Almost all studies evaluated anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists. Reinitiation of anticoagulation was associated with a significantly lower risk of thromboembolic complications (pooled relative risk, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.45; Q=5.12, P for heterogeneity=0.28). There was no evidence of increased risk of recurrent ICH after reinstatement of anticoagulation therapy, although there was significant heterogeneity among included studies (pooled relative risk, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.77; Q=24.68, P for heterogeneity <0.001). No significant publication bias was detected in our analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In observational studies, reinstitution of anticoagulation after ICH was associated with a lower risk of thromboembolic complications and a similar risk of ICH recurrence. Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the true risk-benefit profile of anticoagulation resumption after ICH.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The safety and efficacy of restarting anticoagulation therapy after intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the associations of anticoagulation resumption with the subsequent risk of ICH recurrence and thromboembolism. METHODS: We searched published medical literature to identify cohort studies involving adults with anticoagulation-associated ICH. Our predictor variable was resumption of anticoagulation. Outcome measures were thromboembolic events (stroke and myocardial infarction) and recurrence of ICH. After assessing study heterogeneity and publication bias, we performed a meta-analysis using random-effects models to assess the strength of association between anticoagulation resumption and our outcomes. RESULTS: Eight studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis, with 5306 ICHpatients. Almost all studies evaluated anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists. Reinitiation of anticoagulation was associated with a significantly lower risk of thromboembolic complications (pooled relative risk, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.45; Q=5.12, P for heterogeneity=0.28). There was no evidence of increased risk of recurrent ICH after reinstatement of anticoagulation therapy, although there was significant heterogeneity among included studies (pooled relative risk, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.77; Q=24.68, P for heterogeneity <0.001). No significant publication bias was detected in our analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In observational studies, reinstitution of anticoagulation after ICH was associated with a lower risk of thromboembolic complications and a similar risk of ICH recurrence. Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the true risk-benefit profile of anticoagulation resumption after ICH.
Authors: Susan Colilla; Ann Crow; William Petkun; Daniel E Singer; Teresa Simon; Xianchen Liu Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Nicholas A Morris; Alexander E Merkler; Whitney E Parker; Jan Claassen; E Sander Connolly; Kevin N Sheth; Hooman Kamel Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Alessandro Biffi; Christopher D Anderson; Thomas W K Battey; Alison M Ayres; Steven M Greenberg; Anand Viswanathan; Jonathan Rosand Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Robert J Stanton; Mark H Eckman; Daniel Woo; Charles J Moomaw; Mary Haverbusch; Matthew L Flaherty; Dawn O Kleindorfer Journal: Stroke Date: 2020-01-31 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Victor J Del Brutto; Seemant Chaturvedi; Hans-Christoph Diener; Jose G Romano; Ralph L Sacco Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2019-08-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jochen A Sembill; Claudia Y Wieser; Maximilian I Sprügel; Stefan T Gerner; Antje Giede-Jeppe; Caroline Reindl; Ilker Y Eyüpoglu; Philip Hoelter; Hannes Lücking; Joji B Kuramatsu; Hagen B Huttner Journal: J Neurol Date: 2018-08-20 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: William Beedham; George Peck; Simon E Richardson; Kevin Tsang; Michael Fertleman; David Jh Shipway Journal: Clin Med (Lond) Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 2.659
Authors: Meredith P Murphy; Joji B Kuramatsu; Audrey Leasure; Guido J Falcone; Hooman Kamel; Lauren H Sansing; Christina Kourkoulis; Kristin Schwab; Jordan J Elm; M Edip Gurol; Huy Tran; Steven M Greenberg; Anand Viswanathan; Christopher D Anderson; Stefan Schwab; Jonathan Rosand; Fu-Dong Shi; Steven J Kittner; Fernando D Testai; Daniel Woo; Carl D Langefeld; Michael L James; Sebastian Koch; Hagen B Huttner; Alessandro Biffi; Kevin N Sheth Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Santosh B Murthy; Xian Wu; Ivan Diaz; Melvin Parasram; Neal S Parikh; Costantino Iadecola; Alexander E Merkler; Guido J Falcone; Stacy Brown; Alessandro Biffi; Judy Ch'ang; Jared Knopman; Philip E Stieg; Babak B Navi; Kevin N Sheth; Hooman Kamel Journal: Stroke Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Eric Zhou; Aaron Lord; Amelia Boehme; Nils Henninger; Adam de Havenon; Farhaan Vahidy; Koto Ishida; Jose Torres; Eva A Mistry; Brian Mac Grory; Kevin N Sheth; M Edip Gurol; Karen Furie; Mitchell S V Elkind; Shadi Yaghi Journal: Stroke Date: 2020-10-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Agnieszka Kotalczyk; Michał Mazurek; Zbigniew Kalarus; Tatjana S Potpara; Gregory Y H Lip Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 32.419