02 Apr 11

Regional anesthesia in the patient receiving antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy

Posted in Anticoagulation, Regional anaesthesia at 14:49 by Laci

By T Horlocker, D Wedel, J Rowlingson, F Enneking et al

Reg Anesth Pain Med 2010;35:64-101

The actual incidence of neurologic dysfunction resulting from hemorrhagic complications associated with neuraxial blockade is unknown. Although the incidence cited in the literature is estimated to be less than 1 in 150,000 epidural and less than 1 in 220,000 spinal anesthetics, recent epidemiologic surveys suggest that the frequency is increasing and may be as high as 1 in 3000 in some patient populations. Overall, the risk of clinically significant bleeding increase with age, associated abnormalities of the spinal cord or vertebral column, the presence of an underlying coagulopathy, difficulty during needle placement, and an indwelling neuraxial catheter during sustained anticoagulation (particularly with standard heparin or low-molecular weight heparin). The need for prompt diagnosis and intervention to optimize is also consistently reported.

In response to these patient safety issues, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) convened its Third Consensus Conference on Regional Anesthesia and Anticoagulation. Practice guidelines or recommendations summarize evidence-based reviews. However, the rarity of spinal hematoma defies a prospective randomized study, and there is no current laboratory model. As a result, the ASRA consensus statements represent the collective experience of recognized experts in the field of neuraxial anesthesia and anticoagulation. These are based on case reports, clinical series, pharmacology, hematology, and risk factors for surgical bleeding. An understanding of the complexity of this issue is essential to patient management.

27 Dec 10

Oral rivaroxaban for symptomatic venous thromboembolism

Posted in Anticoagulation at 16:09 by Laci

The EINSTEIN Investigators

NEJM 2010; 363:2499-2510

Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide a simple, fixed-dose regimen for treating acute deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and for continued treatment, without the need for laboratory monitoring.

We conducted an open-label, randomized, event-driven, noninferiority study that compared oral rivaroxaban alone (15 mg twice daily for 3 weeks, followed by 20 mg once daily) with subcutaneous enoxaparin followed by a vitamin K antagonist (either warfarin or acenocoumarol) for 3, 6, or 12 months in patients with acute, symptomatic DVT. In parallel, we carried out a double-blind, randomized, event-driven superiority study that compared rivaroxaban alone (20 mg once daily) with placebo for an additional 6 or 12 months in patients who had completed 6 to 12 months of treatment for venous thromboembolism. The primary efficacy outcome for both studies was recurrent venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in the initial-treatment study and major bleeding in the continued-treatment study.

The study of rivaroxaban for acute DVT included 3449 patients: 1731 given rivaroxaban and 1718 given enoxaparin plus a vitamin K antagonist. Rivaroxaban had noninferior efficacy with respect to the primary outcome (36 events [2.1%], vs. 51 events with enoxaparin–vitamin K antagonist [3.0%]; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44 to 1.04; P<0.001). The principal safety outcome occurred in 8.1% of the patients in each group. In the continued-treatment study, which included 602 patients in the rivaroxaban group and 594 in the placebo group, rivaroxaban had superior efficacy (8 events [1.3%], vs. 42 with placebo [7.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.39; P<0.001). Four patients in the rivaroxaban group had nonfatal major bleeding (0.7%), versus none in the placebo group (P=0.11).

Rivaroxaban offers a simple, single-drug approach to the short-term and continued treatment of venous thrombosis that may improve the benefit-to-risk profile of anticoagulation.

22 Oct 10

Cardiac risk of noncardiac surgery after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents

Posted in Anticoagulation, Antiplatelet therapy, Pre-operatie evaluation at 0:35 by Laci

By J Rabbitts, G Nuttall, M Brown, A Hanson, W Oliver, D Holmes, C Rihal, Charanjit

Anesthesiology 2008;109:596-604

The American College of Cardiology released a scientific advisory that included a recommendation to delay elective of noncardiac surgery (NCS) for 1 yr after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a drug-eluting stent (DES).

This single-center, retrospective study examined the risk for complications of NCS performed within 2 yr after DES placement and examined whether this risk changed based on the time between procedures. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) during the hospitalization for NCS. Bleeding events were analyzed as a secondary endpoint.

From April 22, 2003, to December 31, 2006, a total of 520 patients underwent NCS within 2 yr after PCI with a DES at Mayo Clinic. The majority, 84%, of the DES placed were Cypher stents. The frequency of MACE was not found to be significantly associated with the time between PCI and NCS (rate of MACEs 6.4, 5.7, 5.9, and 3.3% at 0-90, 91-180, 181-365, and 366-730 days after PCI with DES, respectively; P = 0.727 for comparison across groups). Characteristics found to be associated with MACEs in univariate analysis were advanced age (P = 0.031), emergent NCS (P = 0.006), shock at time of PCI (P = 0.035), previous history of myocardial infarction (P = 0.046), and continuation of a thienopyridine (ticlopidine or clopidogrel) into the preoperative period (P = 0.040). The rate of transfusion did not seem to be associated with antiplatelet therapy use.

The risk of MACEs with NCS after DES placement was not significantly associated with time from stenting to surgery, but observed rates of MACEs were lowest after 1 yr.

01 Jan 10

Perioperative use of anti-platelet drugs

Posted in Anesthesia, Anticoagulation, Coronary artery disease, Pre-operatie evaluation at 16:19 by Laci

by P Chassot, A Delabays, D Spahn

Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2007; 21:241–256

Performing a surgical procedure on a patient undergoing anti-platelet therapy raises a dilemma: is it safer to withdraw the drugs and reduce the haemorrhagic risk, or to maintain them and reduce the risk of myocardial ischaemic events? Based on recent clinical data, this review concludes that the risk of coronary thrombosis on anti-platelet drugs withdrawal is much higher than the risk of surgical bleeding when maintaining them. In secondary prevention, aspirin is a lifelong therapy and should never be stopped. Clopidogrel is mandatory as long as the coronary stents are not fully endothelialized, which takes 6–24 weeks depending on the technique used, but might be required for a longer period

Google PageRank