| 1. |
- Douketis, James D., et al.
(författare)
-
Urgent surgery or procedures in patients taking dabigatran or warfarin : Analysis of perioperative outcomes from the RE-LY trial
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Thrombosis Research. - : Elsevier BV. - 0049-3848 .- 1879-2472. ; 139, s. 77-81
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: There is concern about the management of anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who require an urgent surgery/procedure, especially in those who are receiving a direct oral anticoagulant such as dabigatran. Methods: We accessed the database from RE-LY, a randomized trial comparing dabigatran (110 mg and 150 mg twice daily) with warfarin for stroke prevention in AF, to assess patients who had an urgent and elective surgery/procedure. We compared the risk for thromboembolism, major bleeding and mortality according to treatment allocation (dabigatran 110 mg or 150 mg, or warfarin) or surgery/procedure type (urgent or elective). Outcomes were assessed from day-7 to day 30 after a surgery/procedure. Results: 353 patients (2.0% of study population) had an urgent surgery/procedure and 4168 patients (23.1% of study population) had an elective surgery/procedure. In patients on dabigatran 110 mg, dabigatran 150 mg and warfarin who had an urgent surgery/procedure: rates of thromboembolism were 16.1%, 7.4%, and 10.5%; rates of major bleeding were 17.0%, 17.6%, and 22.9%; rates of mortality were 6.3%, 1.5%, and 2.9%, respectively (P > 0.50 for all comparisons). Rates of these outcomes were multi-fold higher in patients having an urgent rather than an elective surgery/procedure (P < 0.5 for all comparisons). Conclusion: In anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation who require an urgent surgery/procedure, the risks for thromboembolism, major bleeding and mortality did not differ depending on treatment with dabigatran or warfarin, but rates of these outcomes were multi-fold higher than in patients having an elective surgery/procedure.
|
|
| 2. |
- Essebag, Vidal, et al.
(författare)
-
Short-term dabigatran interruption before cardiac rhythm device implantation : multi-centre experience from the RE-LY trial
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Europace. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS. - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 19:10, s. 1630-1636
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) surgery is commonly performed in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The current analysis was undertaken to compare peri-operative anticoagulation management, bleeding, and thrombotic events in AF patients treated with dabigatran vs. warfarin.Methods and results: This study included 611 patients treated with dabigatran vs. warfarin who underwent CIED surgery during the RE-LY trial. Among 201 warfarin-treated patients, warfarin was interrupted a median of 144 (inter-quartile range, IQR: 120-216) h, and 37 (18.4%) patients underwent heparin bridging. In dabigatran-treated patients (216 on 110 mg bid and 194 on 150 mg bid), the duration of dabigatran interruption was a median of 96 (IQR: 61-158) h. Pocket hematomas occurred in 9 (2.20%) patients on dabigatran and 8 (3.98%) patients on warfarin (P = 0.218). The occurrence of pocket hematomas was lower with dabigatran compared with warfarin with heparin bridging (RD: -8.62%, 95% CI: -24.15 to - 0.51%, P = 0.034) but not when compared with warfarin with no bridging (P = 0.880). Ischemic stroke occurred in 2 (0.3%) patients; one in the warfarin group (without bridging) and one in the dabigatran 150 mg bid group (P = 0.735).Conclusion: In patients treated with dabigatran undergoing CIED surgery, interruption of dabigatran is associated with similar or lower incidence of pocket hematoma, when compared with warfarin interruption without or with heparin bridging, respectively. Whether uninterrupted dabigatran can reduce pocket hematoma or ischemic stroke remains to be evaluated.
|
|
| 3. |
- Healey, Jeff S., et al.
(författare)
-
Periprocedural Bleeding and Thromboembolic Events With Dabigatran Compared With Warfarin Results From the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) Randomized Trial
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 126:3, s. 343-348
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background-Dabigatran reduces ischemic stroke in comparison with warfarin; however, given the lack of antidote, there is concern that it might increase bleeding when surgery or invasive procedures are required.Methods and Results-The current analysis was undertaken to compare the periprocedural bleeding risk of patients in the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial treated with dabigatran and warfarin. Bleeding rates were evaluated from 7 days before until 30 days after invasive procedures, considering only the first procedure for each patient. A total of 4591 patients underwent at least 1 invasive procedure: 24.7% of patients received dabigatran 110 mg, 25.4% received dabigatran 150 mg, and 25.9% received warfarin, P=0.34. Procedures included: pacemaker/defibrillator insertion (10.3%), dental procedures (10.0%), diagnostic procedures (10.0%), cataract removal (9.3%), colonoscopy (8.6%), and joint replacement (6.2%). Among patients assigned to either dabigatran dose, the last dose of study drug was given 49 (35-85) hours before the procedure on comparison with 114 (87-144) hours in patients receiving warfarin, P<0.001. There was no significant difference in the rates of periprocedural major bleeding between patients receiving dabigatran 110 mg (3.8%) or dabigatran 150 mg (5.1%) or warfarin (4.6%); dabigatran 110 mg versus warfarin: relative risk, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.17; P=0.28; dabigatran 150 mg versus warfarin: relative risk, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.49; P=0.58. Among patients having urgent surgery, major bleeding occurred in 17.8% with dabigatran 110 mg, 17.7% with dabigatran 150 mg, and 21.6% with warfarin: dabigatran 110 mg; relative risk, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.41; P=0.47; dabigatran 150 mg: relative risk, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.35; P=0.44.Conclusions-Dabigatran and warfarin were associated with similar rates of periprocedural bleeding, including patients having urgent surgery. Dabigatran facilitated a shorter interruption of oral anticoagulation.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Kyriakoulis, Konstantinos G, et al.
(författare)
-
Practical Recommendations for Optimal Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with COVID-19 : A Consensus Statement Based on Available Clinical Trials
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Medicine. - : MDPI AG. - 2077-0383. ; 11:20, s. 1-18
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been shown to be strongly associated with increased risk for venous thromboembolism events (VTE) mainly in the inpatient but also in the outpatient setting. Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis has been shown to offer significant benefits in terms of reducing not only VTE events but also mortality, especially in acutely ill patients with COVID-19. Although the main source of evidence is derived from observational studies with several limitations, thromboprophylaxis is currently recommended for all hospitalized patients with acceptable bleeding risk by all national and international guidelines. Recently, high quality data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) further support the role of thromboprophylaxis and provide insights into the optimal thromboprophylaxis strategy. The aim of this statement is to systematically review all the available evidence derived from RCTs regarding thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with COVID-19 in different settings (either inpatient or outpatient) and provide evidence-based guidance to practical questions in everyday clinical practice. Clinical questions accompanied by practical recommendations are provided based on data derived from 20 RCTs that were identified and included in the present study. Overall, the main conclusions are: (i) thromboprophylaxis should be administered in all hospitalized patients with COVID-19, (ii) an optimal dose of inpatient thromboprophylaxis is dependent upon the severity of COVID-19, (iii) thromboprophylaxis should be administered on an individualized basis in post-discharge patients with COVID-19 with high thrombotic risk, and (iv) thromboprophylaxis should not be routinely administered in outpatients. Changes regarding the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants, the wide immunization status (increasing rates of vaccination and reinfections), and the availability of antiviral therapies and monoclonal antibodies might affect the characteristics of patients with COVID-19; thus, future studies will inform us about the thrombotic risk and the optimal therapeutic strategies for these patients.
|
|
