Perrin Mark J, Vezi Brian Z, Ha Andrew C, Keren Arieh, Nery Pablo B, Birnie David H
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2012 Dec;35(12):1480-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2012.03516.x. Epub 2012 Sep 14.
Current guidelines recommend bridging anticoagulation in patients undergoing cardiac rhythm device surgery with a "moderate to high risk" of thromboembolism. Patients at "low risk" are advised to stop oral anticoagulation without bridging to the procedure. This study examines real world adherence to accepted guidelines and the clinical sequelae of nonadherence.
We performed a review of all patients undergoing device surgery receiving chronic anticoagulation over a prespecified time period of 14 months. Patients were classified per American College of Chest Physician guidelines as "moderate/high risk" or "low risk" of thromboembolism. We then compared perioperative management of anticoagulation to guideline recommendations and assessed the rate of perioperative bleeding and thromboembolism.
One hundred and twenty-nine patients were included in this study. Sixty-two (48%) were classified as "moderate/high risk" and 67 (52%) "low risk." In the "moderate/high risk" group 47/62 (76%) received perioperative anticoagulation but only 25/62 (40%) were bridged both pre- and postprocedure or maintained on uninterrupted warfarin. In the "low risk" group, 22/67 (33%) received bridging therapy. Device pocket hematoma or perioperative bleeding occurred in 10/129 (8%) with 4/10 receiving inappropriate bridging for a calculated low risk of thromboembolism. There were no perioperative thromboembolisms.
Our study identified significant underutilization of bridging, particularly in the postoperative period, in patients at "moderate/high risk" of thromboembolism. Conversely, bridging was overused in "low risk" patients and associated with bleeding complications. Physicians should be urged to follow current expert guidelines in regard to bridging anticoagulation for cardiac rhythm device surgery. (PACE 2012;35:1480-1486).
当前指南建议,在接受心律装置手术且有“中度至高度”血栓栓塞风险的患者中进行桥接抗凝治疗。对于“低风险”患者,建议在手术期间停用口服抗凝药而不进行桥接治疗。本研究旨在调查实际临床中对公认指南的遵循情况以及不遵循指南的临床后果。
我们回顾了在指定的14个月期间接受装置手术并长期接受抗凝治疗的所有患者。根据美国胸科医师学会指南,将患者分为血栓栓塞“中度/高度风险”或“低风险”。然后,我们将围手术期抗凝管理与指南建议进行比较,并评估围手术期出血和血栓栓塞的发生率。
本研究共纳入129例患者。其中62例(48%)被归类为“中度/高度风险”,67例(52%)为“低风险”。在“中度/高度风险”组中,62例患者中有47例(76%)接受了围手术期抗凝治疗,但只有25例(40%)在术前和术后均接受了桥接治疗或持续使用华法林不间断。在“低风险 ”组中,67例患者中有22例(33%)接受了桥接治疗。129例患者中有10例(8%)发生了装置囊袋血肿或围手术期出血,其中4例因血栓栓塞风险较低而接受了不适当的桥接治疗。围手术期未发生血栓栓塞事件。
我们的研究发现,在血栓栓塞“中度/高度风险”患者中,桥接治疗的使用率明显不足,尤其是在术后阶段。相反,桥接治疗在“低风险”患者中被过度使用,并与出血并发症相关。应敦促医生在心律装置手术的桥接抗凝治疗方面遵循当前的专家指南。(《心律》2012;35:1480 - 1486)