Oral anticoagulation continuation compared with heparin bridging therapy among high risk patients undergoing implantation of cardiac rhythm devices

Lei Feng; Yang Li; Jian Li; Bo Yu

doi:10.1160/TH12-07-0498

Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Thromb Haemost 2012; 108(06): 1124-1131
DOI: 10.1160/TH12-07-0498

Review Article

Schattauer GmbH

Oral anticoagulation continuation compared with heparin bridging therapy among high risk patients undergoing implantation of cardiac rhythm devices

A meta-analysis

Authors

Lei Feng

¹Department of Cardiology, First Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P. R. China
Yang Li

¹Department of Cardiology, First Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P. R. China
Jian Li

¹Department of Cardiology, First Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P. R. China
Bo Yu

¹Department of Cardiology, First Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P. R. China

Abstract

Summary

It was the objective of this study to systematically compare the effects of oral anticoagulation (OAC) with heparin bridging therapy among patients at high risk for thromboembolism undergoing implantation of cardiac rhythm devices. A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid and Elsevier, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted. Six trials that met our inclusion criteria were identified and included in the present study. The endpoints of this meta-analysis included pocket haematoma, severe haematoma requiring drainage/revision, thromboembolic events, and length of hospital stay. Data were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs). There was a statistically significant reduction of pocket haematoma (OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.49, p<0.00001) and haematoma drainage/revision (OR 0.15, 95%CI: 0.04 to 0.54, p=0.004), respectively, in the OAC continuation group versus the heparin bridging group. We did not detect any statistically sig- nificant differences of thromboembolic events (OR 0.48, 95%CI: 0.07 to 3.54, p=0.48) in the two groups. There was a trend that patients in bridging group had longer hospital stays. In conclusion, OAC continu- ation had a better risk-beneficial ratio and shorter length of hospital stay, and was more convenient to implement compared with heparin bridging therapy among patients at high risk for thromboembolism undergoing implantation of cardiac rhythm devices.

Keywords

Oral anticoagulation continuation - heparin bridging - cardiac rhythm - devices implantation - meta-analysis

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Douketis JD, Spyropoulos AC, Spencer FA. et al. Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141: e326S-e350S.
2 Kovacs MJ, Kearon C, Rodger M. et al. Single-arm study of bridging therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin for patients at risk of arterial embolism who require temporary interruption of warfarin. Circulation 2004; 110: 1658-1663.
3 Jaffer AK, Ahmed M, Brotman DJ. et al. Low-molecular-weight- heparins as periprocedural anticoagulation for patients on long-term warfarin therapy: a standardized bridging therapy protocol. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2005; 20: 11-16.
4 Woods K, Douketis JD, Kathirgamanathan K. et al. Low-dose oral vitamin K to normalize the international normalized ratio prior to surgery in patients who require temporary interruption of warfarin. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2007; 24: 93-97.
5 Spyropoulos AC, Turpie AG, Dunn AS. et al. REGIMEN Investigators. Clinical outcomes with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin as bridging therapy in patients on long-term oral anticoagulants: the REGIMEN registry J Thromb Haemost 2006; 4: 1246-1252.
6 Pengo V, Cucchini U, Denas G. et al. Italian Federation of Centers for the Diagnosis of Thrombosis and Management of Antithrombotic Therapies (FCSA). Standardized low-molecular-weight-heparin bridging regimen in outpatients on oral anticoagulants undergoing invasive procedure or surgery: an inception cohort management study. Circulation 2009; 119: 2920-2927.
7 Kearns C, Ginsberg JS, Kovacs MJ. et al. Comparison of low-intensity warfarin therapy with conventional-intensity warfarin therapy for long term prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 631-639.
8 Hyleck EM, Go AS, Chang Y. et al. Effect of intensity of oral anticoagulation on stroke severity and mortality in atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 1019-1026.
9 Perret-Guillaume C, Wahl DG. Low-dose warfarin in atrial fibrillation leads to more thromboembolic events without reducing major bleeding when compared with adjusted dose. A meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost 2004; 91: 394-402.
10 Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ. et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003; 327: 557-560.
11 Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1959; 22: 719-748.
12 DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986; 7: 177-188.
13 Tischenko A, Gula LJ, Yee R. et al. Implantation of cardiac rhythm devices without interruption of oral anticoagulation compared with perioperative bridging with low-molecular weight heparin. Am Heart J 2009; 158: 252-256.
14 Tolosana JM, Berne P, Mont L. et al. Preparation for pacemaker or implantable cardiac defibrillator implants in patients with high risk of thromboembolic events: oral anticoagulation or bridging with intravenous heparin? A prospective randomized trial. Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 1880-1884.
15 Ahmed I, Gertner E, Nelson WB. et al. Continuing warfarin therapy is superior to interrupting warfarin with or without bridging anticoagulation therapy in patients undergoing pacemaker and defibrillator implantation. Heart Rhythm 2010; 7: 745-749.
16 Ghanbari H, Feldman D, Schmidt M. et al. Cardiac Resynchronization therapy device implantation in patients with therapeutic international normalized ratios. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2010; 33: 400-406.
17 Li HK, Chen FC, Rea RF. et al. No increased bleeding events with continuation of oral anticoagulation therapy for patients undergoing cardiac device procedure. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2011; 34: 868-874.
18 Cano O, Muñoz B, Tejada D. et al. Evaluation of a new standardized protocol for the perioperative management of chronically anticoagulated patients receiving implantable cardiac arrhythmia devices. Heart Rhythm 2012; 9: 361-367.
19 Kargi E, Babuccu O, Hosnuter M. et al. Complications of minor cutaneous surgery in patients under anticoagulant treatment. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2002; 26: 483-485.
20 Syed S, Adams BB, Liao W. et al. A prospective assessment of bleeding and international normalized ratio in warfarin-anticoagulated patients having cutaneous surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol 2004; 51: 955-957.
21 Katz J, Feldman MA, Bass EB. et al. Study of Medical Testing for Cataract Surgery Team. Risks and benefits of anticoagulant and antiplatelet medication use before cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 2003; 110: 1784-1788.
22 Jonas JB, Pakdaman B, Sauder G. Cataract surgery under systemic anticoagulant therapy with coumarin. Eur J Ophthalmol 2006; 16: 30-32.
23 Jamula E, Anderson J, Douketis JD. Safety of continuing warfarin therapy during cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Res 2009; 124: 292-299.
24 Douketis JD. Contra: “Bridging anticoagulation is needed during warfarin interruption when patients require elective surgery”. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 210-212.
25 Spyropoulos AC. Pro: “Bridging anticoagulation is needed during warfarin interruption in patients who require elective surgery”. Thromb Haemost 2012; 108: 213-216.
26 Douketis JD, Crowther MA, Cherian SS. et al. Physician preferences for perioperative anticoagulation in patients with a mechanical heart valve who are undergoing elective noncardiac surgery. Chest 1999; 116: 1240-1246.
27 Marquie C, De Geeter G, Klug D. et al. Post-operative use of heparin increases morbidity of pacemaker implantation. Europace 2006; 8: 283-287.
28 Michaud GF, Pelosi F, Noble MD. et al. A randomized trial comparing heparin initiation 6 h or 24 h after pacemaker or defibrillator implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 35: 1915-1918.
29 Basu D, Gallus A, Hirsh J. et al. A prospective study of the value of monitoring heparin treatment with the activated partial thromboplastin time. N Engl J Med 1972; 287: 324-327.
30 Rosborough TK. Comparing different lots of activated partial thromboplastin time reagent: analysis of two methods. Am J Clin Pathol 1998; 110: 173-177.
31 Baker BA, Adelman MD, Smith PA. et al. Inability of the activated partial thromboplastin time to predict heparin levels. Time to reassess guidelines for heparin assays Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 2475-2479.
32 Shojania AM, Tetreault J, Turnbull G. The variations between heparin sensitivity of different lots of activated partial thromboplastin time reagent produced by the same manufacturer. Am J Clin Pathol 1988; 89: 19-23.
33 Zanke B, Shojania AM. Comparison of two aPTT methods of monitoring heparin therapy. APTT ratio and heparin response of pooled normal plasma. Am J Clin Pathol 1990; 93: 684-689.
34 Kirkwood TB. Calibration of reference thromboplastins and standardisation of the prothrombin time ratio. Thromb Haemost 1983; 49: 238-244.
35 Johnston M, Harrison L, Moffat K. et al. Reliability of the international normalized ratio for monitoring the induction phase of warfarin: comparison with the prothrombin time ratio. J Lab Clin Med 1996; 128: 214-217.
36 van den Besselaar AM, Chantarangkul V, Tripodi A. Thromboplastin standards. Biologicals 2010; 38: 430-436.
37 Quick A. The prothrombin time in haemophilia and in obstructive jaundice. J Biol Chem 1935; 109: 73-74.
38 Lee DS, Krahn AD, Healey JS. et al. Evaluation of Early Complications Related to De Novo Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantation: Insights From the Ontario ICD Database. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55: 774-782.