MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2564114794 · doi:10.1182/blood.v118.21.546.546

Conservative Peri-Procedural Anticoagulation Management in Patients with Venous Thromboembolic Disease Results in a Low Proportion of Thrombosis and Bleeding

2011· article· en· W2564114794 sur OpenAlexaff
Leslie Skeith, Jay Taylor, Alejandro Lazo‐Langner, Michael J. Kovacs

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Établissements canadiensVictoria HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineWarfarinThrombosisCompression stockingsSurgeryLow molecular weight heparinAmbulatoryVenous thrombosisCohortRetrospective cohort studyVenous thromboembolismPulmonary embolismHeparinFondaparinuxInternal medicineAtrial fibrillation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 546 The optimal strategy for peri-procedural warfarin management in patients with venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) is unknown because most studies to date have included small proportions of VTE patients. Guidelines are largely based on expert opinion and recommend low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging in patients at high or moderate risk for VTE. LMWH bridging may be associated with an increased bleeding risk, which if occurs, would result in temporary cessation of anticoagulation (AC) potentially leading to a paradoxical increased thrombotic risk. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study to examine the effectiveness of conservative peri-procedural AC management in VTE (DVT or PE) patients. We included all patients from our institution's thrombosis unit between 1993 and 2011 who required peri-procedural AC management for planned procedures. The thrombosis unit has, on average, 800 patients on chronic AC for VTE. Patients were excluded if they had other indications for AC, had an acute VTE <90 days before the procedure, or had no follow-up after the procedure. Our centre uses a conservative bridging strategy in these patients consisting of holding warfarin 5 days before the procedure without administering LMWH. Postoperatively all patients resume warfarin as soon as they can swallow. For ambulatory procedures no LMWH is given after the procedure, whereas patients undergoing in-hospital procedures are usually given prophylactic LMWH starting the morning after surgery until discharge or when the INR is therapeutic, whichever occurs first. The primary outcome was incidence of VTE within 90 days of the procedure. Secondary outcomes were 90-day incidence of major and total bleeding and all-cause mortality. Confidence intervals for proportions were calculated using the Wilson's score method. Groups were compared using χ2 or Fisher's exact tests. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier method. Two-sided p values ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant. During the study period there were 634 procedures in 416 patients (47.4% males). The mean age was 64.9 years (SD 15.8) and 79.1% of patients had idiopathic VTE. There were 156 procedures (24.6%) completed in-hospital. Pre- and post-procedure bridging was used in 15 (2.4%) and 153 (24.1%) procedures, respectively. The 90-day cumulative incidence of VTE was 0.63% (95% CI 0.25–1.61). The VTE events were 4 DVTs (postoperative day 3, 29, 41, 43) with no associated mortality. The 90-day cumulative incidence of major and total bleeding events was 1.58% (95% CI 0.86–2.88) and 3.47% (95% CI 2.30–5.20), respectively. All-cause mortality rate was 0.63% (95% CI 0.25–1.61); one patient died from a myocardial infarction 3 days after an abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, a second died from an ischemic stroke the morning of a colonoscopy and 2 patients had non-VTE related deaths. The effects of type of procedure and use of bridging on outcomes are shown in Table 1. The use of pre- or post-procedure bridging was not associated with VTE or bleeding. There were significantly more total bleeding events with inpatient procedures. There was a significant correlation between bleeding and VTE events: 13.6% of patients with any bleeding and 30% with major bleeding developed a VTE complication compared with 0.2% of those without bleeding. Spearman's correlation coefficients were 0.311 and 0.470, respectively (p<0.001). Two postoperative DVTs (50%) developed after warfarin was held for an extended period of time (1 major bleed, 1 neurosurgical complication). Conservative peri-procedural AC management in VTE patients on warfarin for at least 3 months results in a low risk of thrombotic and bleeding events. A randomized controlled trial in chronically anticoagulated VTE patients is needed to provide definitive conclusions but a conservative approach appears promising.Effect of Type of Procedure and Bridging on OutcomeOutcomeVTE N (%)No (N=630)Yes (N=4)PInpatient procedure154 (24.4%)2 (50%)0.255Pre-procedure bridging15 (2.4)0 (0)1Post-procedure bridging151 (24)2 (50)0.247Total Bleeding N (%)No (N=612)Yes (N=22)Inpatient procedure146 (23.9)10 (45.5)0.039Pre-procedure bridging15 (2.5)0 (0)1Post-procedure bridging147 (24)6 (27.3)0.800Major bleeding N (%)No (N=624)Yes (N=10)Inpatient procedure153 (24.5)3 (30)0.714Pre-procedure bridging15 (2.4)0 (0)1Post-procedure bridging151 (24.2)2 (20)1 Disclosures: Lazo-Langner: Pfizer Inc.: Honoraria; Leo Pharma: Honoraria.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,009

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,252
Écart entre enseignants0,226 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→Travaux en français237 207→