Antithrombotic agents and traumatic brain injury in the elderly population: hemorrhage patterns and outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Among the elderly, use of antithrombotics (ATs), antiplatelets (APs; aspirin, clopidogrel), and/or anticoagulants (ACs; warfarin, direct oral ACs [DOACs; dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban]) to prevent thromboembolic events must be carefully weighed against the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) with trauma. The goal of this study was to assess the risk of sustaining a traumatic brain injury (TBI), ICH, and poorer outcomes in relation to AT use among all patients 65 years or older presenting to a single institution with head trauma. METHODS: Data were collected from all head trauma patients 65 years or older presenting to the authors' supraregional tertiary trauma center over a 24-month period and included age, sex, injury mechanism, medical history, international normalized ratio, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, ICH presence and type, hospital admission, reversal therapy, surgery, discharge destination, Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) score at discharge, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1365 head trauma patients 65 years or older were included; 724 were on AT therapy (413 on APs, 151 on ACs, 59 on DOACs, 48 on 2 APs, 38 on AP+AC, and 15 on AP+DOAC) and 641 were not. Among all head trauma patients, the risk of sustaining a TBI was associated with AP use after adjusting for covariates. Of the 731 TBI patients, those using ATs had higher rates of ICH (p <0.0001), functional dependency at discharge (GOSE score ≤ 4; p < 0.0001), and mortality (p < 0.0001). Elevated rates of ICH progression on follow-up CT scanning were observed in patients in the warfarin monotherapy (OR 5.30, p < 0.0001) and warfarin + AP (OR 6.15, p = 0.0011). Risk of mortality was not associated with single antiplatelet use but was notably high with 2 APs (OR 4.66, p = 0.0056), warfarin (OR 5.18, p = 0.0003), and DOAC use (OR 5.09, p = 0.0149). CONCLUSIONS: Elderly trauma patients on ATs, especially combination therapy, are at elevated risk of ICH and poor outcomes compared with those not on AT therapy. While both AP and warfarin use alone and in combination were associated with significantly elevated odds of sustaining an ICH among TBI patients, only warfarin use was a predictor of hemorrhage progression on follow-up scans. The use of a single AP was not associated with mortality; however, the combination of both aspirin and clopidogrel was. Warfarin and DOAC users had comparable mortality rates; however, DOAC users had lower rates of ICH progression, and fewer survivors were functionally dependent at discharge than were warfarin users. DOACs are an overall safer alternative to warfarin for patients at high risk of falls.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".