Pacemaker or Defibrillator Surgery without Interruption of Anticoagulation

In this trial, patients receiving oral anticoagulation therapy who required pacemaker or defibrillator surgery were assigned to heparin bridging or continuation of warfarin. Patients receiving warfarin had a markedly lower risk of clinically significant device-pocket hematoma. Each year, an estimate...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The New England journal of medicine 2013-05, Vol.368 (22), p.2084-2093
Hauptverfasser: Birnie, David H, Healey, Jeff S, Wells, George A, Verma, Atul, Tang, Anthony S, Krahn, Andrew D, Simpson, Christopher S, Ayala-Paredes, Felix, Coutu, Benoit, Leiria, Tiago L.L, Essebag, Vidal
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In this trial, patients receiving oral anticoagulation therapy who required pacemaker or defibrillator surgery were assigned to heparin bridging or continuation of warfarin. Patients receiving warfarin had a markedly lower risk of clinically significant device-pocket hematoma. Each year, an estimated 1.25 million pacemakers and 410,000 implantable cardioverter–defibrillators (ICDs) are implanted worldwide. 1 Between 14 and 35% of patients receiving these devices require long-term oral anticoagulation therapy, 2 – 5 and their periprocedural treatment presents a dilemma to physicians. This is particularly true for the subset of patients at moderate-to-high risk (≥5% per year) for thromboembolic events. 6 Current guidelines recommend interruption of oral anticoagulation therapy and the use of bridging therapy with intravenous unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin around the time of surgery. 6 However, there are a number of potential drawbacks to bridging with heparin in the perioperative period. . . .
ISSN:0028-4793
1533-4406
DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1302946