The long-term fate of epistaxis patients with exposure to antithrombotic medication

Epistaxis Versus Nonepistaxis Bleeding in Anticoagulated Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Results From the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 Trial

BACKGROUND

Epistaxis is common with antithrombotic therapy and is often troublesome to patients, yet its frequency, severity, and outcomes are poorly characterized.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48 (ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48) randomized 21 105 patients with atrial fibrillation and CHADS2 risk score ≥2 to higher-dose edoxaban regimen (60 mg daily, dose-reduced to 30 mg), lower-dose edoxaban regimen (30 mg, dose reduced to 15 mg, daily), or warfarin. Bleeds were adjudicated using International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. Patients with intracranial hemorrhage during follow-up were excluded; those with >1 bleeding event were categorized according to their most severe event. The safety cohort with interval censoring during drug interruption was analyzed. Proportions were compared using Pearson's chi-square test and treatment arms were compared using a Cox proportional hazards model. Among 5247 patients with a bleeding event, 1008 (19.2%) had epistaxis and 4239 (80.8%) had nonepistaxis bleeding. Epistaxis events were less severe than nonepistaxis bleeds (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major: 3.2% versus 20.7%; clinically relevant nonmajor: 64.7% versus 60.1%; minor: 32.1% versus 19.2%; P<0.001). Permanent drug discontinuation was similar following epistaxis versus nonepistaxis bleeding in patients with major (59.4% versus 53.6%; P=0.52) or clinically relevant nonmajor (32.5% versus 33.3%; P=0.70) bleeding but was significantly higher in patients with minor epistaxis versus other minor bleeds (33.3% versus 23.9%; P=0.001). Compared with warfarin, higher-dose edoxaban regimen had similar risk of epistaxis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09 [95% CI, 0.95-1.26]), whereas lower-dose edoxaban regimen conferred reduced risk (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62-0.86]).

CONCLUSIONS

Epistaxis was frequent, and despite being overall less severe than nonepistaxis bleeding, was associated with similar rates of anticoagulant discontinuation. Compared with warfarin, lower-dose edoxaban regimen reduced the risk of epistaxis by 27% whereas higher-dose edoxaban regimen had no effect.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT00781391.

Factors Associated with Recurrent Emergency Department Visits for Epistaxis in Adults, Cross Sectional Study in Two Tertiary Care Hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Introduction and Objectives

This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of recurrent and active epistaxis in adult patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) and explored the association of recurrent epistaxis with demographic characteristics, comorbidities and medications, and types of emergency interventions in adult epistaxis patients.

Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted with data from Eds of two tertiary hospitals over three years, from January 2019 to January 2022. All adult patients aged ≥18 years with active epistaxis not resolved by pressure on the nose or head positioning were included. Demographic data, details of clinical presentation and clinical management were collected from the patient's electronic medical records.

Results

Of 404 patients, 73 (18.1%) revisited the ED with recurrence of epistaxis within 28 days. There was a male predilection in the study, with an average age of 55.4 ± 18.03. Most patients had unilateral (n = 328, 81.2%) and anterior (n = 376, 93.1%) nasal bleeding. Heart failure as a comorbidity was associated with a significantly increased risk of recurrent epistaxis (p = 0.001). The most common treatments included expandable polyvinyl acetate packs (EPAP) (n = 198, 49%); topical xylometazoline (n = 108, 26.7%); and chemical cautery (n = 57, 14.1%). EPAP for controlling initial bleeding was significantly associated with ED revisits due to epistaxis (p = 0.033).

Conclusion

The prevalence of recurrent epistaxis mostly occurs in older-aged males. Congestive heart failure may be an under-recognised risk factor for recurrent epistaxis. In patients with a high risk of epistaxis recurrence, other treatment modalities should be sought aside from expandable polyvinyl acetate packs as they can increase the risk of rebleeding.

Outcome of treatment for severe epistaxis: nasal packing and endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation

Background: Severe epistaxis is a frequent emergency condition encountered by otolaryngologists and is often treated with nasal packing. In the event of failure surgical treatment is considered. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Nasal Packing (NP) and Endoscopic Sphenopalatine Artery Ligation (ESPAL) as treatment of severe epistaxis in terms of failures and recurrences including risk factors. Methodology: Retrospective descriptive study of patients with epistaxis treated with NP, admitted to an ENT department from 2011-2017. If initial treatment with NP failed, patients were considered for ESPAL. Results: An analysis of 511 patients was performed. All patients were treated with NP at the time of admission, and 14% of pa- tients were treated with ESPAL due to failure of NP. The majority of patients was only admitted once. Twelve percent were readmit- ted within 30 days, 7% were readmitted >30 days later. Treatment failure after ESPAL was 7.9%. No significant difference in the risk of readmission was found between patients treated with NP alone and patients treated with ESPAL. Conclusion: The majority of epistaxis patients were effectively treated with NP alone. We found good effect of ESPAL although no significant differences in risk of readmission NP vs. ESPAL were identified.

Device-related epistaxis risk: continuous-flow left ventricular assist device-supported patients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of device-dependent factors on epistaxis episodes comparing patients supported with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) to patients under the same antithrombotic therapy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent CF-LVAD between 2012 and 2018 were reviewed retrospectively from the institutionally adopted electronic database. Patients who underwent mitral valve replacement (MVR) surgery receiving the same anticoagulant and antiaggregant therapy were included as a control group. Demographics, epistaxis episodes, and nonepistaxis bleeding between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 179 patients met the inclusion criteria (61 patients CF-LVAD group, 118 patients MVR group). The median (range) follow-up periods for the study (CF-LVAD) and control (MVR) groups were 370 (2819) and 545.70 (2356) days, respectively. There was a significant difference for frequency of bleeding episodes per month between CF-LVAD and MVR groups (p = 0.003 < 0.05). The most common site of bleeding was the anterior septum in both groups (90.9% for the CF-MVR group and 100% for the MVR group). While 14 patients (23%) had nonepistaxis bleeding in the CF-LVAD group, only two patients (1.7%) had nonepistaxis bleeding in the MVR group. There were significant differences in nonepistaxis bleeding rates between the CF-LVAD and MVR groups (χ²=19.79, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both epistaxis and nonepistaxis bleeding rates were higher in the CF-LVAD group than in the MVR group. This suggests that the use of CF-LVAD support could directly increase the risk of hemorrhagic complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2A (Etiology/Harm).

Association of epistaxis with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To investigate the association between epistaxis and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control cohort study.

METHODS

This study included patients from the tertiary-care ear, nose, and throat department at the University Hospital of Zurich between December 1, 2016 and June 1, 2017. We assessed the cardiovascular risk profiles in a group of 41 patients presenting with epistaxis, and a group of 41 matched controls, focusing on a surrogate parameter for atherosclerosis: the carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT).

RESULTS

With a mean of 1.06 mm (standard deviation [SD] = 0.17), CIMT values were on average 26% higher in epistaxis patients than in their controls, with a mean of 0.84 mm (SD = 0.14; P < .001). Occurrence of severe epistaxis was also associated with lower ankle-brachial index values at 0.96 (SD = 0.12) versus 1.05 (SD = 0.17) (P < .001) and significantly higher QRISK2 relative risks (an algorithm for predicting cardiovascular risk) than found in the control group (1.81, SD = 0.97 vs. 1.35, SD = 0.28; P = .028). A binary logistic regression model, adjusted for possible confounders, showed an odds ratio of 2.5 for the occurrence of epistaxis per increase in CIMT of 0.1 mm in the study population (95% confidence interval: 1.56-4.11; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The occurrence of severe epistaxis was shown to be closely associated with the prevalence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Accordingly, patients affected by epistaxis should be regarded as at an elevated cardiovascular risk, which indicates the need for appropriate further medical assessment and preventive measures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3b TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials NCT03092973 Laryngoscope, 129:783-787, 2019.

Current Approaches to Epistaxis Treatment in Primary and Secondary Care

BACKGROUND

The lifetime prevalence of epistaxis is approximately 60%, and 6-10% of the affected persons need medical care. In rare cases, severe bleeding calls for the rapid initiation of effective treatment.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent articles that were retrieved by a selective search PubMed, and on the authors' clinical experience.

RESULTS

There are no German guidelines for the management of epistaxis. The available evidence consists mainly of retro spective analyses and expert opinions. 65-75% of the patients who require treatment can be adequately cared for by their primary care physician or by an emergency physician with baseline measures. If there is persistent anterior epistaxis, an otorhinolaryngologist can control the bleeding sastisfactorily in 78-88% of cases with chemical or electrical cauterization. Nasal packing is used if this treatment fails, or for posterior epistaxis. In a retrospective study, surgical treatment was found to be more effective than nasal packing in the treatment of posterior epistaxis (97% versus 62% treatment success). Percutaneous embolization is an alternative treatment for patients whom general anesthesia would put at high risk.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of severe or recurrent epistaxis requires the interdisciplinary collaboration of the primary care physician, the emergency physician, the practice-based otolaryngologist, and the hospital otolaryngology service. Uniform guidelines and epidemiological studies on this topic would be desirable.

Risk factors for the occurrence of epistaxis: Prospective study

OBJECTIVE

Analyse and compare the characteristics of patients with epistaxis admitted to the otolaryngology emergency department with those provided by a control group. Establish a model to identify epistaxis predictive factors.

METHODS

Prospective analysis of 283 consecutive adults, admitted to the otolaryngology emergency department of a tertiary referral centre between 25 January and 25 February 2014. Comparison of gender, age, co-morbidities, usual medication, history of epistaxis or nasal trauma, presence of septal deviation and blood pressure value on admission, between the elements that were admitted to the emergency due to epistaxis (group 1) and a group composed of patients with other symptoms (group 2). Intergroup variations were analyzed using t student and chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression and a receiver operating characteristic curve were used to establish a predictive model and test its suitability.

RESULTS

Male gender (OR=2.57, 95% CI 1.1-6.0, p=0.029), older age (OR=1.03, 95% CI 1.0-1.1, p=0.002), existence of peripheral vascular disease (OR=13.47, 95% CI 1.9-95.3, p=0.009), cardiovascular disease (OR=3.91, 95% CI 1.6-9.7, p=0.003) and previous history of epistaxis (OR=5.53, 95% CI 2.5-12.1, p<0.001) were predictors of epistaxis when adjusted for the presence of elevated blood pressure, history of hypertension, cerebrovascular disease and chronic use of anticoagulants or antiplatelet drugs. The model revealed a good applicability (area under the curve of 0.852).

CONCLUSIONS

The only predictive factors of admission to the emergency department due to epistaxis were male gender, older age, peripheral vascular disease, cardiovascular disease and history of epistaxis.