The management of patients on dual antiplatelet therapy undergoing orthopedic surgery

The birth, decline, and contemporary re-emergence of endovascular brachytherapy for prevention of in-stent restenosis

Despite the advent of drug-eluting stents and dual antiplatelet therapy in the interventional management of cardiovascular disease, restenosis rates remain high with significant sequelae. Endovascular brachytherapy-popular in the 1990s and early 2000s-has recently resurfaced as a cost-effective treatment option. In this work, we outline the history of endovascular brachytherapy starting with its earliest promise in the 1990s. We discuss the development of drug-eluting stents and dual antiplatelet strategies and their impact on the perceived benefit of endovascular brachytherapy. For the contemporary era, we propose novel roles for endovascular brachytherapy in complex coronary artery disease and in high-risk patients managed with drug-eluting stents. We discuss the impetus for reducing the requirement and duration of dual antiplatelet therapy using endovascular brachytherapy. We also review innovative opportunities for endovascular brachytherapy after bare-metal stent placement in both coronary and noncoronary territories and offer economic arguments in favor of endovascular brachytherapy. Trials of endovascular brachytherapy in these regimes are merited.

The Safety of Continuing Antiplatelet Medication Among Elderly Patients Undergoing Urgent Hip Fracture Surgery

Elderly patients with hip fractures who are receiving antiplatelet therapy are commonly encountered in clinical practice. This study sought to elucidate the safety of urgent hip surgery without termination of antiplatelet medication among patients taking a combination of aspirin and dipyridamole, aspirin alone, or dipyridamole alone. This retrospective cohort study included 176 patients 55 years or older who had uncomplicated hip fractures and underwent surgery within 48 hours after admission. On the basis of the preoperative medication regimen, the patients were divided into the following 4 groups: those receiving aspirin and dipyridamole combined (n=29); those receiving aspirin alone (n=63); those receiving dipyridamole alone (n=28); and those not receiving antiplatelet medication (n=56). Main outcomes, including total blood loss, transfusion rate, and 1-year mortality, were analyzed. There was no significant difference in total blood loss, transfusion rate, or 1-year mortality among the 4 groups. The group receiving aspirin and dipyridamole combined preoperatively had increased intraoperative blood loss (mean, 309.14±189.15 mL) compared with the group not receiving antiplatelet medication (mean, 214.64±119.21 mL; P=.005). There was no significant difference in the hazard ratio (P>.05) for 1-year mortality among the 4 groups after adjusting for confounding covariates, including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and duration of hospital stay. Patients receiving antiplatelet medication, including aspirin, dipyridamole, or both, who have uncomplicated hip fractures may undergo urgent surgery without a significant difference in total blood loss, transfusion rate, or 1-year mortality compared with patients not receiving anti-platelet medication. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(5):268-274.].

Risk of bleeding in patients with continued dual antiplatelet therapy during orthopedic surgery

Background:

To prevent risk of life-threatening stent thrombosis, all patients need to undergo dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for at least 6 weeks to 12 months after stent implantation. If DAPT is continued during noncardiac surgery, there is a risk of severe bleeding at the surgical site. Our study was to assess the risk of bleeding in patients with continued DAPT during orthopedic surgery.

Methods:

The clinical data of 78 patients with coronary heart disease who underwent orthopedic surgery from February 2006 to July 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Prior to orthopedic surgery, DAPT was continued in 16 patients (group I), 24 patients were treated with single antiplatelet therapy (group II), and 26 patients received low-molecular-weight heparin therapy for more than 5 days after the discontinuation of all antiplatelet therapies (group III). Twelve patients were excluded, as they had undergone minimally invasive surgery such as transforaminal endoscopy and vertebroplasty. The perioperative blood loss of each patient was calculated using Nadler's formula and Gross’ formula. The intraoperative bleeding volume, total volume of intraoperative bleeding in addition to postoperative drainage, and total blood loss were compared between groups. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05.

Results:

There were no significant differences between the three groups in age, intraoperative bleeding volume, total volume of intraoperative bleeding in addition to postoperative drainage, and total perioperative blood loss calculated by Nadler's formula and Gross’ formula (all P > 0.05). Six patients experienced postoperative cardiovascular complications due to the delayed restart of antiplatelet therapy; one of these patients in group III died from myocardial infarction.

Conclusions:

Continued DAPT or single antiplatelet treatment during orthopedic surgery does not increase the total intraoperative and perioperative bleeding compared with switching from antiplatelet therapy to low-molecular-weight heparin. However, the discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy increases the risk of serious cardiac complications.

[Thromboprophylaxis and platelet aggregation inhibitors in spinal surgery: perioperative management]

BACKGROUND

The perioperative use of anticoagulants (AC) and platelet aggregation inhibitors (PAI) in the field of spinal surgery suggests an increased rate of epidural bleeding. However, evidence is lacking and these medications are most often indispensable in the prevention of thromboembolic complications. Comprehensive recommendations for the correct use of AC and PAI are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was an analysis of the current situation with regards to the use of AC and PAI in spinal surgery and development of new recommendations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two independent surveys on the perioperative use of AC and PAI were obtained from centers for spinal surgery in Germany. The study obtained information on the perioperative use of AC and PAI, risk assessment of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events as well as on the type and extent of the substance groups used.

RESULTS

Almost the entire patient collective (98%) received perioperative low molecular weight heparin. In 64% the medical prophylaxis was started before surgery and in 36% after surgery. The period of prophylaxis was determined arbitrarily. Approximately 40% of interviewees employed paravertebral infiltration and 19% injected into the epidural space in patients on PAI medication. Open spinal canal surgery was performed in 30% of PAI medicated patients and closed spinal canal surgery was executed in 40%. The risk assessment of PAI differed significantly between aspirin and receptor blocker medication as well as dual administration of PAI.

DISCUSSION

The use of AC and PAI in spinal surgery in Germany is very heterogeneous and large deviations from the guidelines frequently occurred. Therefore, there is a strong need for further studies to accurately assess the perioperative use of AC and PAI and to formulate precise recommendations.