Perioperative management of chronic anticoagulation therapy in urological patients: a cross-sectional survey of practice

The Dilemma of Peri-Procedural Warfarin Management: A Narrative Review

Periprocedural vitamin K antagonist management is a complex process and inherently entails multiple clinical issues. Marked variations have been reported in different aspects of this process. These differences were noted at the clinician and institutional levels owing to the lack of evidence-based data leading to many discrepancies in decision-making. This review aims to address the gap of vitamin K antagonist periprocedural management acknowledged by previously published prescribers’ questionnaires. One of the components of this process is “bridging,” which aims to provide minimal interruption of the anticoagulation period through the use of heparin products. Recent studies showed that bridging is increasing bleeding risk. Secondly, interruption decision relies on the classification of thromboembolism risk which depends on trials that did not include patients with atrial fibrillation. Thirdly, the interruption duration is different among different International normalization ratio levels, which strengthens the difference in the clinical practice of preoperative vitamin K antagonist management. Lastly, the resumption of a vitamin-K antagonist after surgery has many scenarios according to the procedure and patient risk of bleeding. Vitamin-K antagonist periprocedural management is complicated due to individual practice and the lack of strictly implemented institutional standardized protocols to guide, manage and evaluate the process.

Management of antithrombotic agents in dermatologic surgery before and after publication of the corresponding German evidence-based guideline

BACKGROUND

A survey in 2012 revealed marked heterogeneity in the management of antithrombotic agents in dermatologic surgery in Germany. An evidence-based guideline on this topic was published for the first time in 2014.

METHODS

Using the same study sample, we conducted an anonymous survey on the management of antithrombotic agents and familiarity with the guideline. We reported the results as relative frequencies and compared them with those from 2012.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 208 questionnaires (response rate: 36.6 %). A large majority of dermatologists reported performing minor procedures without discontinuing low-dose aspirin (≤ 100 mg), clopidogrel, or direct oral anticoagulants. In contrast, antithrombotic management was still heterogeneous in the context of major procedures, especially among office-based dermatologists. Overall, there was an increase in the proportion of dermatologists who managed phenprocoumon, aspirin, and clopidogrel in compliance with the guideline. For example, while 53.8 % of hospital-based dermatologists and 36.3 % of office-based dermatologists had performed large excisions on continued low-dose aspirin treatment in 2012, these figures showed an increase to 90.2 % and 57.8 %, respectively, by 2017 (phenprocoumon: from 33.8 % and 11.9 % to 63.9 % and 29.9 %, respectively; clopidogrel: from 36.9 % and 23.2 % to 63.9 % and 30.6 %, respectively). Among hospital dermatologists a large proportion was familiar with the guideline and considered it to be useful.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that compliance with the German guideline on the perioperative management of antithrombotics in dermatologic surgery has increased for all procedures. Despite this positive development, greater efforts are needed to improve implementation of the guideline and address barriers to its use in everyday practice.

S3 guidelines for the management of anticoagulation in cutaneous surgery

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of patients are being treated with anticoagulants and platelet inhibitors. Whenever surgical procedures of the skin are required, questions arise regarding the perioperative management of anticoagulation.

METHODS

Development of S3 guidelines following the requirements of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies, systematic literature search and analysis, use of GRADE methodology, structured consensus conference using a nominal group process.

RESULTS

During cutaneous surgery, treatment with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) should be continued if medically necessary. In procedures with a higher risk of bleeding and a positive bleeding history, INR should be determined preoperatively. Surgical procedures of the skin with a higher risk of bleeding should not be performed if the INR is above therapeutic range. Bridging from vitamin K antagonists (VKA) to heparin should not be performed just because of the surgery of the skin. As to direct-acting oral anticoagulants, the last dose should be taken 24 h preoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommendations issued by the German guidelines group are mostly in line with recommendations provided by other guidelines. The American ìChest-Guidelineì recommends continuing VKAs and acetylsalicylic acid during minor dermatologic procedures. In their guidelines, the German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians considers an INR of 2 to be adequate in surgical procedures on the skin.

Risk of complications due to anticoagulation during dermatosurgical procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Management of anticoagulation and anti-platelet drugs during cutaneous surgery is still a challenge for many dermatologists and standards of care with respect to stopping, continuing or bridging vary widely. Methods We performed a systematic review (Medline, Cochrane Library, until August 27th, 2013) of studies assessing the risk of complications due to anticoagulation during cutaneous surgery. Primary outcomes were mild-moderate and severe postsurgical bleeding. The secondary outcomes were excessive and uncontrollable intraoperative bleeding and other postsurgical complications as wound dehiscence, erythema, wound infection. Results 1.287 publications were identified and 10 studies were included into the review. The frequencies of bleeding in the control groups in general were low (about 1%). In patients on aspirin, increased risks were seen neither with respect to mild-moderate postoperative bleeding (RR 1.1, CI 0.5-2.3), nor with respect to severe bleeding (RR 0.9, CI 0.2-4.6). The studies with patients on warfarin showed a risk for mild-moderate bleeding that was three times as high as in controls (RR 3.2, CI 1.4-7.1) and for severe bleeding that was 15 times higher (RR 14.8, CI 2.7-80.4). In general the study sizes were small and the methodological quality low. Conclusion The risk of bleeding due to a medication with aspirin seems to be negligible. With warfarin, the risk is increased; an exact estimate of the risk increase is difficult to give, because of the lack of sufficient high quality studies. A two-fold increase appears likely, the 15-fold increase is most likely due to statistical reasons arising from the rareness of the event in the small number of included patients. Stopping, bridging or continuing a medication should always be an individual decision. In accordance with guidelines from internal medicine for most patients it will be recommendable to continue with the medication.

Thromboprophylaxis and bleeding diathesis in minimally invasive stone surgery

With populations ageing and active treatment of urinary stones increasingly in demand, more patients with stones are presenting with an underlying bleeding disorder or need for regular thromboprophylaxis, by means of antiplatelet and other medication. A practical guide to thromboprophylaxis in the treatment of urinary tract lithiasis has not yet been established. Patients can be stratified according to levels of risk of arterial and venous thromboembolism, which influence the requirements for antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications, respectively. Patients should also be stratified according to their risk of bleeding. Consideration of the combined risks of bleeding and thromboembolism should determine the perioperative thromboprophylactic strategy. The choice of shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy or ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy for treatment of lithiasis should be determined with regard to these risks. Although ureteroscopy is the preferred method in high-risk patients, shockwave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy can be chosen when indicated, if appropriate guidelines are strictly followed.