Frequency of late drug-eluting stent thrombosis with non-cardiac surgery

A New Predictive Model for In-Hospital Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events in Chinese Patients After Major Noncardiac Surgery

Prediction tools focused on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events after noncardiac surgery are lacking, particularly for Chinese patients. We developed and validated what we believe is a new predictive tool for postoperative major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) in Chinese patients in this study. Overall, 401 variables derived from 598 patients who received noncardiac surgery at our center were retrospectively analyzed to develop and validate the new predictive model for MACCEs during hospitalization. The 7 strongest predictors for MACCEs in the development cohort were chronic heart failure, age, atrial fibrillation, general anesthesia, history of coronary heart disease, high-risk procedures, and lymphocyte count. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.698 (95% confidence interval 0.616 to 0.780) for the new predictive tool with the validation cohort. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed the new predictive tool had better performance than the Revised Cardiac Risk Index and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program scores. This new predictive tool is effective for the prediction of postoperative MACCEs in patients who undergo noncardiac surgery.

Drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents prior to noncardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

The safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) vs. bare metal stents (BMS) in the perioperative setting, a heightened state of inflammation and thrombosis is not well defined.

METHODS

All adults undergoing noncardiac surgical (NCS) procedures within 1 year following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Massachusetts between April 1, 2004, and September 30, 2007, were identified from an administrative claims database. Patients were divided into those who received BMS vs. DES at index PCI. Primary net clinical outcome was death, myocardial infarction (MI) or bleeding within 30 days of NCS. Primary clinical outcome was 30-day death or MI.

RESULTS

Among 8,415 (22% BMS) patients that satisfied our inclusion criteria, 1,838 BMS patients were matched with 3,565 DES patients with similar propensity scores. In the DES cohort, the 30-day primary net clinical outcome rate was lower with longer time from PCI to NCS (P = 0.02) with lowest rates if NCS was performed after 90 days from PCI (event rate 8.57, 7.53, 5.21, and 5.75% for 1-30, 31-90, 91-180, and 181-365 days from PCI to NCS). However, in the BMS cohort, the event rate was uniformly high regardless of the time from PCI to NCS (P = 0.60) (event rate 8.20, 6.56, 8.05, and 8.82% for 1-30, 31-90, 91-180, and 181-365 days from PCI to NCS). There was no significant difference between DES and the BMS group for 30-day primary net clinical outcome (6.64 vs. 7.89%; P = 0.10), but there was a 26% lower odds of primary clinical outcome (OR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.94) with DES when compared with BMS, driven mainly by differences in event rates when NCS was performed >90 days post PCI.

CONCLUSION

DES implantation was not associated with higher adverse events after NCS. Moreover, the incidence of adverse events following NCS was lower when NCS was performed >90 days post-DES implantation suggesting that it may not be necessary to wait until 12 months post PCI with DES before NCS.

The risk of adverse cardiac and bleeding events following noncardiac surgery relative to antiplatelet therapy in patients with prior percutaneous coronary intervention

Noncardiac surgery (NCS) may be required within the first year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in approximately 4% of patients and is the second most common reason for premature discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy (APT),which may, in turn, increase the risk of perioperative ischemic events, particularly stent thrombosis. Its continuation may increase the risk of perioperative bleeding. We review current information on the incidence of these events, particularly related to APT, describe potentially useful strategies to minimize the risks of adverse outcomes, and provide recommendations on APT use.

Perioperative antiplatelet management in patients with coronary artery stenting

Coronary artery disease is the primary cause of mortality in men and women in the United States. Transcatheter coronary intervention is the mainstay of treatment for patients with acute coronary artery disease presentations and patients with stable disease. Although percutaneous intervention initially only included balloon angioplasty, it now typically involves the placement of intracoronary stents. To overcome the limitations of bare-metal stents, namely in-stent restenosis, stents have been developed that remove pharmaceuticals that reduce neointimal hyperplasia and in-stent restenosis. However, these pharmaceutical agents also delay stent endothelialization, posing a prolonged risk of in situ thrombosis. Placement of an intracoronary stent (eg, bare-metal or drug-eluting stent) requires dual antiplatelet therapy to prevent the potentially life-threatening complication of stent thrombosis. The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy following stent placement is unknown. This article discusses the factors to be considered when deciding when dual antiplatelet therapy can be safely discontinued. Unfortunately, in the hospital setting, this decision to interrupt dual antiplatelet therapy frequently must be made shortly after stent placement because of unanticipated surgical procedures or other unforeseen complications. The decision of when dual antiplatelet therapy can be safely interrupted needs to be individualized for each patient and involves factoring in the type of stent; the location and complexity of the lesion stented; post-stent lesion characteristics; the amount of time since stent placement; and the antiplatelet regimen currently in use, along with its implication for bleeding during the proposed procedure. Having a protocol in place, such as the protocol described in this article, can help guide this decision-making process and avoid confusion and potential error.

A case of late epidural hematoma in a patient on clopidogrel therapy postoperatively: when is it safe to resume antiplatelet agents?

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The use of antiplatelet agents after coronary artery stent placement is currently recommended to prevent coronary stent obstruction. These patients may have concurrent disabling spinal stenosis and require spinal decompression. Resuming antiplatelet agents as soon as possible after spinal surgery is recommended.

PURPOSE

To describe a unique case of late postoperative epidural hematoma occurring with the use of clopidogrel.

STUDY DESIGN

A case report and review of the literature.

METHODS

The hospital chart, history, physical examination, and imaging of a single patient were reviewed.

RESULTS

A 59-year-old man underwent spinal decompression and fusion for neurogenic claudication with lumbar spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis while managed on clopidogrel for prevention of thrombosis after cardiac stent placement. He developed a symptomatic epidural hematoma 12 days postoperatively, well outside the usual time frame for this complication. The patient was closely monitored, and lumbar radiculopathy resolved over the ensuing days.

CONCLUSION

After spinal surgery and resumption of antiplatelet therapy, the physician needs to maintain vigilance in observing patients for late postoperative complications such as epidural hematoma, which could have catastrophic consequences if not recognized in a timely manner.