Perioperative management of antiplatelet agents in patients with coronary stents: recommendations of a French Task Force

[Multidisciplinary team model for patients with oral cancer and systemic diseases: an expert consensus]

Large general hospitals currently play an increasingly important role in the diagnosis and treatment for acute critical patients and difficult diseases because of the development of dual referral system and hierarchical diagnosis, as well as the formation of medical treatment alliance. Patients with oral cancers are often associated with systemic diseases, which increases the complexity of the condition. Thus, meeting the demand through the traditional single medical model is difficult. As such, a multidisciplinary team (MDT) model has been proposed and has achieved a good clinical effect. To standardize the application of this model, we organized an event in which relevant experts discussed and formulated a consensus to provide standardized suggestions on the MDT process and the diagnosis and treatment of common systemic diseases as reference for clinical practice.

A Comprehensive Review of Analgesia and Pain Modalities in Hip Fracture Pathogenesis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hip fracture is common in the elderly population, painful and costly. The present investigation was undertaken to review epidemiology, socio-economic and medical implications, relevant anatomy, and anesthetic and pain modalities of hip fracture.

RECENT FINDINGS

A literature search of PubMed, Ovid Medline, and Cochrane databases was conducted in December 2018 to identify relevant published clinical trials, review articles, and meta-analyses studies related to anesthetic and pain modalities of hip fracture. The acute pain management in these situations is often challenging. Common issues associated with morbidity and mortality include patients' physiological decrease in function, medical comorbidities, and cognitive impairment, which all can confound and complicate pain assessment and treatment. Perioperative multidisciplinary and multimodal approaches require medical, surgical, and anesthesiology teams employing adequate preoperative optimization. Reduction in pain and disability utilizing opioid and non-opioid therapies, regional anesthesia, patient-tailored anesthetic approach, and delirium prevention strategies seems to ensure best outcomes.

Is the Perioperative Continuation of Antiplatelet Therapy Safe for Elective Hernia Surgery?

Antiplatelet medication use in the perioperative period for elective surgical procedures remains controversial. We hypothesized that for elective hernioplasty, the continuation of antiplatelet agents would not increase postoperative complications. A single surgeon prospectively tracked all elective hernia repairs performed. All patients were included except those on anticoagulation therapy. Patients already on antiplatelet therapy (APT) continued their regimen throughout the perioperative period, whereas those who were not remained off antiplatelet medications. All patients had postoperative visits between 7 and 10 days at which point they were evaluated with complications documented. One thousand four patients underwent open hernia repair. Two hundred sixty-seven patients were taking APT, whereas 737 were not. The mean age of the antiplatelet group was greater than those not on APT (66 vs 51 years old, P < 0.0001). Ecchymosis occurred more frequently in the APT group than in those not on APT (9.36% vs 2.71%, P = 0.0005). This was the only statistically significant difference in postoperative complications noted between these two groups. Patients taking clopidogrel alone or a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel had a significantly higher rate of ecchymosis compared with those on other antiplatelet regiments (10%, 21.6%, and 7.4%, respectively, P = 0.047). There were no postoperative hematomas, bleeding complications, urinary retention, or any patients who required cessation of antiplatelet medications. Continuation of APT in the perioperative period for elective hernia repair did not result in an increased frequency of postoperative complications except for ecchymosis development. We conclude that the continuation of antiplatelet medications throughout the perioperative period of elective hernioplasty is safe.

Management of antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary stents undergoing noncardiac surgery: association with adverse events

BACKGROUND

Perioperative discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in patients with coronary stents has been associated with major adverse cardiac events. Our aim was to analyse the perioperative management of APT in such patients and its relationship to the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and major bleeding events (MBE) in noncardiac surgery.

METHODS

We completed a prospective multicentre observational study of patients with coronary stents undergoing noncardiac surgery in 11 hospitals in Spain. The main objectives were to record perioperative events and prospectively analyse the management of APT, and to assess whether the different preoperative APT regimens were associated with MACCE and MBE.

RESULTS

Of 432 surgical procedures studied, 15% experienced a perioperative MACCE and 37% a MBE. Overall mortality was 3.0%. Presurgical APT was prescribed in 95% of procedures, and was preoperatively discontinued in 15%. Surgery was urgent or emergent in 22% of patients, 31% were ASA IV, and 38% had a Revised Cardiac Risk Index of IV. MACCE were related to recent myocardial infarction (P=0.038), chronic kidney disease (P<0.001), insulin-dependent diabetes (P=0.006) and no preoperative APT (P=0.018). MBE also increased MACCE risk (P<0.001). We found statin therapy (P=0.049) and obesity (P=0.016) to be protective factors for MACCE.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with coronary stents undergoing noncardiac surgery suffer a high incidence of perioperative adverse events, even with perioperative APT. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events are mainly related to previous medical conditions and perioperative major bleeingn events. Our findings should be treated with caution when applied to an elective surgery population.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01171612.

Perioperative management of patient with intracoronary stent presenting for noncardiac surgery

As the number of percutaneous coronary interventions increase annually, patients with intracoronary stents (ICS) who present for noncardiac surgery (NCS) are also on the rise. ICS is associated with stent thrombosis (STH) and requires mandatory antiplatelet therapy to prevent major adverse cardiac events. The risks of bleeding and ischemia remain significant and the management of these patients, especially in the initial year of ICS is challenging. The American College of Cardiologists guidelines on the management of patients with ICS recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) for minimal 14 days after balloon angioplasty, 30 days for bare metal stents, and 365 days for drug-eluting stents. Postponement of elective surgery is advocated during this period, but guidelines concerning emergency NCS are ambiguous. The risk of STH and surgical bleeding needs to be assessed carefully and many factors which are implicated in STH, apart from the type of stent and the duration of DAT, need to be considered when decision to discontinue DAT is made. DAT management should be a multidisciplinary exercise and bridging therapy with shorter acting intravenous antiplatelet drugs should be contemplated whenever possible. Well conducted clinical trials are needed to establish guidelines as regards to the appropriate tests for platelet function monitoring in patients undergoing NCS while on DAT.

Coagulopathy and Anticoagulation During Thoracic Surgery

Coagulopathy and bleeding in thoracic surgery may be compounded by the chronic use of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents. Timely preoperative cessation and postoperative resumption of these antithrombotic drugs are critical in reducing the risks of perioperative major bleeding and thromboembolism. This article describes the various strategies for the optimal perioperative management of antithrombotics based on individual assessment of each patient and the most recent multisociety guidelines.

National survey on thromboprophylaxis and anticoagulant or antiplatelet management in neurosurgical and neurocritical patients

OBJECTIVES

To determine the protocols used by Spanish anaesthesiologists for thromboprophylaxis and anticoagulant or antiplatelet drugs management in neurosurgical or neurocritical care patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An online survey with 22 questions, with one or multiple options, launched by the Neuroscience Subcommittee of the Spanish Anaesthesia Society and available between June and October 2012.

RESULTS

Of the 73 hospitals included in the National Hospitals Catalogue, a valid response to the online questionnaire was received by 41 anaesthesiologists from 37 sites (response rate 50.7%). Only one response per site was used. A specific protocol was available in 27% of these centres. Mechanical thromboprophylaxis is used, intraoperatively or postoperatively, in 80%, and pharmacological treatment is used by 75% of respondents. Enoxaparin was the most frequent heparin used in craniotomy patients (78%). Craniotomies were performed maintaining acetylsalicylic acid treatment in patients with coronary stents and double anti-platelet treatment in a half of the centres.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanical thromboprophylaxis is used more frequently than the pharmacological approach in neurosurgical or neurocritical populations in Spanish hospitals. Management of patients under previous anticoagulant treatment was highly heterogeneous among hospitals included in this survey. Previous antiplatelet treatment is modified depending on primary or secondary prescription.

[Retrospective study on bleeding and thromboembolic complications related to tooth extraction, in 93 patients usually treated by antithrombotic therapy]

INTRODUCTION

Tooth extraction for patients treated by AVK and/or platelet aggregation inhibitor is performed according to local habits rather than to a consensus. We had for objective to assess hemorrhagic and thromboembolic risks for patients for whom treatment with AVK and/or platelet aggregation inhibitor was modified before tooth extraction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-three patient files were examined retrospectively. The following data was collected: epidemiological data, ASA score, nature and changes of antithrombotic therapy, preoperative INR, number teeth extracted, postoperative complications (bleeding and thromboembolic events).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were treated with oral anticoagulants, 41 by a platelet aggregation inhibitor, 10 by double platelet aggregation inhibitor therapy, and 5 by an AVK-platelet aggregation inhibitor combination. At D0, the mean INR was decreased to 1.4, 4 patients with high thromboembolic risk had received heparin relay treatment; the treatment was stopped for 9 of the 56 patients on monotherapy with antiplatelet therapy, 4 were switched from clopidogrel to lysine acetylate; clopidogrel was stopped for 7 patients under combination therapy. Seven hundred and twenty-six avulsions (mean 8.1 per patient) were performed, 41 patients presented with mild/moderate bleeding, easily resolved. A patient presented with delayed hemorrhage at D6 (AVK overdose). No thromboembolic complication was reported.

DISCUSSION

The modification of antithrombotic treatment, as for surgery at high risk of bleeding, seems to limit the risk of bleeding without increasing thromboembolic risk.

Perioperative Management of Elderly Patients with Hip Fracture

Hip fracture has devastating consequences in elderly patients with comorbidities. The two main objectives to improve outcome are the needs for early surgery and for a multidisciplinary approach, known as the orthogeriatric concept..

Non-cardiac surgery after percutaneous coronary intervention

Perioperative management of patients after percutaneous coronary intervention presents physicians with unique challenges and dilemmas. Although newer generation drug-eluting stents, transcatheter-based therapies, and minimally invasive surgical techniques have changed the medical landscape, guidelines for managing perioperative patients after percutaneous intervention are based largely on expert opinion and inconsistent data from an earlier era. In conclusion, the aims of this review are to summarize the data pertinent to managing patients after percutaneous coronary intervention in the perioperative period and to explore future perspectives.

Impact of aspirin and clopidogrel interruption on platelet function in patients undergoing major vascular surgery

Aims

To investigate functional platelet recovery after preoperative withdrawal of aspirin and clopidogrel and platelet function 5 days after treatment resumption.

Methods/Results

We conducted an observational study, which prospectively included consecutive patients taking aspirin, taking clopidogrel, and untreated controls (15 patients in each group). The antiplatelet drugs were withdrawn five days before surgery (baseline) and were reintroduced two days after surgery. Platelet function was evaluated by optical aggregation in the presence of collagen, arachidonic acid (aspirin) and ADP (clopidogrel) and by VASP assay (clopidogrel). Platelet-leukocyte complex (PLC) level was quantified at each time-point. At baseline, platelet function was efficiently inhibited by aspirin and had recovered fully in most patients 5 days after drug withdrawal. PLC levels five days after aspirin reintroduction were similar to baseline (+4±10%; p = 0.16), in line with an effective platelet inhibition. Chronic clopidogrel treatment was associated with variable platelet inhibition and its withdrawal led to variable functional recovery. PLC levels were significantly increased five days after clopidogrel reintroduction (+10±15%; p = 0.02), compared to baseline.

Conclusions

Aspirin withdrawal 5 days before high-bleeding-risk procedures was associated with functional platelet recovery, and its reintroduction two days after surgery restored antiplaletet efficacy five days later. This was not the case of clopidogrel, and further work is therefore needed to define its optimal perioperative management.

Risk of bleeding and adverse outcomes predicted by thromboelastography platelet mapping in patients taking clopidogrel within 7 days of non-cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Patients often fail to stop clopidogrel appropriately before non-cardiac surgery. Thromboelastography platelet mapping (TEG-PM) can be used to measure the percentage adenosine 5'-diphosphate platelet receptor inhibition (ADP-PRI) by clopidogrel in these patients.

METHODS

This prospective case-control study investigated the risk of bleeding in patients who had taken clopidogrel within 7 days of scheduled operation. Patients underwent TEG-PM to stratify their bleeding risk. Low-risk (ADP-PRI below 30 per cent) and urgent priority high-risk (ADP-PRI 30 per cent or more) patients proceeded to surgery. The outcomes of these patients were compared with those of matched controls. Regression analysis, with bootstrapping validation, was used to identify independent risk factors for bleeding and an optimal cut-off value of ADP-PRI for cancellation of surgery.

RESULTS

From May 2008 to October 2013, 182 patients failed to discontinue clopidogrel. No correlation was observed between duration of clopidogrel omission and percentage ADP-PRI; 112 low-risk and 19 high-risk patients proceeded to surgery. High-risk patients had significantly greater intraoperative packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion in comparison with their matched controls, and a strong positive correlation between percentage ADP-PRI and units of intraoperative PRBCs transfused (r = 0·749, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0·410 to 0·940; P < 0·001). Percentage ADP-PRI was the only independent risk factor for intraoperative PRBC transfusion (odds ratio 1·07, 95 per cent c.i. 1·02 to 1·13; P = 0·005).

CONCLUSION

An objective measure of platelet inhibition with TEG-PM, using an ADP-PRI cut-off of 34 per cent, can be used to prevent unnecessary cancellations, while minimizing patient risk.

Bleeding complications in patients with coronary stents during non-cardiac surgery

INTRODUCTION

Patients with coronary stents often undergo non-cardiac invasive procedures. These are often associated with thrombotic and/or hemorrhagic complications. The type of procedure, perioperative antiplatelet therapy, and other patient-related factors influence the risk of postoperative haemorrhage. Our objective was to analyze the postoperative risk factors for hemorrhagic complications and to determine the impact of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy strategies on postoperative bleeding risk in patients with coronary stents undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective, multicentre observational cohort study of 1134 consecutive patients with coronary stents undergoing non-cardiac surgery between April 2007 and April 2009. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of an hemorrhagic complication during the first 30days following the surgery or intervention.

RESULTS

Among the 1134 patients evaluated, 108 (9.5%) experienced a postoperative hemorrhagic complication (with a median time to occurrence of 5.3days). These complications were considered major, involved the operative site, and required reoperation in 92 (85.2%), 92 (85.2%), and 20 (18.5%) of patients, respectively. Mortality in patients with a haemorrhagic complication was 12% (n=13). Independent postoperative factors associated with haemorrhagic complications were identified as a high and intermediate bleeding risk procedure and the use and dose of anticoagulants. When interrupted before the procedure, resumption of antiplatelet treatment was delayed in patients developing early postoperative hemorrhagic complications.

CONCLUSION

Patients with coronary stents who undergo surgery are at high risk for hemorrhagic complications.

General anaesthetic considerations for haemostasis in orbital surgery

Orbital surgery is often conducted in areas with limited exposure where vital structures are tightly crowded together. A bloodless field is paramount in orbital surgery for the proper identification of normal and pathologic tissue and even minimal bleeding can obscure the surgical field, making surgery more difficult and increasing the risk of complications. Surgery for highly vascular orbital lesions is an additional situation where maintaining an adequate surgical field is often challenging but paramount. The role of the anaesthetist in controlling surgical blood loss has been increasingly recognized in the last few decades. Various techniques including hypotensive anaesthesia have been described, but the control of intraoperative bleeding does not rely on a single particular technique, but a series of well-designed interventions that result in optimal conditions. An understanding of the anaesthetic considerations pertinent to haemostasis is invaluable for oculoplastic surgeons. Additionally, with the growing use of endonasal approaches to medial wall decompression and accessing the medial orbit, it has become increasingly important that orbital surgeons understand the anaesthetic requirements of their colleagues in other disciplines.

Patients who require non-cardiac surgery in acute coronary syndrome

The coexistence of an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and non-cardiac surgery (NCS) in an individual patient can be summarized in two challenging clinical scenarios for the treating physician: 1) Post-operative patients who develop ACS and 2) Patients with ACS who subsequently require NCS. Both settings are characterized by a struggle on the part of treating physicians attempting to optimize antithrombotic therapies for ACS while minimizing post-surgical bleeding risk. In this review we address specific clinical issues related to patients with coexistent NCS and ACS, discussing possible management strategies balancing ischemic and bleeding risk in these complex patient scenarios.

Are continuing medical education activities effective in improving the competence and performance of clinicians? Evidence from activities for primary care clinicians who manage patients with acute coronary syndromes

An estimated 610,000 new cases of myocardial infarction (MI) and 325,000 recurrent MIs will occur this year in the United States, accounting for 1 MI every 34 seconds. Despite the advances in acute coronary syndrome management, recurrent events and the mortality associated with acute coronary syndromes are also high. There is clear evidence that knowledge, competence, and performance gaps exist among clinicians, contributing to the lack of adherence, premature discontinuation, and the increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients. As primary care clinicians manage these patients during the chronic phase of treatment, educational activities addressing identified gaps were developed and presented nationally. Outcome measurements using pre-, post-, and follow-up surveys showed that knowledge, confidence, competence, and performance significantly improved resulting in better patient outcomes as reported by activity participants. Thus, continuing medical education activities developed with the clear goal of changing clinician behavior can be effective in improving outcomes among patients with coronary artery disease.

Bridging therapy for early surgery in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate stent-related adverse cardiac events and bleeding complications within 30 days after surgical procedures in patients with recent drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, in whom a bridging protocol was used.

METHODS

In our centre a bridging protocol is used in patients scheduled for cardiac or non-cardiac surgery within 6 months after PCI with DES implantation. Clopidogrel and in some cases also acetylsalicylic acid is discontinued 5 days prior to the planned intervention and patients are admitted 2 to 3 days before the intervention for tirofiban infusion. This is discontinued 4 h before intervention. Close postoperative monitoring is performed and double antiplatelet therapy is restarted as soon as possible. Thirty-six consecutive patients were included in the protocol, 15 receiving coronary artery bypass graft and 21 non-cardiac interventions. Thrombotic and bleeding complications were studied for up to 30 days after the bridged procedure.

RESULTS

No incidences of stent thrombosis or other adverse cardiac events (mortality, myocardial infarction) were seen in up to 30 days of follow-up. However, 6 bleeding events were reported of which 5 required a blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

Our bridging protocol in patients requiring surgery after recent PCI with DES seems adequate to prevent stent thrombosis in this high-risk group. The bleeding risk is not insignificant but in our patient group controllable without major late sequelae. Larger studies should be performed to establish safety and efficacy in order to develop guidelines for these patients.

Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation: a review of the current guidelines and literature

Dual antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay of medical treatment after percutaneous coronary intervention regarding the risk of stent thrombosis occurrence. Since the beginning of the stenting era, antiplatelet regimens have evolved according to the emerging and widespread diffusion of new devices and more challenging indications for their use. In the past years, concerns have been raised about the safety of drug-eluting stent implantation with regard to late and very late stent thrombosis. Thus, the length of dual antiplatelet therapy has been progressively increased with marked individual and local differences. However, prolonged antiplatelet therapy leads to increased risk of bleeding, especially in the setting of surgical procedures, traumas, and/or other diseases. To date, the exact duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation is still debated in the literature. The aim of this article is to review the literature and the current guidelines on the risks and benefits of pursuing dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation.

[Preoperative management to reduce morbidity and mortality of hip fracture]

Hip femur is extremely common in the elderly and is one of the most common reasons for admission in trauma care. The main reported causes of death after hip fracture were cardiovascular (29%), neurological (20%) and pulmonary. Large epidemiological studies have shown a relatively small decrease in mortality for 20 years despite an active approach to medical and surgical management. Yet 57% of deaths occurring within 30 days post-surgery are preventable because they are not related to a pre-existing disease. Preoperative management to optimize these patients could help to reduce morbidity and mortality and is thus a crucial issue. The anesthesia consultation is used to evaluate the perioperative risk, treat pain, manage treatment and stabilize the patient. An operative delay of more than 48hours after admission increases mortality. This period should not be prolonged by unnecessary investigations that will not change the perioperative management. The preoperative period is a key moment because it allows to choose the anesthetic technique. Even if this choice is controversial, continuous spinal anesthesia (titrated) do not modify the cardiovascular and neurological physiological balance of these precarious patients.

Perioperative management of antiplatelet-drugs in cardiac surgery

The management of coronary patients scheduled for a coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), who are receiving one or more antiplatelet drugs, is plenty of controversies. It has been shown that withdrawal of antiplatelet drugs is associated with an increased risk of a thrombotic event, but surgery under an altered platelet function also means an increased risk of bleeding in the perioperative period. Because of the conflict recommendations, this review article tries to evaluate the outcome of different perioperative antiplatelet protocols in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing CABG.

Bleeding in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary interventions: position paper by the Working Group on Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology

Bleeding has recently emerged as an important outcome in the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS), which is relatively frequent compared with ischaemic outcomes and has important implications in terms of prognosis, outcomes, and costs. In particular, there is evidence that patients experiencing major bleeding in the acute phase are at higher risk for death in the following months, although the causal nature of this relation is still debated. This position paper aims to summarize current knowledge regarding the epidemiology of bleeding in ACS and percutaneous coronary intervention, including measurement and definitions of bleeding, with emphasis on the recent consensus Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) definitions. It also provides an European perspective on management strategies to minimize the rate, extent, and consequences of bleeding. Finally, the research implications of bleeding (measuring and reporting bleeding in trials, the importance of bleeding as an outcome measure, and bleeding as a subject for future research) are also discussed.

Peri-operative management of antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease: joint position paper by members of the working group on Perioperative Haemostasis of the Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Research (GTH), the working group on Perioperative Coagulation of the Austrian Society for Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (ÖGARI) and the Working Group Thrombosis of the European Society for Cardiology (ESC)

An increasing number of patients suffering from cardiovascular disease, especially coronary artery disease (CAD), are treated with aspirin and/or clopidogrel for the prevention of major adverse events. Unfortunately, there are no specific, widely accepted recommendations for the perioperative management of patients receiving antiplatelet therapy. Therefore, members of the Perioperative Haemostasis Group of the Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Research (GTH), the Perioperative Coagulation Group of the Austrian Society for Anesthesiology, Reanimation and Intensive Care (ÖGARI) and the Working Group Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) have created this consensus position paper to provide clear recommendations on the perioperative use of anti-platelet agents (specifically with semi-urgent and urgent surgery), strongly supporting a multidisciplinary approach to optimize the treatment of individual patients with coronary artery disease who need major cardiac and non-cardiac surgery. With planned surgery, drug eluting stents (DES) should not be used unless surgery can be delayed for ≥12 months after DES implantation. If surgery cannot be delayed, surgical revascularisation, bare-metal stents or pure balloon angioplasty should be considered. During ongoing antiplatelet therapy, elective surgery should be delayed for the recommended duration of treatment. In patients with semi-urgent surgery, the decision to prematurely stop one or both antiplatelet agents (at least 5 days pre-operatively) has to be taken after multidisciplinary consultation, evaluating the individual thrombotic and bleeding risk. Urgently needed surgery has to take place under full antiplatelet therapy despite the increased bleeding risk. A multidisciplinary approach for optimal antithrombotic and haemostatic patient management is thus mandatory.

Providing perioperative care for patients with hip fractures

Providing perioperative care for patients with hip fractures can present major challenges for the anaesthesiologist. These patients often have multiple comorbidities, the deterioration of any one of which may have precipitated the fall. A careful balance has to be achieved between minimising the time before operation and spending time to optimise their medical status. This review will present insights into preoperative patient assessment and optimization in this group of patients from the anaesthesiologists' perspective. In particular, it will highlight important medical issues of concern that may alter anaesthetic risks and management. With a greater understanding of what these issues are, potentially a more prompt and integrated approach to managing these patients may be made. Hopefully, this would result in minimising last minute cancellations due to medical reasons for these patients.

The Management of Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Stents Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery

Whereas the development of coronary stents has been a major breakthrough in the treatment of coronary artery disease, stent thrombosis, associated with myocardial infarction and death, has introduced a new challenge in the care of patients with coronary stents undergoing noncardiac surgery. This review presents the authors’ recommendations regarding the optimal management of such patients. Elective surgery should be postponed for at least 6 weeks and optimally 3 months for a bare-metal stent and at least 1 year for a drug-eluting stent. On the other hand, managing a patient undergoing non-elective surgery is more difficult and necessitates a case-by-case assessment of bleeding risk versus thrombotic risk based on patient comorbidities, type of stents present, details of the coronary intervention, and type of surgical procedure. Patients with a risk of bleeding that outweighs the risk of stent thrombosis should discontinue at least clopidogrel, whereas all other patients should continue dual antiplatelet therapy throughout the perioperative period.

Differences in the in vitro antiplatelet effect of dexibuprofen, ibuprofen, and flurbiprofen in human blood

BACKGROUND

In this study, we compared the in vitro pharmacodynamic profile of dexibuprofen, ibuprofen, and flurbiprofen to identify possible differences in antiplatelet activity.

METHODS

In whole blood samples from healthy volunteers, we measured platelet aggregation induced by adenosine diphosphate, collagen and arachidonic acid, platelet thromboxane B(2) (TxB(2)), lipopolysaccharide-induced prostaglandin E(2), leukocyte 6-keto-prostaglandin F(1α) (PGF(1α)), and nitric oxide induced by both constitutive and inducible pathways before and after incubation with increasing concentrations of acetylsalicylic acid, dexibuprofen, ibuprofen, or flurbiprofen. The concentration that inhibited (IC(50)) or increased each variable by 50% was calculated.

RESULTS

All 3 drugs inhibited platelet aggregation in a dose-dependent manner, TxB(2), prostaglandin E(2), and 6-keto-PGF(1α), and increased calcium-induced nitric oxide production. Dexibuprofen showed greater antiplatelet potency than ibuprofen and flurbiprofen, and its profile was similar to that of aspirin. For example, IC(50) values for arachidonic acid-induced platelet aggregation were 0.85 ± 0.06 μM for dexibuprofen, 14.76 ± 1.22 μM for ibuprofen, 6.39 ± 0.51 μM for flurbiprofen, and 0.38 ± 0.03 μM for aspirin. All drugs inhibited both thromboxane and prostacyclin synthesis, but the IC(50) anti-TxB(2)/IC(50) anti-6-keto-PGF(1α) ratio was 0.21 ± 0.03 for dexibuprofen, 1.05 ± 0.08 for ibuprofen, 0.79 ± 0.11 for flurbiprofen, and 0.46 ± 0.06 for aspirin. All drugs increased calcium-dependent nitric oxide production.

CONCLUSIONS

The aryl propionic acid derivative dexibuprofen was the most potent antiplatelet drug, and its pharmacodynamic profile is similar to aspirin.

A review of the use of common antiplatelet agents in orthopaedic practice

Antiplatelet agents are widely prescribed for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. A common clinical problem facing orthopaedic and trauma surgeons is how to manage patients receiving these agents who require surgery, either electively or following trauma. The dilemma is to balance the risk of increased blood loss if the antiplatelet agents are continued peri-operatively against the risk of coronary artery/stent thrombosis and/or other vascular event if the drugs are stopped. The traditional approach of stopping these medications up to two weeks before surgery appears to pose significant danger to patients and may require review. This paper covers the important aspects regarding the two most commonly prescribed antiplatelet agents, aspirin and clopidogrel.

Prevention of the renarrowing of coronary arteries using drug-eluting stents in the perioperative period: an update

The management of patients scheduled for surgery with a coronary stent, and receiving 1 or more antiplatelet drugs, has many controversies. The premature discontinuation of antiplatelet drugs substantially increases the risk of stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction, and cardiac death, and surgery under an altered platelet function could also lead to an increased risk of bleeding in the perioperative period. Because of the conflict in the recommendations, this article reviews the current antiplatelet protocols after positioning a coronary stent, the evidence of increased risk of ST associated with the withdrawal of antiplatelet drugs and increased bleeding risk associated with its maintenance, the different perioperative antiplatelet protocols when patients are scheduled for surgery or need an urgent operation, and the therapeutic options if excessive bleeding occurs.

Previous Coronary Stent Implantation and Cardiac Events in Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery

Background—

Noncardiac surgery performed after coronary stent implantation is associated with an increased risk of stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and death. The influence of stent type and period of risk still have to be defined.

Methods and Results—

We linked the Scottish Coronary Revascularisation Register with hospital admission data to undertake a Scotland-wide retrospective cohort study examining cardiac outcomes in all patients who received drug-eluting or bare-metal stents between April 2003 and March 2007 and subsequently underwent noncardiac surgery. Of 1953 patients, 570 (29%) were treated with at least 1 drug-eluting stent and 1383 (71%) with bare-metal stents only. There were no differences between drug-eluting and bare-metal stents in the primary end point of in-hospital mortality or ischemic cardiac events (14.6% versus 13.3%; P =0.3) or the secondary end points of in-hospital mortality (0.7% versus 0.6%; P =0.8) and acute myocardial infarction (1.2% versus 0.7%; P =0.3). Perioperative death and ischemic cardiac events occurred more frequently when surgery was performed within 42 days of stent implantation (42.4% versus 12.8% beyond 42 days; P <0.001), especially in patients revascularized after an acute coronary syndrome (65% versus 32%; P =0.037). There were no temporal differences in outcomes between the drug-eluting and bare-metal stent groups.

Conclusions—

Patients undergoing noncardiac surgery after recent coronary stent implantation are at increased risk of perioperative myocardial ischemia, myocardial infarction, and death, particularly after an acute coronary syndrome. For at least 2 years after percutaneous coronary intervention, cardiac outcomes after noncardiac surgery are similar for both drug-eluting and bare-metal stents.

Peri-operative management of anti-platelet agents

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of patients treated with anti-platelet agents are presenting for non-cardiac surgery. We examined the peri-operative management of anti-platelet therapy in patients undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery and the process by which patients received instructions.

METHODS

We interviewed and collected outcome data on 213 consecutive patients aged > or = 45 years presenting for elective non-cardiac surgery at our institution over a 6-week period regarding the peri-operative management of anti-platelet and warfarin therapy.

RESULTS

Anti-platelet therapy was prescribed in 22.5% and warfarin in 5.2% of the study subjects. Aspirin was stopped peri-operatively in 55.3%, while clopidogrel was stopped in the sole patient treated with this. The frequency of anti-platelet agent discontinuation was similar for major and minor surgery. Warfarin was discontinued prior to surgery in all cases. Only 54.2% of those treated with anti-platelet therapy recalled being given instruction regarding pre-operative management of their anti-platelet therapy compared with 90.9% of patients treated with warfarin (P= 0.04). In the absence of instructions, a number of patients made their own decision to stop their aspirin pre-operatively. Post-operatively, only 37% recalled receiving instructions regarding restarting anti-platelet therapy. As a result, three patients failed to do so. In contrast, all those treated with warfarin received clear post-operative instructions.

CONCLUSION

Peri-operative anti-platelet management and communication with patients appears to be sub-optimal. There is a need for standardized processes whereby informed decisions regarding peri-operative anti-platelet therapy are made and communicated clearly to the patients.

[Antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants: management of the anticoagulated surgical patient]

Among the drugs most widely consumed by patients are both antiplatelet agents (aspirin, clopidogrel, ticlopidine) and anticoagulants (acenocoumarol, warfarin, low molecular weight heparin, fondaparinux). The use of these drugs in the perioperative period is an essential concern in patient care due to the need to balance the risk of bleeding against thrombotic risk (arterial or venous), which is increased in surgical patients. The present review highlights three main aspects. Firstly, withdrawal of antiplatelet agents is recommended between 1 week and 10 days before surgery to minimize perioperative bleeding. However, this practice has been questioned because patients without the required antiplatelet coverage may be at greater risk of developing cardiac, cerebral or peripheral vascular complications. Therefore, the recommendation of systematic antiplatelet withdrawal for a specific period should be rejected. Currently, risks should be evaluated on an individual basis to minimize the time during which the patient remains without adequate antiplatelet protection. Secondly, thromboprophylaxis is required in most surgical patients due to the high prevalence of venous thromboembolic disease. This implies the use of anticoagulants and the practice of regional anesthesia has been questioned in these patients. However, with the safety recommendations established by the various scientific societies, this practice has been demonstrated to be safe. Finally, "bridge therapy" in patients anticoagulated with acenocoumarol should be performed on an individual basis rather than systematically without taking into account the thrombotic risks of each patient. The perioperative period involves high arterial and venous thrombotic risk and the optimal use of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants should be a priority to minimize this risk without increasing hemorrhagic risk. Multidisciplinary consensus is essential on this matter.

Real-life management of dual antiplatelet therapy interruption: the REGINA survey

BACKGROUND

Concern about procedure-related bleeding is a major reason for premature discontinuation of dual oral antiplatelet therapy (APT); treatment cessation is detrimental in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), especially after drug-eluting stent (DES) placement. The nationwide REGINA survey was designed to evaluate how the interruption of dual APT is managed in the 'real world'.

METHODS

Physicians (2700/4581) were randomly selected to participate in a computer-assisted telephone interview. Knowledge about DES and APT was appraised by multiple-choice questions. Strategies for temporary interruption of dual APT before an invasive or surgical procedure were evaluated using 21 scenarios, including high-risk (30 days after DES) and low-risk (18 months after DES) periods.

RESULTS

Out of 2700 practitioners, 2515 completed the interview. Rates of correct answers to basic knowledge questions ranged from 0% (dentists) to 52% (cardiologists). Unjustified total interruption of dual APT was much more frequent than expected (22.0% vs. 11.8%). A strategy of total interruption was less frequently chosen in the period of high ischemic risk compared to the low-risk period (13.7% vs. 31.1%, p<0.0001). Dual APT interruption in patients who require additional invasive cardiac or surgical procedures depended on type of physician consulted (more frequent in specialists than general practitioners or dentists), and on the physician's age and practice type (rural/private vs. urban/hospital). Correct answers were more frequently given in situations bearing a major risk, either ischemic or bleeding risk, than in those with no risk (49.2% vs. 30.2%, p<0.0001). Low-molecular-weight heparin was the substitution therapy in over two-thirds of scenarios and was associated with longer periods of APT interruption.

INTERPRETATION

Adequate management of APT in patients with intracoronary stents who undergo potentially haemorrhagic invasive procedures depends mainly on the type of physician involved and their practice rather than on a carefully weighted assessment of ischemic/bleeding risk. Our findings suggest a lack of scientific evidence, insufficient knowledge of guidelines, and poor communication between physicians managing these patients.

Perioperative handling of patients on antiplatelet therapy with need for surgery

The widespread use of metal stents and drug-eluting stents has shown the extent to which patients with unstable coronary perfusion depend on antiplatelet drugs, and how their risk of late thrombosis depends on the long-term use of agents such as clopidogrel. It has also been shown that the risk of surgical bleeding, if antiplatelet drugs are continued, is lower than that of coronary thrombosis if they are withdrawn. Thus, except for low-risk settings, the practice of withdrawing antiplatelet drugs 5-10 days prior to surgical procedures should be changed. The following suggestions are meant to provide a guideline in this respect. Most of the current surgical procedures may be performed while on low-dose aspirin treatment. Except when bleeding may occur in closed spaces (e.g. intracranial surgery, spinal surgery in the medullary canal, surgery of the posterior chamber of the eye) or where excessive blood loss is expected, where only clopidogrel should be discontinued; in all other cases the surgical procedures should be carried out in the presence of dual antiplatelet agents (if prescribed). Aspirin may be discontinued only in subjects at low risk of thrombosis, and at high risk of intraoperative bleeding. Operations associated with an expected excessive blood loss should be postponed unless vital. When prescribed for acute coronary syndrome or during stent re-endothelialization, clopidogrel should not be discontinued before a noncardiac procedure. For elective procedures, surgery should be postponed until the end of the indication for clopidogrel. After the operation, clopidogrel should be resumed within the 12-24 h. Cardiac procedures should be postponed for at least 4 days after clopidogrel withdrawal. The thrombotic risk of preoperative withdrawal of antiplatelet drugs overwhelms the benefit of regional or neuraxial blockade. Antiplatelet treatment replacement by heparin or low-molecular weight heparin does not provide protection against the risk of coronary artery or stent thrombosis. Haemostasis requires that at least 20% of circulating platelets have a normal function. As the effects of antiplatelet agents are not reversible by other drugs, fresh platelets are the only manner to rapidly restore normal haemostasis. Aprotinin decreases postoperative bleeding and transfusion rates in patients undergoing CABG and on clopidogrel during the days preceding surgery.

[Drug-eluting stents: implications for surgery patients]

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has a special role in the treatment of coronary heart disease. The insertion of drug-eluting stents (DES) requires dual anti-platelet therapy for at least 1 year which makes planned and emergency surgery difficult. There is a dilemma between high risk of stent thrombosis and perioperative bleeding. There is no evidence-based, bridging therapy option available perioperatively. This complex of problems should be considered whenever PCI is performed. An interdisciplinary approach is obligatory in these imminent conditions to proceed with either interventional or surgical revascularization. Co-existing malignancies and disorders which must be treated surgically should be excluded before PCI. Furthermore, DES and dual anti-platelet therapy produce unanswered forensic questions. On legal grounds it is not possible to proceed with surgery in cases of medication with anti-platelet therapy. Therefore, it is mandatory to discuss the possible answers to this problem with health care lawyers. The patient must be informed about this complex of problems.

Perioperative management of antiplatelet agents in noncardiac surgery

It is common that patients who are scheduled for surgery are treated with antiplatelet agents (APAs) due to their wide indications. The management of these APAs in the perioperative period (acetylsalicylic acid alone, a thienopyridine alone or, in most cases, a combination of them) has a dual perspective: the risk of bleeding when the patient is operated under the effect of the APA against the risk of thrombosis if it has been withdrawn. The main challenges for the anaesthesiologist and the surgeon include patients with a coronary stent (mainly, new drug-eluting coronary stents), those undergoing urgent surgery and those undergoing high bleeding risk surgery. We review current protocols and discuss the most recent proposals for the management of APAs in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Current recommendations include the maintenance of aspirin if possible throughout the perioperative period, in order to limit the risks of cardiological, vascular or neurological postoperative events, although this makes it necessary to assume a small risk for haemorrhagic complications in some patients. Nevertheless, there are many circumstances that are not clear yet and, in this situation, it is crucial that patients are treated with a multidisciplinary approach (anaesthesiologists, surgeons, cardiologists and haematologists).