Bleeding complications during cardiac electronic device implantation in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy: is there any value of local tranexamic acid?

Current strategies to minimize postoperative hematoma formation in patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: A review

There are an increasing number of cardiac electronic device implants and generator changes with a longer patient life expectancy along with concomitant increase in antiplatelet and anticoagulant regimens, which can increase the incidence of pocket hematomas. We have conducted an in-depth analysis on the relevant literature, which is rife with varying definition of hematomas, on ways to reduce pocket hematomas. We have analyzed studies on periprocedural medication management, intraprocedural use of prohemostatic agents, and postprocedure role of compression devices.

Reversing Bleeding Associated With Antiplatelet Use: The Role of Tranexamic Acid

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the mainstay of therapy in patients that have been diagnosed with coronary artery disease. DAPT has known risk factors such as an increased risk of bleeding, and, currently, no specific medication is indicated to reverse bleeding associated with antiplatelet use. One medication that may help reduce blood loss is tranexamic acid (TXA). A retrospective review of the literature regarding TXA in the setting of antiplatelet associated bleeding through a systematic search strategy was conducted. This review of the literature followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines and included seven studies. Multiple studies demonstrated the impact on platelet function resulting from administering TXA through lower volumes of blood loss, lower transfusion requirements, and lower incidence of reoperations. TXA is not widely recommended to reverse antiplatelet medications; however, it is widely available, has a positive track record for use in various types of bleeding, and is relatively inexpensive and safe. Large-scale randomized trials are warranted to make a strong recommendation for TXA in reversing bleeding associated with antiplatelet therapy.

Strategies to Prevent Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection

The association between the risk of mortality and cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infections has been well-established in the literature. As CIED implantations have increased in frequency in the past few decades, the incidence of CIED-related infections has also risen. Given the morbidity, mortality, and health-care costs associated with CIED infections, the prevention of device-related infection is a critical goal. Risk factors for developing CIED infections can be categorized as patient-, procedure-, or device-related. Numerous studies have highlighted different strategies for preventing CIED-related infections, which include patient optimization, device selection, and periprocedural preparation and treatment. Nonetheless, as the comorbidity burden of patients undergoing CIED implantation continues to increase, significant challenges in the successful elimination of CIED-related infections remain. This review provides a comprehensive overview of available evidence-based approaches and strategies to reduce the risk of CIED infections.

Effect of Direct Oral Anticoagulants, Warfarin, and Antiplatelet Agents on Risk of Device Pocket Hematoma: Combined Analysis of BRUISE CONTROL 1 and 2

BACKGROUND

Oral anticoagulant use is common among patients undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator surgery. BRUISE CONTROL (Bridge or Continue Coumadin for Device Surgery Randomized Controlled Trial; NCT00800137) demonstrated that perioperative warfarin continuation reduced clinically significant hematomas (CSH) by 80% compared with heparin bridging (3.5% versus 16%). BRUISE-CONTROL-2 (NCT01675076) observed a similarly low risk of CSH when comparing continued versus interrupted direct oral anticoagulant (2.1% in both groups). Using patient level data from both trials, the current study aims to: (1) evaluate the effect of concomitant antiplatelet therapy on CSH, and (2) understand the relative risk of CSH in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulant versus continued warfarin.

METHODS

We analyzed 1343 patients included in BRUISE-CONTROL-1 and BRUISE-CONTROL-2. The primary outcome for both trials was CSH. There were 408 patients identified as having continued either a single or dual antiplatelet agent at the time of device surgery.

RESULTS

Antiplatelet use (versus nonuse) was associated with CSH in 9.8% versus 4.3% of patients (P<0.001), and remained a strong independent predictor after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio, 1.965; 95% CI, 1.202-3.213; P=0.0071). In multivariable analysis, adjusting for antiplatelet use, there was no significant difference in CSH observed between direct oral anticoagulant use compared with continued warfarin (odds ratio, 0.858; 95% CI, 0.375-1.963; P=0.717).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant antiplatelet therapy doubled the risk of CSH during device surgery. No difference in CSH was found between direct oral anticoagulant versus continued warfarin. In anticoagulated patients undergoing elective or semi-urgent device surgery, the patient specific benefit/risk of holding an antiplatelet should be carefully considered.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00800137, NCT01675076.