Warfarin, not direct oral anticoagulants nor antiplatelet therapy, is associated with increased bleeding risk in emergency general surgery patients: implications in this new era of novel anticoagulants: An EAST Multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

To assess perioperative bleeding complications & in-hospital mortality in patients requiring emergency general surgery (EGS) presenting with a history of antiplatelet (AP) vs. direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) vs warfarin use.

METHODS

Prospective observational study across 21 centers between 2019-2022. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years, & DOAC, warfarin or AP use within 24 hours of an EGSP. Outcomes included perioperative bleeding and in-hospital mortality. The study was conducted using ANOVA, Chi-square, and multivariable regression models.

RESULTS

Of the 413 patients, 221 (53.5%) reported AP use, 152 (36.8%) DOAC use, & 40 (9.7%) warfarin use. Most common indications for surgery were obstruction (23% (AP), 45% (DOAC), 28% (warfarin)), intestinal ischemia (13%, 17%, 23%), & diverticulitis/peptic ulcers (7%, 7%, 15%). Compared to DOAC use, warfarin use was associated with significantly higher perioperative bleeding complication (OR 4.4 [2.0, 9.9]). There was no significant difference in perioperative bleeding complication between DOAC & AP use (OR 0.7 [0.4, 1.1]). Compared to DOAC use, there was no significant difference in mortality between warfarin use (0.7 [0.2, 2.5]) or AP use (OR 0.5 [0.2, 1.2]). After adjusting for confounders, warfarin use (OR 6.3 [2.8, 13.9]), medical history and operative indication were associated with an increase in perioperative bleeding complications. However, warfarin was not independently associated with risk of mortality (OR 1.3 [0.39, 4.7]), whereas intraoperative vasopressor use (OR 4.7 [1.7, 12.8)), medical history & postoperative bleeding (OR 5.5 [2.4, 12.8]) were.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite ongoing concerns about the increase in DOAC use & lack of readily available reversal agents, this study suggests that warfarin, rather than DOACs, is associated with higher perioperative bleeding complications. However, that risk does not result in an increase in mortality, suggesting that perioperative decisions should be dictated by patient disease & comorbidities rather than type of antiplatelet or anticoagulant use.

Anticoagulation in emergency general surgery: Who bleeds more? The EAST multicenter trials ACES study

BACKGROUND

While direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use is increasing in the Emergency General Surgery (EGS) patient population, our understanding of their bleeding risk in the acute setting remains limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of perioperative bleeding complications in patients using DOACs versus warfarin and AP therapy requiring urgent/emergent EGS procedures (EGSPs).

METHODS

This was a prospective observational trial, conducted between 2019 and 2022, across 21 centers. Inclusion criteria were 18 years or older, DOAC, warfarin/AP use within 24 hours of requiring an urgent/emergent EGSP. Demographics, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected. ANOVA, χ 2 , and multivariable regression models were used to conduct the analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 413 patients enrolled in the study, 261 (63%) reported warfarin/AP use and 152 (37%) reported DOAC use. Appendicitis and cholecystitis were the most frequent indication for operative intervention in the warfarin/AP group (43.4% vs. 25%, p = 0.001). Small bowel obstruction/abdominal wall hernias were the main indication for operative intervention in the DOAC group (44.7% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.001). Intraoperative, postoperative, and perioperative bleeding complications and in-hospital mortality were similar between the two groups. After adjusting for confounders, a history of chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 4.3; p = 0.015) and indication for operative intervention including occlusive mesenteric ischemia (OR, 4.27; p = 0.016), nonocclusive mesenteric ischemia (OR, 3.13; p = 0.001), and diverticulitis (OR, 3.72; p = 0.019) were associated with increased perioperative bleeding complications. The need for an intraoperative transfusion (OR, 4.87; p < 0.001), and intraoperative vasopressors (OR, 4.35; p = 0.003) were associated with increased in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative bleeding complications and mortality are impacted by the indication for EGSPs and patient's severity of illness rather than a history of DOAC or warfarin/AP use. Therefore, perioperative management should be guided by patient physiology and indication for surgery rather than the concern for recent antiplatelet or anticoagulant use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

MOVING THE NEEDLE ON TIME TO RESUSCITATION: AN EAST PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER STUDY OF VASCULAR ACCESS IN HYPOTENSIVE INJURED PATIENTS USING TRAUMA VIDEO REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

Vascular access in hypotensive trauma patients is challenging. Little evidence exists on the time required and success rates of vascular access types. We hypothesized that intraosseous (IO) access would be faster and more successful than peripheral IV (PIV) and central venous catheter (CVC) access in hypotensive patients.

METHODS

An EAST prospective multicenter trial was performed; 19 centers provided data. Trauma video review (TVR) was used to evaluate the resuscitations of hypotensive (systolic blood pressure ≤ 90 mmHg) trauma patients. Highly granular data from video recordings were abstracted. Data collected included vascular access attempt type, location, success rate, and procedural time. Demographic and injury-specific variables were obtained from the medical record. Success rates, procedural durations, and time to resuscitation were compared among access strategies (IO vs PIV vs CVC).

RESULTS

1,410 access attempts occurred in 581 patients with a median age of 40[27-59] years and an ISS of 22[10-34]. 932 PIV, 204 IO and 249 CVC were attempted. 70% of access attempts were successful but were significantly less likely to be successful in females (64% vs. 71%, p = 0.01). Median time to any access was 5.0[3.2-8.0] minutes. IO had higher success rates than PIV or CVC (93% vs. 67% vs. 59%, p < 0.001) and remained higher after subsequent failures (second attempt 85% vs. 59% vs. 69%, p = 0.08; third attempt 100% vs 33% vs. 67%, p = 0.002). Duration varied by access type (IO 36[23-60]sec; PIV 44[31-61]sec; CVC 171[105-298]sec) and was significantly different between IO vs. CVC (p < 0.001) and PIV vs. CVC (p < 0.001) but not PIV vs. IO. Time to resuscitation initiation was shorter in patients whose initial access attempt was IO, 5.8 minutes vs. 6.7 minutes (p = 0.015). This was more pronounced in patients arriving to the hospital with no established access (5.7 minutes vs. 7.5 minutes, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

IO is as fast as PIV and more likely to be successful compared with other access strategies in hypotensive trauma patients. Patients whose initial access attempt was IO were resuscitated more expeditiously. IO access should be considered a first line therapy in hypotensive trauma patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II Therapeutic/Care Management.

Follow-up trends after emergency department discharge for acutely symptomatic hernias: A southwestern surgical congress multi-center trial

BACKGROUND

The objective of this multi-center study was to examine the follow-up trends after emergency department (ED) discharge in a large and socioeconomically diverse patient population.

METHODS

We performed a 3-year retrospective analysis of adult patients with acutely symptomatic hernias who were discharged from the EDs of five geographically diverse hospitals.

RESULTS

Of 674 patients, 288 (43%) were evaluated in the clinic after discharge from the ED and 253 (37%) underwent repair. Follow-up was highest among those with insurance. A total of 119 patients (18%) returned to the ED for hernia-related complaints, of which 25 (21%) underwent urgent intervention.

CONCLUSION

The plan of care for patients with acutely symptomatic hernias discharged from the ED depends on outpatient follow-up, but more than 50% of patients are lost to follow-up, and nearly 1 in 5 return to the ED. The uninsured are at particularly high risk.

Infection after penetrating brain injury-An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter study oral presentation at the 32nd annual meeting of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, January 15-19, 2019, in Austin, Texas

BACKGROUND

Fatality rates following penetrating traumatic brain injury (pTBI) are extremely high and survivors are often left with significant disability. Infection following pTBI is associated with worse morbidity. The modern rates of central nervous system infections (INF) in civilian survivors are unknown. This study sought to determine the rate of and risk factors for INF following pTBI and to determine the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis.

METHODS

Seventeen institutions submitted adult patients with pTBI and survival of more than 72 hours from 2006 to 2016. Patients were stratified by the presence or absence of infection and the use or omission of prophylactic antibiotics. Study was powered at 85% to detect a difference in infection rate of 5%. Primary endpoint was the impact of prophylactic antibiotics on INF. Mantel-Haenszel χ and Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests were used to compare categorical and nonparametric variables. Significance greater than p = 0.2 was included in a logistic regression adjusted for center.

RESULTS

Seven hundred sixty-three patients with pTBI were identified over 11 years. 7% (n = 51) of patients developed an INF. Sixty-six percent of INF patients received prophylactic antibiotics. Sixty-two percent of all patients received one dose or greater of prophylactic antibiotics and 50% of patients received extended antibiotics. Degree of dural penetration did not appear to impact the incidence of INF (p = 0.8) nor did trajectory through the oropharynx (p = 0.18). Controlling for other variables, there was no statistically significant difference in INF with the use of prophylactic antibiotics (p = 0.5). Infection was higher in patients with intracerebral pressure monitors (4% vs. 12%; p = <0.001) and in patients with surgical intervention (10% vs. 3%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There is no reduction in INF with prophylactic antibiotics in pTBI. Surgical intervention and invasive intracerebral pressure monitoring appear to be risk factors for INF regardless of prophylactic use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, level IV.

Massive Transfusion: The Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT) Score

BACKGROUND

Massive transfusion (MT) is a lifesaving treatment for trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock, assessed by Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) Score based on mechanism of injury, systolic blood pressure (SBP), tachycardia, and FAST exam. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of ABC score by replacing hypotension and tachycardia; with Shock Index (SI) > 1.0 and including pelvic fractures.

METHODS

We performed a 2-year (2014-2015) analysis of all high-level trauma activations and excluded patients dead on arrival. The ABC score was calculated using the 4-point score [blunt (0)/penetrating trauma (1), HR ≥ 120 (1), SBP ≤ 90 mmHg (1), and FAST positive (1)]. The Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT) score also included 4 points, calculated by replacing HR and SBP with SI > 1.0 and including pelvic fracture. AUROC compared performances of the two scores.

RESULTS

A total of 380 patients were included. The overall MT was 27%. Patients receiving MT had higher median ABC scores [1.1 (0-2) vs. 1 (0-2), p = 0.15] and RABT scores [2 (1-3) vs. 1 (0-2), p < 0.001]. The RABT score had better discriminative power (AUROC = 0.828) compared to ABC score (AUROC = 0.617) for predicting the need for MT. Cutoff of RABT score ≥ 2 had a sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 77% for predicting need for MT compared to ABC score with 39% sensitivity and 72% specificity.

CONCLUSION

Replacement of hypotension and tachycardia with a SI > 1.0 and inclusion of pelvic fracture enhanced discrimination of ABC score for predicting the need for MT. The current ABC score would benefit from revision to more appropriately identify patients requiring MT.

Vena Cava Filters: A Synopsis of Complications and Related Topics

Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism constitute common preventable causes of morbidity and mortality. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) continues to increase. Standard anticoagulation therapy may reduce the risk of fatal PE by 75% and that of recurrent VTE by over 90%. For patients who are not candidates for anticoagulation, a vena cava filter (VCF) may be beneficial. Despite a good overall safety record, significant complications related to VCF are occasionally seen. This review discusses both procedural and non-procedural complications associated with VCF placement and use. We will also discuss VCF use in the settings of pregnancy, malignancy, and the clinical need for more than one filter.

Complications related to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a comprehensive clinical review

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is one of the most commonly performed endoscopic procedures. It provides the treating physician with both diagnostic and therapeutic options. The recent shift towards interventional uses of ERCP is largely due to the emergence of advanced imaging techniques, including magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and ultrasonography. With over 500,000 ERCP procedures performed yearly in the United States alone, it is important that all medical and surgical practitioners be well versed in indications, contraindications, potential complications, benefits, and alternatives to ERCP. The authors present an in-depth review of ERCP-related complications (pancreatitis, bleeding, perforation, etc) as well as special topics related to ERCP (periprocedural antibiotic use, performance of intraoperative ERCP, performance of ERCP during pregnancy, etc).

Vena cava filters: a synopsis of complications and related topics

Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism constitute common preventable causes of morbidity and mortality. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) continues to increase. Standard anticoagulation therapy may reduce the risk of fatal PE by 75% and that of recurrent VTE by over 90%. For patients who are not candidates for anticoagulation, a vena cava filter (VCF) may be beneficial. Despite a good overall safety record, significant complications related to VCF are occasionally seen. This review discusses both procedural and non-procedural complications associated with VCF placement and use. We will also discuss VCF use in the settings of pregnancy, malignancy, and the clinical need for more than one filter.