The use of antithrombotic medicines in patients who have a history of intracerebral haemorrhage is widely perceived as being contraindicated. However, many patients with intracerebral haemorrhage may suffer from conditions for which antithrombotic medicines are indicated. Such scenarios represent a therapeutic dilemma whereby treating infers an increased risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage, but not treating infers an increase of thrombotic complications. Despite the importance of this dilemma, there is very little guidance for prescribers. This perspective review considered previous systematic reviews that addressed this issue, together with recently published research findings from the Tayside Stroke Cohort. Systematic reviews of experimental and observational studies have concluded that there is a marked lack of data on which to judge the safety of oral anticoagulant agents following intracerebral haemorrhage. In addition, the limited data available regarding the use of antiplatelet medicines following intracerebral haemorrhage provide no evidence that they are harmful, and again further data are required. In the absence of such data, a decision analysis approach has been proposed. This considers the findings of other studies to infer the likely impact of using antithrombotic agents in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage. The success of this approach is contingent on the availability of reliable data that describe the rate of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage; however, published data on this varies widely. There are a number of factors that conspire against researchers addressing this issue. The current paucity of evidence to guide prescribers faced with this therapeutic dilemma seems likely to remain for some time.

OBJECTIVES:

Recent developments of new direct oral anticoagulants that target specific clotting factors necessitate understanding of coagulation biology. The objective of this tutorial is to offer dental professionals a review of coagulation mechanisms and the pharmacodynamics of the conventional and new oral anticoagulants. Also, we summarized the dental implications of the conventional and new anticoagulants.

METHOD:

We searched Medline using search terms "antithrombotic", "antihemostasis" or "anticoagulation" and combined them with the search results of "dental", "oral surgery" or "periodontal". We restricted the results to "human" and "English".

RESULTS:

The early coagulation cascade, the new cell-based coagulation model, the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of conventional antithrombotics, and new oral anticoagulants were reviewed. The new direct factor Xa inhibitors and the direct thrombin inhibitor (s), called direct oral anticoagulants (DOAs) have rapid onset of action, fast elimination on cessation, and fewer drug-drug or drug-food interactions than warfarin. However, the lack of antidotes raises concerns that some dental procedures may trigger serious hemorrhagic events. Additionally, careful perioperative withdrawal and resumption protocols for the DOAs are reviewed, because DOAs' blood levels are dependent on renal function. Also, various reversal strategies in the event of excessive bleedings are summarized. Perioperative management of dental patients taking new DOAs and conventional oral anticoagulants are also discussed. However, the perioperative strategies for DOAs are yet to be validated in randomized trials.

Este artículo no tiene resumen

A common clinical dilemma exists for optimal antithrombotic management of a patient requiring oral anticoagulation (such as venous thromboembolism) and continued secondary myocardial infarction prophylaxis. Often aspirin will be continued concomitantly with the indicated oral anticoagulation therapy; however, additional benefits and increased risks of this practice have not been established. A systematic literature review was conducted to determine the benefits and risks of antithrombotic treatment strategies. Five clinical trials met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated to answer this clinical question.

El ictus isquémico constituye un problema sanitario de primer orden debido a su alto riesgo de recurrencia. La búsqueda de estrategias eficaces y seguras para la prevención de eventos vasculares en los pacientes con un ictus isquémico debe ser una prioridad, con el objetivo de disminuir la mortalidad y discapacidad asociada con el mismo. Diversos estudios han analizado el tratamiento combinado con antitrombóticos para intentar mejorar la eficacia de estos fármacos en la prevención secundaria de eventos vasculares tras un primer ictus isquémico. En este trabajo se revisa el estado actual de la evidencia científica en cuanto a la terapia combinada con antitrombóticos en pacientes con un primer ictus isquémico...

BACKGROUND:

Patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET) are at high risk for both thrombosis and hemorrhage.

PURPOSE:

To evaluate the risks and benefits of antithrombotic therapy in adults with ET.

DATA SOURCES:

Multiple databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, through 4 March 2017.

STUDY SELECTION:

Randomized and observational studies of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy, published in any language and reporting thrombotic or hemorrhagic events.

DATA EXTRACTION:

Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and graded certainty of evidence.

DATA SYNTHESIS:

No relevant randomized trials were identified. Twenty-four observational studies (18 comparative and 6 single-group) involving 6153 patients followed for 31 711 patient-years were reviewed; most were deemed to have high risk of bias. Most patients receiving antiplatelet therapy (3613 of 4527 [80%]) received low-dose aspirin (50 to 150 mg/d); 914 (20%) received high-dose aspirin (300 to 600 mg/d), dipyridamole, or other agents. Overall, findings were inconsistent and imprecise. The reported incidence rates of thrombosis, any bleeding, and major bleeding without antiplatelet therapy ranged from 5 to 110 (median, 20), from 3 to 39 (median, 8), and from 2 to 53 (median, 6) cases per 1000 patient-years, respectively. The reported relative risks for thrombosis, any bleeding, and major bleeding with antiplatelet therapy compared with none ranged from 0.26 to 3.48 (median, 0.74), from 0.48 to 11.04 (median, 1.95), and from 0.48 to 5.17 (median, 1.30), respectively. Certainty of evidence was rated low or very low for all outcomes.

LIMITATION:

No randomized trials, no extractable data on anticoagulants, lack of uniform bleeding definitions, and systematic reporting of outcomes.

CONCLUSION:

Available evidence about the risk-benefit ratio of antiplatelet therapy in adults with ET is highly uncertain.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE:

Regional Medical Associates. (

PROSPERO:

CRD42015027051).

BACKGROUND:

Anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs (e.g., warfarin, clopidogrel and acetylsalicylic acid) are key therapeutic agents in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. However, drug-drug interactions may lead to a greatly increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding when these drugs are combined. We assessed whether antithrombotic drug combinations increased the risk of such bleeding in a general practice population.

METHODS:

We conducted a population-based, retrospective case-control study using records in the United Kingdom General Practice Research Database from 2000 through 2005. Cases were identified as patients over 18 years of age with a first-ever diagnosis of gastrointestinal bleeding. They were matched with controls by physician practice, patient age and index date (date of diagnosis of bleeding). All eligible patients had to have at least 3 years of follow-up data in the database. Drug exposure was considered to be any prescription issued in the 90 days before the index date.

RESULTS:

There were 4028 cases with a diagnosis of gastrointestinal bleeding and 40 171 matched controls. The prescribing of acetylsalicylic acid with either clopidogrel (adjusted rate ratio [RR] 3.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78-5.47) or warfarin (adjusted RR 6.48, 95% CI 4.25-9.87) was associated with a greater risk of gastrointestinal bleeding than that observed with each drug alone. The same was true when a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug was combined with either clopidogrel (adjusted RR 2.93, 95% CI 1.74-4.93) or warfarin (RR 4.60, 95% CI 2.77-7.64).

INTERPRETATION:

Drug combinations involving antiplatelets and anticoagulants are associated with a high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding beyond that associated with each drug used alone. Physicians should be aware of these risks to better assess their patients' therapeutic risk-benefit profiles.

To evaluate the role of antithrombotic therapy, on preserving graft patency, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials involving aspirin (ASA), dipyridamole (D), anticoagulants (AC) and placebo or nontreatment controls (P). Manual literature searches were performed supplemented by computerized MEDLINE listings complete to July 1991. Saphenous vein graft occlusion was determined by angiography (patients with > or = 1 distal anastomotic occlusion). The trial data were aggregated with the methods of Mantel and Haenszel. The results are reported as odds ratios (OR) +/- 95% confidence intervals (CI). Seventeen trials were evaluated. Aspirin strongly influenced graft occlusion [ASA +/- D vs P: OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.51, 0.71, P < 0.0001], but dipyridamole provided no additional benefit [ASA+D vs

ASA:

OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72, 1.24, P = 0.71]. Anticoagulants reduced graft occlusion [AC vs P: OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33, 0.93, P = 0.025] and the results were similar to that achieved with aspirin [ASA vs AC.: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.62, 1.44, P = 0.87]. The combination of aspirin and anticoagulants was superior to anticoagulants alone in two limited trials [ASA+AC vs AC.: OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33, 0.88, P = 0.01]. A low (100 mg) to medium (325 mg) daily aspirin dosage was more effective than a high dose (975 mg). Early postoperative treatment (< or = 6 h) strongly influenced graft occlusion while preoperative administration provided no additional benefit. No mortality advantage was identified for any antithrombotic therapy. Aspirin or anticoagulants enhance saphenous vein graft patency following aortocoronary bypass surgery, and a combination thereof deserves further investigation in a trial large enough to detect the effects of these treatments with respect to clinical events.

Objetivo: Abordar los efectos adversos relacionados con el uso indiscriminado de antitrombóticos en el tratamiento profiláctico de la puérpera. Método: Revisión integrativa de la literatura realizada entre febrero y abril de 2022 en las siguientes bases de datos: Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud (LILACS), Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), SciVerse Scopus (SCOPUS) y Medical Literature Analysis and Retrievel System Online (MEDLINE/PubMed). Se seleccionaron diez artículos para esta revisión, publicados entre 2012 y abril de 2022 (10 años). Resultados: Los resultados muestran que la minimización de los eventos tromboembólicos en el puerperio es fundamental para el seguimiento desde el embarazo, de esta forma se identificarán tempranamente los riesgos y así se podrán tomar las medidas preventivas oportunas efectivas en la reducción de las consecuencias manifestadas por la enfermedad. Conclusión: Se evidencia que no existe un procedimiento específico con alto nivel de evidencia científica cuando se trata de involucramiento del paciente sin riesgo inminente, debido a la escasez de estudios disponibles sobre el tema.

BACKGROUND:

This guideline addresses the management of patients who are receiving anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy and require an elective surgery or procedure.

METHODS:

The methods herein follow those discussed in the Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines. Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines article of this supplement.

RESULTS:

In patients requiring vitamin K antagonist (VKA) interruption before surgery, we recommend stopping VKAs 5 days before surgery instead of a shorter time before surgery (Grade 1B). In patients with a mechanical heart valve, atrial fibrillation, or VTE at high risk for thromboembolism, we suggest bridging anticoagulation instead of no bridging during VKA interruption (Grade 2C); in patients at low risk, we suggest no bridging instead of bridging (Grade 2C). In patients who require a dental procedure, we suggest continuing VKAs with an oral prohemostatic agent or stopping VKAs 2 to 3 days before the procedure instead of alternative strategies (Grade 2C). In moderate- to high-risk patients who are receiving acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and require noncardiac surgery, we suggest continuing ASA around the time of surgery instead of stopping ASA 7 to 10 days before surgery (Grade 2C). In patients with a coronary stent who require surgery, we recommend deferring surgery > 6 weeks after bare-metal stent placement and > 6 months after drug-eluting stent placement instead of undertaking surgery within these time periods (Grade 1C); in patients requiring surgery within 6 weeks of bare-metal stent placement or within 6 months of drug-eluting stent placement, we suggest continuing antiplatelet therapy perioperatively instead of stopping therapy 7 to 10 days before surgery (Grade 2C).

CONCLUSIONS:

Perioperative antithrombotic management is based on risk assessment for thromboembolism and bleeding, and recommended approaches aim to simplify patient management and minimize adverse clinical outcomes.