1
|
Douketis JD, Spyropoulos AC, Murad MH, Arcelus JI, Dager WE, Dunn AS, Fargo RA, Levy JH, Samama CM, Shah SH, Sherwood MW, Tafur AJ, Tang LV, Moores LK. Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Therapy: An American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline. Chest 2022; 162:e207-e243. [PMID: 35964704 DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.07.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 145] [Impact Index Per Article: 48.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2022] [Revised: 06/10/2022] [Accepted: 07/11/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline on the Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Therapy addresses 43 Patients-Interventions-Comparators-Outcomes (PICO) questions related to the perioperative management of patients who are receiving long-term oral anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy and require an elective surgery/procedure. This guideline is separated into four broad categories, encompassing the management of patients who are receiving: (1) a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), mainly warfarin; (2) if receiving a VKA, the use of perioperative heparin bridging, typically with a low-molecular-weight heparin; (3) a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC); and (4) an antiplatelet drug. METHODS Strong or conditional practice recommendations are generated based on high, moderate, low, and very low certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology for clinical practice guidelines. RESULTS A multidisciplinary panel generated 44 guideline recommendations for the perioperative management of VKAs, heparin bridging, DOACs, and antiplatelet drugs, of which two are strong recommendations: (1) against the use of heparin bridging in patients with atrial fibrillation; and (2) continuation of VKA therapy in patients having a pacemaker or internal cardiac defibrillator implantation. There are separate recommendations on the perioperative management of patients who are undergoing minor procedures, comprising dental, dermatologic, ophthalmologic, pacemaker/internal cardiac defibrillator implantation, and GI (endoscopic) procedures. CONCLUSIONS Substantial new evidence has emerged since the 2012 iteration of these guidelines, especially to inform best practices for the perioperative management of patients who are receiving a VKA and may require heparin bridging, for the perioperative management of patients who are receiving a DOAC, and for patients who are receiving one or more antiplatelet drugs. Despite this new knowledge, uncertainty remains as to best practices for the majority of perioperative management questions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James D Douketis
- Department of Medicine, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - Alex C Spyropoulos
- Department of Medicine, Northwell Health at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY; Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY; Institute of Health Systems Science at The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, NY
| | - M Hassan Murad
- Mayo Clinic Evidence-Based Practice Center, Rochester, MN
| | - Juan I Arcelus
- Department of Surgery, Facultad de Medicina, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
| | - William E Dager
- Department of Pharmacy, University of California-Davis, Sacramento, CA
| | - Andrew S Dunn
- Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mt. Sinai Health System, New York, NY
| | - Ramiz A Fargo
- Department of Internal Medicine, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA; Department of Internal Medicine, Riverside University Health System Medical Center, Moreno Valley, CA
| | - Jerrold H Levy
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Surgery (Cardiothoracic), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC
| | - C Marc Samama
- Department of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, GHU AP-HP, Centre-Université Paris-Cité-Cochin Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Sahrish H Shah
- Mayo Clinic Evidence-Based Practice Center, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Alfonso J Tafur
- Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL
| | - Liang V Tang
- Institute of Hematology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong, University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Lisa K Moores
- F. Edward Hébert School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Douketis JD, Syed S, Li N, Narouze S, Radwi M, Duncan J, Schulman S, Spyropoulos AC. A physician survey of perioperative neuraxial anesthesia management in patients on a direct oral anticoagulant. Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2021; 5:159-167. [PMID: 33537540 PMCID: PMC7845072 DOI: 10.1002/rth2.12430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2020] [Revised: 07/05/2020] [Accepted: 08/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The perioperative management of patients taking a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) who require a high-bleed-risk surgery and/or neuraxial anesthesia is uncertain. We surveyed clinician practices relating to DOAC interruption and related perioperative management in patients having high-bleed-risk surgery with neuraxial anesthesia, and assess the suitability of a randomized trial of different perioperative DOAC management strategies. METHODS We surveyed members of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, the Canadian Anesthesia Society and Thrombosis Canada. We developed four clinical scenarios involving DOAC-treated patients who required anticoagulant interruption for elective high-bleed-risk surgery. In three scenarios, patients were to receive neuraxial anesthesia, and in one scenario they were to receive general anesthesia. We also asked about the merit of a randomized trial to compare a 2-day versus longer (3- to 5-day) duration of DOAC interruption. RESULTS There were 399 survey respondents of whom 356 (89%) were anesthetists and 43 (11%) were medical specialists. The responses indicate uncertainty about the DOAC interruption interval for high-bleed-risk surgery and/or neuraxial anesthesia; anesthetists favor 3- to 5-day interruption whereas medical specialists favor 2-day interruption. Anesthetists were unwilling to proceed with neuraxial anesthesia in patients with a 2-day DOAC interruption interval, preferring to cancel the surgery or switch to general anesthesia. There is general agreement on the need for a randomized trial in this field to compare a 2-day and a 3- to 5-day DOAC interruption management strategy. CONCLUSIONS There is variability in practices relating to the perioperative management of DOAC-treated patients who require a high-bleed-risk surgery with neuraxial anesthesia; this variability relates to the duration of DOAC interruption in such patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Summer Syed
- Department of AnesthesiologyMcMaster UniversityHamiltonONCanada
| | - Na Li
- Department of MedicineMcMaster UniversityHamiltonONCanada
| | - Samer Narouze
- Center for Pain MedicineWestern Reserve HospitalCuyahoga FallsOHUSA
| | - Mansoor Radwi
- Department of HematologyFaculty of MedicineUniversity of JeddahJeddahSaudi Arabia
| | - Joanne Duncan
- Department of MedicineMcMaster UniversityHamiltonONCanada
| | - Sam Schulman
- Department of MedicineMcMaster UniversityHamiltonONCanada
- Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyI.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical UniversityMoscowRussia
| | - Alex C. Spyropoulos
- Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/NorthwellNorthwell Health at Lenox Hill HospitalNew YorkNYUSA
| |
Collapse
|