Heparin-bridging therapy and risk of post-polypectomy bleeding: Meta-analysis of data reported by Japanese colonoscopists

A systematic evaluation of methodological and reporting quality of meta-analysis published in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of published meta-analyses (MAs) in four major gastrointestinal endoscopic journals, and identify the predicted factors for high quality.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed to identify MAs from 1, January, 2016 to 31, December, 2020 in four major gastrointestinal endoscopic journals (including Digestive Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Surgical Endoscopy, and Endoscopy). We collected the characteristics of MAs after filtering unqualified articles, and assessed methodological and reporting qualities for eligible articles by AMSTAR tool and PRISMA checklist, respectively. Logistic regression was used for identifying predictive factors for high quality.

RESULTS

A total of 289 MAs were identified after screening by predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The scores (mean ± SD) of AMSTAR and PRISMA were 7.73 ± 1.11 and 22.90 ± 1.85, respectively. In PRISMA checklist, some items had less than 50% complete adherence, including item 2 (structured summary), items 5 (protocol and registration), items 12 and 19 (risk of bias in studies), item 27 (funding support). Item 1 (a priori design), item 4 (gray literature research), item 5 (list of included and excluded) were inferior to 50% adherence in AMSTAR tool. We found the predictive factors for high quality through logistic regression analysis: a priori design and funding support were associated with methodological quality. Protocol and registration influenced the methodological and reporting quality closely.

CONCLUSION

In general, qualities on the methodology and the reporting of MAs published in the gastrointestinal endoscopic journals are good, but both of which still potentially need further improvement.

Bleeding After Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Focused on Management of Xa Inhibitors

Purpose

The use of direct oral Xa inhibitors (DXaIs) to prevent venothrombotic events is increasing. However, gastrointestinal bleeding, including that related to endoscopic resection, is a concern. In this study, we evaluated bleeding and coagulation times during the perioperative period of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).

Materials and Methods

Patients who consecutively underwent gastric ESD from August 2016 to December 2018 were analyzed. Bleeding rates were compared among the 3 groups (antiplatelet, DXaIs, and control). DXaI administration was discontinued on the day of the procedure. Prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time, and the ratio of inhibited thrombin generation (RITG), which was based on dilute PT, were determined before and after ESD.

Results

During the study period, 265 gastric ESDs were performed in 239 patients, where 23 and 50 patients received DXaIs and antiplatelets, respectively. Delayed bleeding occurred in 17 patients (7.4%) and 21 lesions (7.1%). The bleeding rate in the DXaI group was significantly higher than that in the other groups (30.4%, P<0.01), and the adjusted odds ratio of bleeding was 5.7 (95% confidence interval, 1.4–23.7; P=0.016). In patients using DXaIs, there was a significant (P=0.046) difference in the median RITG between bleeding cases (18.6%) and non-bleeding cases (3.8%).

Conclusions

A one-day cessation of DXaIs was related to a high incidence of bleeding after gastric ESD, and monitoring of residual coagulation activity at trough levels might enable the predicted risk of delayed bleeding in patients using DXaIs.

Bleeding after endoscopic resection between direct oral anticoagulants or warfarin: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Oral anticoagulants are risk factors for post-endoscopic resection bleeding. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis for the risks of post-procedural bleeding (PPB) for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin following endoscopic resection.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score was used to assess the quality of the studies, the pooled odds ratio (OR) to present PPB results, and the funnel plots to assess publication bias. The Higgins I² statistic was employed to determine the variation across studies due to heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We reviewed 30 articles. PPB occurred in 586 patients on DOACs and 1782 on warfarin. The patients on DOACs had a significantly lower overall risk of PPB compared with those on warfarin (OR, 0.867, 95% confidence interval, 0.771-0.975; P = 0.017, I²  = 1.6%). Cumulative meta-analysis showed that the PPB rate of DOACs has the trend to be lower than that of warfarin with publication year and sample size. For the subgroup of endoscopic submucosal dissection, the PPB of DOACs was significantly lower than that of warfarin (OR, 0.786; 95% confidence interval, 0.633-0.976; P = 0.029, I²  = 0%). No significant difference was observed between DOACs and warfarin for anticoagulant strategies, endoscopic procedures, and lesion location.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with warfarin, DOACs have the possibility to significantly decrease the risk of PPB following endoscopic resection, especially for endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Postpolypectomy bleeding of colorectal polyps in patients with continuous warfarin and short-term interruption of direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB) is the most common adverse event after colorectal polypectomy. Use of anticoagulants is an important risk factor for PPB. This study aimed to evaluate PPB in patients receiving treatment with warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).

METHODS

Between August 2017 and July 2019, 5449 patients with 12,601 polyps who underwent endoscopic snare resection of colorectal polyps were enrolled. Endoscopic snare resection was performed in patients receiving continuous warfarin (C-warfarin) and in patients who experienced 1 day cessation of (O-) of DOACs in accordance with the Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines.

RESULTS

The PPB rate in the group receiving anticoagulants was statistically higher than that in the group without anticoagulants (8.5% [33/387] vs 1.2% [63/5,062], respectively; P < .001). By multivariate logistic regression analysis, male gender (odds ratio [OR], 2.17; P = .007), warfarin (OR, 4.64; P < .001), DOACs (OR, 6.59; P < .001), and multipolyp removal (OR, 1.77; P = .007) were significant risk factors for PPB. PPB was observed in 9 and 21 patients in the C-warfarin and O-DOACs groups, respectively: C-warfarin (8.0% [9/113]), O-dabigatran (6.1% [2/33]), O-rivaroxaban (14.8% [9/61]), O-apixaban (9.8% [9/92]), and O-edoxaban (1.8% [1/56]). The PPB rate with the O-edoxaban group was significantly lower than that with the O-rivaroxaban group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of anticoagulant therapy was an independent risk factor for PPB. The rates of PPB in patients receiving C-warfarin and O-DOACs were also higher than those in patients not receiving anticoagulants. Edoxaban may be safe through short-term withdrawal in patients undergoing endoscopic snare resection of colorectal polyps.

Effect of anticoagulants on the risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Background and study aims  In patients receiving antithrombotic therapy, the risks of delayed bleeding after endoscopic procedures for gastrointestinal neoplasms become a major problem. Few reports have shown the effects of delayed bleeding in patients taking anticoagulants after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This study aimed to evaluate the delayed bleeding events after colorectal ESD in patients receiving anticoagulant therapy. Patients and methods  We retrospectively analyzed 87 patients taking anticoagulants who underwent colorectal ESD from April 2012 to December 2017 at 13 Japanese institutions participating in the Osaka Gut Forum. Among these patients, warfarin users were managed with heparin bridge therapy (HBT), continued use of warfarin, a temporary switch to direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC), or withdrawal of warfarin, and DOAC users were managed with DOAC discontinuation with or without HBT. We investigated the occurrence rate of delayed bleeding and compared the rates between warfarin and DOAC users. Results  The delayed bleeding rate was 17.2 % among all patients. The delayed bleeding rate was higher in DOAC users than in warfarin users (23.3 % vs. 11.4 %, P  = 0.14), although no statistically significant difference was observed. In DOAC users, the delayed bleeding rates for dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban users appeared similar (30 %, 18.2 %, 22.2 %, and 25 %, respectively). The onset of delayed bleeding in both warfarin and DOAC users was late, averaging 6.9 and 9.4 days, respectively. Conclusions  Among patients taking anticoagulants, the risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal ESD was relatively high and the onset of delayed bleeding was late.

Clinical impact of the perioperative management of oral anticoagulants in bleeding after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection

BACKGROUND

Heparin bridging therapy (HBT) is indeed related to a high frequency of bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). In this study, our aim was to investigate clinical impact of management of oral anticoagulants without HBT in bleeding after colonic EMR.

METHODS

From data for patients who underwent consecutive colonic EMR, the relationships of patient factors and procedural factors with the risk of bleeding were analysed. Our management of antithrombotic agents was based on the shortest cessation as follows: the administration of warfarin was generally continued within the therapeutic range, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were not administered on the day of the procedure. We calculated bleeding risks after EMR in patients who used antithrombotic agents and evaluated whether perioperative management of anticoagulants without HBT was beneficial for bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 1734 polyps in 825 EMRs were analysed. Bleeding occurred in 4.0% of the patients and 1.9% of the polyps. The odds ratios for bleeding using multivariate logistic regression analysis were 3.67 in patients who used anticoagulants and 4.95 in patients who used both anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents. In patients with one-day skip of DOACs, bleeding occurred in 6.5% of the polyps, and there were no significant differences in bleeding risk between HBT and continuous warfarin or one-day skip DOACs.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of oral anticoagulants was related to bleeding after colonic EMR, and perioperative management of oral anticoagulants based on the shortest cessation without HBT would be clinically acceptable.

Post-polypectomy bleeding in hot-snare polypectomy of colonic polyps under continued warfarin or short interruption of direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Newly published guidelines of the Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES) suggest to consider endoscopic procedures with high risk of bleeding without stopping warfarin and with stopping direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) only on the day of the procedure. In this study, we aimed to test the validity of these recommendations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 344 patients with anticoagulant therapy who underwent hot-snare polypectomy between January 2012 and October 2018. Patients (n = 132) with interruption of anticoagulants (3-7 days for warfarin and 2-3 days for DOACs before the procedure) and without heparin-bridging were excluded. Among the remaining 212 patients, the incidence of post-polypectomy bleeding was compared between the following 2 patient groups: patients who had interruption of anticoagulants with heparin-bridging (HB group, n = 139) and patients treated according to the new JGES guideline (FG group, n = 73).

RESULTS

The rate of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in FG group (9.6%) was not significantly different from that in HB group (12.9%, p = 0.5). In subgroup analysis, the incidence of bleeding in patients with warfarin (12.2%) and with DOAC (6.3%) in FG group was not significantly different from corresponding figures in HB group (14.2%, 0%). In multivariate analysis, number of resected polyps was associated with PPB, but the administration of anticoagulants according to the new guidelines was not a significant risk factor for PPB (p = .98).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study affirms the recommendations of JGES for the management of anticoagulants in patients who undergo colonic polypectomy regarding post-polypectomy bleeding.

Current strategies for malignant pedunculated colorectal polyps

Despite significant advances in imaging techniques, the incidence of colorectal cancer has been increasing in recent years, with many cases still being diagnosed in advanced stages. Early detection and accurate staging remain the main factors that lead to a decrease in the cost and invasiveness of the curative techniques, significantly improving the outcome. However, the diagnosis of pedunculated early colorectal malignancy remains a current challenge. Data on the management of pedunculated cancer precursors, apart from data on nonpolypoid lesions, are still limited. An adequate technique for complete resection, which provides the best long-term outcome, is mandatory for curative intent. In this context, a discussion regarding the diagnosis of malignancy of pedunculated polyps, separate from non-pedunculated variants, is necessary. The purpose of this review is to provide a critical review of the most recent literature reporting the different features of malignant pedunculated colorectal polyps, including diagnosis and management strategies.

Safety of Cold Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps in Patients on Antithrombotic Medication

BACKGROUND

The cold polypectomy (CP) technique has been increasingly used in recent years. However, there have been few studies about post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in patients who underwent CP and who were on antithrombotic drugs. The objective of this study was to determine the safety of CP in patients on antithrombotic medication.

METHODS

The subjects were patients who underwent CP in our hospital between April 2014 and March 2016. PPB rates were examined in relation to the use of antithrombotic medication.

RESULTS

CP was performed to remove 2,466 polyps in 1,003 patients. There were 549 polyps (22.3%) in186 patients in the antithrombotic group and 1,917 polyps (77.7%) in 817 patients in the non-antithrombotic group. PPB occurred in 0.55% (3/549) of patients in the antithrombotic group and in 0.10% (2/1,917) of patients in the non-antithrombotic group, showing no significant difference (p = 0.07). Patients in the antithrombotic group in whom PPB occurred included 1 aspirin user with 1 polyp and 1 aspirin plus clopidogrel user with 2 polyps. No PPB occurred in patients on other antithrombotic agents or receiving heparin bridging. There was no significant difference between PPB rates in patients with small polyps (6-9 mm) in the antithrombotic and non-antithrombotic groups, but there was a significant difference between PPB rates in the 2 groups for patients with diminutive group (1-5 mm).

CONCLUSION

CP is a safe procedure even in patients on antithrombotic medication.

Post-polypectomy bleeding and thromboembolism risks associated with warfarin vs direct oral anticoagulants

AIM

To verify the validity of the endoscopy guidelines for patients taking warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC).

METHODS

We collected data from 218 patients receiving oral anticoagulants (73 DOAC users, 145 warfarin users) and 218 patients not receiving any antithrombotics (age- and sex-matched controls) who underwent polypectomy. (1) We evaluated post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) risk in patients receiving warfarin or DOAC compared with controls; (2) we assessed the risks of PPB and thromboembolism between three AC management methods: Discontinuing AC with heparin bridge (HPB) (endoscopy guideline recommendation), continuing AC, and discontinuing AC without HPB.

RESULTS

PPB rate was significantly higher in warfarin users and DOAC users compared with controls (13.7% and 13.7% vs 0.9%, P < 0.001), but was not significantly different between rivaroxaban (13.2%), dabigatran (11.1%), and apixaban (13.3%) users. Two thromboembolic events occurred in warfarin users, but none in DOAC users. Compared with the continuing anticoagulant group, the discontinuing anticoagulant with HPB group (guideline recommendation) had a higher PPB rate (10.8% vs 19.6%, P = 0.087). These findings were significantly evident in warfarin but not DOAC users. One thrombotic event occurred in the discontinuing anticoagulant with HPB group and the discontinuing anticoagulant without HPB group; none occurred in the continuing anticoagulant group.

CONCLUSION

PPB risk was similar between patients taking warfarin and DOAC. Thromboembolism was observed in warfarin users only. The guideline recommendations for HPB should be re-considered.