Management of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents in elective endoscopy: weighing the risks and benefits

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients on anticoagulant therapy and antiplatelet agents

Periprocedural management of antithrombotics for gastrointestinal endoscopy is a common clinical issue, given the widespread use of these drugs for primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention. For diagnostic procedures, with or without biopsy, no adjustments in antithrombotics are usually needed. For operative procedures, balancing the risk of periprocedural hemorrhage with the continuation of antithrombotics against the chance of recurrent thromboembolic events with their discontinuation may be challenging. Oral anticoagulants need to be temporarily withheld, and consideration must be given to whether a periendoscopic "bridge" therapy, typically a low-molecular-weight heparin, should be used in order to minimize the risk of thromboembolic events. Although some emerging evidence has shown that patients receiving heparin bridging appear to be at increased risk of overall and major bleeding and at similar risk of thromboembolic events compared to controls, bridging therapy is still recommended for patients on vitamin K antagonists who are at high thrombotic risk. Conversely, bridging therapy is usually not needed for patients taking new oral agents, which are characterized by shorter half-lives, and a rapid offset and onset of action. Management of antiplatelet therapy requires special care in patients on secondary prevention, especially those with coronary stents. This review is intended to summarize the recommendations of updated International Guidelines designed to help the decision-making process in such an intricate field.

Percutaneous tracheostomy in patients on anticoagulants

Aims:

To determine if percutaneous tracheostomy is safe in critically ill patients treated with anticoagulant therapies.

Settings and Design:

Single-center retrospective study including all the patients who underwent percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) placement over a 1-year period in a 14-bed, cardiothoracic and vascular Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

Materials and Methods:

Patients demographics and characteristics, anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies, coagulation profile, performed technique and use of bronchoscopic guidance were retrieved.

Results:

Thirty-six patients (2.7% of the overall ICU population) underwent PDT over the study period. Twenty-six (72%) patients were on anticoagulation therapy, 1 patient was on antiplatelet therapy and 2 further patients received prophylactic doses of low molecular weight heparin. Only 4 patients had normal coagulation profile and were not receiving anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapies. Overall, bleeding of any severity complicated 19% of PDT. No procedure-related deaths occurred.

Conclusions:

PDT was proved to be safe even in critically ill-patients treated with anticoagulant therapies. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings.

[Digestive system endoscopy in the elderly and in patients with severe comorbidities]

Besides the technical equipment, the endoscopic team's theoretical and practical skills, the success of endoscopic intervention is influenced by the patient's general condition. Advanced age, severe co-morbidities may increase the risk, especially in case of operative endoscopy. The decision is more complicated when alarm symptoms urge the examination. The endoscopic examination of digestive system, biliary track and pancreas in advanced age can safely be performed as alternatives of surgical intervention. It is important to know the exact stage of cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases, besides, in case of stroke the patient's cooperation is very important. In everyday practice the most common problems are the endoscopic examination of the patient in oral anticoagulant and/or thrombocyte aggregation inhibition therapy and the question of suspending, modifying or restarting the therapy. Examining the patients with implanted electronic device as well as antibiotic prophylaxis in expanding range of indications are special issues. The gastroenterologist makes the decision based on the knowledge of the endoscopic intervention, the patient's risk classification, the indications, the contradictions and the alternative diagnostic possibilities. This review attempts to give an overview with some practical aspects.

Multi-center survey regarding the management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy for endoscopic procedures in Japan

BACKGROUND

A guideline on the management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy for endoscopic procedures has been established from Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society in 2005. However, it is unknown whether consensus on the management of these conditions is obtained among endoscopists in daily practice owing to the guideline.

METHODS

To study the current practice on the management, survey questionnaires were sent to 13 representative endoscopists of 13 middle or high-volume hospitals in the Tokyo area.

RESULTS

Responses were obtained from all 13 endoscopists. The results showed that only five (38%) and six (46%) hospitals had their own standard protocols regarding the management for endoscopic biopsy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), respectively. There was a wide variation among endoscopists in terms of discontinuation of each agent. When the patients had a major risk of thromboembolism due to discontinuation of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents, seven (54%) and five (38%) endoscopists, respectively, never took a biopsy. Similar numbers of endoscopists never carried out EMR. During discontinuation of anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents for biopsy and EMR, three (23%) and three (23%) endoscopists, respectively, experienced patients with thromboembolic events.

CONCLUSIONS

There is still a wide variation and confusion among endoscopists after establishment of our national guideline. A robust national guideline with clearer description based on the scientific evidence is needed.