Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel: what is the risk in noncardiac surgery? A narrative review

Antithrombotic Therapy in Spinal Surgery Does Not Impact Patient Safety–A Single Center Cohort Study

Objective

Antithrombotic therapy is common in older patients to avoid thromboembolic events. Careful planning is required, particularly in the perioperative environment. There are no clearly date guidelines on the best timing for interrupting the use of anticoagulation in the case of spinal surgery. This study evaluates early per procedural clinical outcomes in patients whose antithrombotic therapy was interrupted for spinal surgery.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study. All patients who underwent dorsal instrumentation from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020 were included. In group A, vitamin K antagonists (VKA) were suspended for 5 days and direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) for 3 days. In group B, antiplatelet agents (APA) were paused for at least 7 days before surgery to prevent perioperative bleeding. Patients not taking anticoagulation medication were gathered into control group C. We analyzed demographic data, ASA status, blood loss, comorbidities, duration of surgery, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, complications, thromboembolism, and 30 day in-hospital mortality. Multivariate analyses from the three groups were further analyzed and conducted.

Results

A total of 217 patients were operated and included. Twenty-eight patients taking VKA/DOAC (group A), 37 patients using APA (group B), and 152 patients without anticoagulation (group C) underwent spinal surgery. Those using anticoagulants were significantly older and often with multimorbidity, but did not differ significantly in procedural bleeding, time of surgery, length of hospital stay, complication rate, thromboembolism, or 30 day in-hospital mortality (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Our data show that dorsal instrumentation safely took place in patients whose antithrombotic therapy was interrupted.

Post-extraction bleeding complications in patients on uninterrupted dual antiplatelet therapy-a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Dental surgeons consider patients on antiplatelet therapy (APT) to be at a risk for perioperative bleeding during dental extraction. This fear often prompts them to consider a temporary withdrawal of the medication for a few days before extraction. Such withdrawal can have serious consequences, especially in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to analyze if patients on uninterrupted DAPT undergoing dental extractions had an increased risk of bleeding complications when compared with patients on no antiplatelet therapy.

METHODS

This prospective study included 120 DAPT patients and an equal number of age- and gender-matched non-APT patients undergoing dental extractions. Immediate and delayed bleeding complications in both groups were recorded. Interventions required to control the post-extraction hemorrhage were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Duration of DAPT medication ranged from 6 months to 13 years. Post-percutaneous coronary intervention was the most common cause for DAPT. A vast majority of patients in both groups underwent extraction of one or two teeth. Patients on DAPT had a 7-fold increased risk of immediate bleeding complications when compared with control group. All bleeding episodes were controlled with local hemostatic measures. Transalveolar extractions and localized periodontitis had a significant relationship to bleeding complications.

CONCLUSION

This study observed an increase in the risk of prolonged bleeding in uninterrupted DAPT patients undergoing dental extractions. Bleeding episodes were amenable to local hemostatic measures with favorable outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Dental extractions in patients on uninterrupted DAPT can be done safely. Resorting to temporary withdrawal of DAPT due to a fear of excessive bleeding is unnecessary.

Safety of Continued Clopidogrel Use in the Preoperative Course of Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Our study aimed to estimate postoperative bleeding risk in older adults taking clopidogrel before gastrointestinal (GI) surgery, to aid surgeons in decisions regarding clopigogrel cessation.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Balancing risks of postoperative bleeding associated with continued clopidogrel use and those associated with cessation is difficult for GI surgeons.

METHODS

Using 100% Texas Medicare Claims Data from 2006 to 2011, we identified patients undergoing emergent GI surgery. We propensity score matched patients on clopidogrel before surgery to patients not on clopidogrel. Using conditional logistic regression, we compared risks of bleeding events at 1-month postdischarge between groups, adjusting for bleeding risk factors.

RESULTS

In total, 1240 patients undergoing emergent GI surgery while treated with clopidogrel were matched to emergency GI surgery patients not treated with clopidogrel. The only significant preoperative differences between groups were higher percent of clopidogrel-treated patients with congestive heart failure, cholecystectomy, and lower percent of clopidogrel-treated patients with colectomy. Mean age was 76.91 (±7.06) and 76.70 (±7.05) years (P = 0.47), and 63.84% and 59.41% of operations were cholecystectomy, in the clopidogrel and nonclopidogrel groups (P = 0.18). In multivariable analyses adjusting for Elixhauser index, hyperlipidemia, confounding drugs, and surgery type, odds ratio for bleeding within 30 days of discharge in those exposed to clopidogrel compared with those not exposed was 1.60 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.38), with raw rates of bleeding 6.85% and 4.84%.

CONCLUSIONS

Clopidogrel use in older adults through the preoperative period of GI surgery does not significantly increase bleeding events in the month after surgery.

Lumbar puncture in patients using anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents

The use of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents has largely increased. Diagnostic lumbar puncture in patients taking these drugs represents a challenge considering the opposing risks of bleeding and thrombotic complications. To date there are no controlled trials, specific guidelines, nor clear recommendations in this area. In the present review we make some recommendations about lumbar puncture in patients using these drugs. Our recommendations take into consideration the pharmacology of these drugs, the thrombotic risk according to the underlying disease, and the urgency in cerebrospinal fluid analysis. Evaluating such information and a rigorous monitoring of neurological symptoms after lumbar puncture are crucial to minimize the risk of hemorrhage associated neurological deficits. An individualized patient decision-making and an effective communication between the assistant physician and the responsible for conducting the lumbar puncture are essential to minimize potential risks.

Perioperative management of dual anti-platelet therapy

Dual anti-platelet therapy denotes a regimen of aspirin plus a P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor, clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor. Such therapy is a cornerstone of medical management following acute coronary syndromes and is imperative following percutaneous coronary interventions. While there is uncertainty about the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention, the new 2016 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines suggest that for patients with stable ischemic heart disease at least six months of such therapy following a drug eluting stent and one month following a bare metal stent should be implemented. In patients with acute coronary syndrome including non-ST elevation and ST elevation myocardial infarction it is recommended to extend dual antiplatelet therapy treatment to one year in both drug eluting stent and bare metal stent groups. There may be latitude for earlier discontinuation in appropriately selected patients; extended dual antiplatelet therapy beyond one year may be beneficial in others. Herein, we describe current guidelines and evidence supporting if and when dual antiplatelet therapy should be interrupted for surgery for patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention.

Evaluating Blood Loss and the Effect of Antiplatelet Treatment in Foot and Ankle Amputations

The interrelationship between diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease is well-documented, and, secondary to the latter, is the use of antiplatelet therapy. Although diabetes and the associated vascular manifestations are driving forces behind lower extremity amputations, few data are available on the risks of perioperative antiplatelet therapy with foot and ankle amputations. The goal of the present study was to address the surgical effect of continuing or discontinuing antiplatelet therapy before foot and/or ankle amputation. The following data were retrospectively collected: blood loss, pre- and postoperative hematocrit and hemoglobin, operative time, amputation type, age, diabetic status, antiplatelet treatment, and number of transfusions during the perioperative period. Perioperative antiplatelet therapy was defined as exposure to aspirin or clopidogrel within 3 days before surgery. To compare the outcomes between groups, the following factors were analyzed using bivariate analyses and then multivariate regression models: (1) the need for transfusions, (2) high blood loss (>20 mL), (3) volume of blood loss, and (4) operative time. The noninferiority of continued antiplatelet use was assessed in terms of operative time and blood loss, using a noninferiority margin of 10 minutes or 10 mL, respectively. Antiplatelet therapy was not a statistically significant risk factor for any of the studied outcomes on multivariate analysis. Equivalence testing revealed that continuing antiplatelet therapy is not inferior to discontinuing perioperative therapy in terms of blood loss and operative time. Multivariate analysis of the data suggested that antiplatelet therapy has no statistically significant impact on blood loss, transfusion rate, or operative time.

Continued Antiplatelet Therapy and Risk of Bleeding in Gastrointestinal Procedures: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Management of perioperative antiplatelet medications in gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is challenging. The risk of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding is associated with perioperative use of antiplatelet medication. However, cessation of these drugs may be unsafe for patients who are required to maintain antiplatelet use due to cardiovascular conditions. The objective of this systematic review was to compare the risk of intraoperative or postoperative bleeding among patients who had GI surgery while on continuous antiplatelet therapy (aspirin, clopidogrel, or dual therapy) with the risk among those not taking continuous antiplatelet medication.

STUDY DESIGN

We reviewed articles published between January 2000 and July 2015 from the Medline Ovid and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases. Studies involving any GI procedures were included if the articles met our inclusion criteria (listed in Methods). The following key words were used for the search: clopidogrel, Plavix, aspirin, antiplatelet, bleeding, hemorrhage, and digestive system surgical procedures. Quality of the studies was assessed, depending on their study design, using the Newcastle-Ottawa score or the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. Five showed that the risk of intraoperative bleeding or postoperative bleeding among patients who had GI surgery while on continuous antiplatelet therapy was higher compared that for those not on continuous therapy. The remaining 17 studies reported that there was no statistically significant difference in the risks of bleeding between the continuous antiplatelet therapy group and the group without continuous antiplatelet therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of bleeding associated with GI procedures in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy was not significantly higher than in patients with no antiplatelet or interrupted antiplatelet therapy.

Percutaneous native kidney biopsy in patients receiving antiplatelet agents- is it necessary to stop them routinely?

Percutaneous renal biopsy plays an important role in the investigational approach of the nephrologist. Though the technique and the safety of the procedure has improved over the last two decades it remains an invasive procedure and can be associated with bleeding complications. To minimize the risk of bleeding, it has been the practice of many centers and nephrologists to advise patients receiving antiplatelet agents to discontinue them 5-7 days before planned procedure. This advice is based on opinion and pre-established procedure or norms rather than sound evidence based guidelines. This article aims to be a critical appraisal of this unnecessary and sometimes not so safe practice of routine stoppage of antiplatelet agents prior to kidney biopsy.

Balancing the risk of complications in foot and ankle surgical patients taking antithrombotic medication

This review intends to provide guidance regarding perioperative management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet drug therapy as they relate to foot and ankle surgery. Venous and arterial thromboembolism are conditions in which the blood clots inappropriately, causing considerable morbidity and mortality. With an increase in awareness of thromboembolic risk factors and expansion of therapeutic options, more patients are routinely taking antithrombotic medication. When these patients require invasive procedures, a decision needs to be made if antithrombotic medication should be held perioperatively and if additional precautions are needed in the interim. Understanding the factors affecting the management of thromboembolism during the perioperative period can reduce the potential for complications.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, Level V: Expert opinion.