首页> 外文期刊>PACE: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology >Perioperative anticoagulation management in patients on chronic oral anticoagulant therapy undergoing cardiac devices implantation: a meta-analysis.
【24h】

Perioperative anticoagulation management in patients on chronic oral anticoagulant therapy undergoing cardiac devices implantation: a meta-analysis.

机译:接受心脏装置植入的慢性口服抗凝治疗患者的围手术期抗凝治疗:一项荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The perioperative anticoagulation strategy during cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation is highly variable without consensus among implanting physicians. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to identify clinical trials in patients on chronic oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy undergoing CIEDs implantation. Bleeding and thromboembolic events were compared among heparin bridging, continued OAC, and interrupted OAC groups. Data were expressed as relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random effects model. According to the inclusion criteria, totally 14 studies involving 3,744 patients were identified and included in the study. The heparin bridging group showed a significantly higher risk of bleeding events (relative risk [RR] 3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.02-4.76, P < 0.00001), especially pocket hematoma (RR 3.58, 95% CI, 2.17-5.91, P < 0.00001), but no significantly lower incidence of thromboembolism (RR 1.16, 95% CI, 0.36-3.67, P = 0.81) compared with OAC continuation group. Meanwhile, both unfractionated heparin-bridged and low-molecular-weight heparin-bridged subgroup exhibited a higher risk of bleeding. There was no significant difference between OAC continuation and OAC interruption group in bleeding (RR 0.90, 95% CI, 0.65-1.24, P = 0.52) and thromboembolic (RR 0.57, 95% CI, 0.16-2.01, P = 0.38) complications. The OAC interruption group had an obviously lower incidence of bleeding in comparison with the heparin bridging group and no statistical significance was observed in thrombus occurrence. Implantation of CIEDs with continuous OAC therapy may offer the best option by combining the lower risk of bleeding with rare thromboembolism compared with heparin bridging and OAC interruption therapy.
机译:心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)植入期间的围手术期抗凝策略变化很大,而植入医师之间没有共识。在MEDLINE,EMBASE和Cochrane库中进行了系统的文献检索,以鉴定接受CIED植入的慢性口服抗凝(OAC)治疗患者的临床试验。比较肝素桥接,持续OAC和中断OAC组之间的出血和血栓栓塞事件。使用随机效应模型将数据表示为相对风险(RRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。根据纳入标准,总共鉴定了14项研究,涉及3744例患者,并将其纳入研究。肝素桥接组显示出血事件的风险显着更高(相对风险[RR] 3.10,95%置信区间[CI],2.02-4.76,P <0.00001),尤其是袋状血肿(RR 3.58,95%CI,2.17-与OAC持续治疗组相比,血栓栓塞的发生率(RR 1.16,95%CI,0.36-3.67,P = 0.81)显着降低(5.91,P <0.00001)。同时,普通肝素桥联和低分子量肝素桥联亚组都有较高的出血风险。 OAC持续和OAC中断组在出血(RR 0.90,95%CI,0.65-1.24,P = 0.52)和血栓栓塞(RR 0.57,95%CI,0.16-2.01,P = 0.38)并发症之间无显着差异。与肝素桥接组相比,OAC中断组的出血发生率明显更低,并且在血栓发生方面没有统计学意义。与肝素桥接和OAC中断治疗相比,连续OAC治疗植入CIEDs可能是最佳选择,将出血风险较低和罕见的血栓栓塞结合起来。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号