Key result
Uninterrupted OACs during CIED implantation are safe, while heparin bridging increases pocket haematomas without reducing thromboembolism.
Why the study?
Implanting CIEDs in patients on antithrombotic medications presents clinical dilemmas in balancing thromboembolic risk against bleeding risk.
Does uninterrupted oral anticoagulation improve safety by reducing pocket haematoma without increasing thromboembolic events compared to heparin bridging in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
Does uninterrupted oral anticoagulation improve safety by reducing pocket haematoma without increasing thromboembolic events compared to heparin bridging in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
Uninterrupted oral anticoagulation is safe and preferred over heparin bridging for patients undergoing CIED implantation to minimize pocket hematoma risk without increasing thromboembolic events.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports uninterrupted OAC over bridging in CIED implantation; leaves open need for RCTs before practice change.
Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are an established treatment option for arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death prevention, and heart failure. Approximately 1000 devices are implanted per million inhabitants in European countries each year. However, the main concern in patients with an indication for CIED implantation is frequently associated with comorbidities requiring antithrombotic medications. The invasive device implantation procedure represents a bleeding risk ranging from pocket hematoma to cardiac tamponade. On the other hand, temporary interruption of antithrombotic therapy increases the risk for thromboembolic events. Implanting CIEDs in patients on antithrombotic medications incites several clinical dilemmas of balancing thromboembolic risk against bleeding risk, as complications are associated with higher mortality rates in both aspects. The most common bleeding complication is pocket haematoma formation, which is associated with a prolonged hospital stay, higher cost, higher risk of pocket infection, and thus higher morbidity and mortality. Studies have shown that the heparin bridging strategy in patients on oral anticoagulants imposes a greater risk for pocket haematoma formation and no benefit in reducing thromboembolic events. Most procedures of CIED implantation can be performed safely with uninterrupted oral anticoagulants. Dual antiplatelet therapy increases the risk of pocket haematoma and should be avoided whenever possible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mežnar et al. (2023) conducted a review in Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. Uninterrupted oral anticoagulants vs. Heparin bridging was evaluated. Uninterrupted oral anticoagulants during CIED implantation are safe, whereas heparin bridging increases the risk of pocket haematoma without reducing thromboembolic events.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: