Key result
Continuation of antiplatelet therapy during abdominal laparoscopic surgery resulted in 0% bleeding and thromboembolic complications, with no significant difference versus interruption or no APT.
Why the study?
Does antiplatelet therapy affect bleeding and thromboembolic complications in patients receiving abdominal laparoscopic surgery?
Cohort (n=1,075)
No
Does antiplatelet therapy affect bleeding and thromboembolic complications in patients receiving abdominal laparoscopic surgery?
Abdominal laparoscopic surgery can be safely performed without interrupting single antiplatelet therapy in patients with high thromboembolic risk, as it does not significantly increase bleeding complications.
May support uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy in high-risk laparoscopic cases; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: The effect of antiplatelet therapy (APT) on surgical blood loss and perioperative complications in patients receiving abdominal laparoscopic surgery still remains unclear. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1,075 consecutive patients undergoing abdominal laparoscopic surgery between 2005 and 2011 were reviewed. Our perioperative management protocol consisted of interruption of APT 1 week before surgery and early postoperative reinstitution in low thromboembolic risk patients (n = 160, iAPT group). Preoperative APT was maintained in patients with high thromboembolic risk or emergent situation (n = 52, cAPT group). Perioperative and outcomes variables of cAPT and iAPT groups, including bleeding and thromboembolic complications, were compared with those of patients without APT (non-APT group, n = 863). RESULTS: In this cohort, 715 basic and 360 advanced laparoscopic operations were included. No patient suffering excessive intraoperative bleeding due to continuation of APT was observed. There were 10 postoperative bleeding complications (0.9%) and 3 thromboembolic events (0.3%), but the surgery was free of both complications in the cAPT group. No significant differences were found between the groups in operative blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and the occurrence of bleeding and thromboembolic complications. Multivariable analyses showed that multiple antiplatelet agents (p = 0.015) and intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.046) were significant prognostic factors for postoperative bleeding complications. Increased thromboembolic complications were independently associated with high New York Heart Association class (p = 0.019) and history of cerebral infarction (p = 0.048), but not associated with APT use. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal laparoscopic operations were successfully performed without any increase in severe complications in patients with APT compared with the non-APT group under our rigorous perioperative assessment and management. Maintenance of single APT should be considered in patients with high thromboembolic risk, even when an abdominal laparoscopic approach is considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fujikawa et al. (2013) conducted a cohort in Abdominal laparoscopic surgery (n=1,075). Continuation of antiplatelet therapy (cAPT) vs. Interruption of antiplatelet therapy (iAPT) or no antiplatelet therapy was evaluated on Operative blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and bleeding or thromboembolic complications. Continuation of antiplatelet therapy during abdominal laparoscopic surgery resulted in 0% bleeding and thromboembolic complications, with no significant difference versus interruption or no APT.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: