Key result
New-generation anticoagulants were associated with a 26% rate of nose bleeding compared to 28% with conventional treatments, but controlling the bleeding was more difficult.
Why the study?
Do new-generation oral anticoagulants alter the incidence or severity of nose bleeding compared to conventional antithrombotic treatments in cardiology patients?
Observational (n=340)
Do new-generation oral anticoagulants alter the incidence or severity of nose bleeding compared to conventional antithrombotic treatments in cardiology patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 26% vs 28%
While new-generation anticoagulants may have a slightly lower overall rate of epistaxis compared to conventional antithrombotics, the bleeding episodes that do occur may be more difficult to control and require surgical intervention.
Epistaxis may prove harder to control with new anticoagulants despite similar rates; this Level 3 finding leaves open any meaningful difference from conventional therapy.
Nose bleeding is a common situation seen in otorhinolaryngological practices. One of the greatest risk factors in nose bleeding is the use of anticoagulant medicine. With the medicine developed in recent years, the risk of nose bleeding due to the frequent use of anticoagulant and antiagregant is gradually increasing.The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of especially new-generation anticoagulants on nose bleeding. In addition, the use and complications of new-generation anticoagulants and antiagregants have been compiled in light of information obtained from the literature.Three hundred forty patients whose follow-up is conducted by the cardiology department and who use oral antithrombocytic medicine have been included in the study. It has been determined that 15% of these patients use new-generation oral anticoagulants (Rivaroksaban, apiksaban, dabigatran, danaparoid) and the other patients are treated with conventional antithrombocytic treatment (Aspirin, Warfarin, Enoksaparin sodium). The rate of nose bleeding in patients who use classical anticoagulants has been observed to be 28%. In 30 of these patients who had nose bleeding, while cauterization and buffering by otorhinolaryngology specialists, major intervention has not been necessary for any of the patients. While bleeding has been observed in 26% of the patients who use new-generation anticoagulants, bleeding that required operational intervention has taken place in 2 patients. Bleedings have been stopped surgically through a large number of cauterization and buffering.While the new-generation anticoagulants cause lower rate of bleeding, it has been observed that controlling these bleedings is more difficult.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gökdoğan et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Patients using oral antithrombocytic medicine (n=340). New-generation oral anticoagulants (Rivaroxaban, apixaban, dabigatran, danaparoid) vs. Conventional antithrombocytic treatment (Aspirin, Warfarin, Enoxaparin sodium) was evaluated on Rate of nose bleeding. New-generation anticoagulants were associated with a 26% rate of nose bleeding compared to 28% with conventional treatments, but controlling the bleeding was more difficult.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: