Key result
Antithrombotic management in ventricular assist device patients currently relies on center-specific protocols without strong experimental evidence, highlighting the need for standardized clinical trials.
Current antithrombotic strategies for VAD patients lack strong evidence, highlighting the need for large, standardized clinical trials to optimize the balance between bleeding and thrombosis.
Center-specific VAD antithrombotic protocols persist without evidence; leaves open standardization via dedicated trials to balance bleeding and thrombosis.
Platelets play a key role in the pathogenesis of ventricular assist device (VAD) thrombosis; therefore, antiplatelet drugs are essential, both in the acute phase and in the long-term follow-up in VAD management. Aspirin is the most used agent and still remains the first-choice drug for lifelong administration after VAD implantation. Anticoagulant drugs are usually recommended, but with a wide range of efficacy targets. Dual antiplatelet therapy, targeting more than one pathway of platelet activation, has been used for patients developing a thrombotic event, despite an increased risk of bleeding complications. Although different strategies have been attempted, bleeding and thrombotic events remain frequent and there are no uniform strategies adopted for pharmacological management in the short and mid- or long-term follow up. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the evidence from randomized clinical trials and observational studies with a focus on the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying bleeding and thrombosis in VAD patients and the best antithrombotic regimens available.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Morici et al. (2018) conducted a review in Heart failure requiring ventricular assist device (VAD). Antithrombotic therapy (antiplatelets and anticoagulants) was evaluated. Antithrombotic management in ventricular assist device patients currently relies on center-specific protocols without strong experimental evidence, highlighting the need for standardized clinical trials.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: