Key result
Warfarin therapy increased the risk of cumulative postoperative complications following CIED procedures compared to antiplatelet (14.3% vs 3.1%) and NOAC (5.1%) therapies (p<0.001).
Why the study?
The incidence of postoperative complications following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs has not been studied sufficiently.
Do antiplatelet drugs or NOACs reduce postoperative complications compared to warfarin in patients undergoing CIED surgery?
Observational (n=1,807)
Do antiplatelet drugs or NOACs reduce postoperative complications compared to warfarin in patients undergoing CIED surgery?
Effect estimate: 2.9-fold increased risk
Absolute Event Rate: 14.3% vs 3.1%
p-value: p=<0.001
In patients undergoing CIED implantation, periprocedural use of antiplatelet drugs or NOACs is associated with significantly fewer postoperative complications compared to warfarin.
May favor periprocedural antiplatelet or NOAC over warfarin to reduce CIED complications; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: The incidence of postoperative complications following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs has not been studied sufficiently. Here we present a comparison of complications after CIED implantations. METHODS: Using an observational study design, the study included 1807 patients with a taking antiplatelet drugs (n: 1601), nonvitamin K anticoagulants (NOAC) (n: 136), and warfarin (n: 70) undergoing CIED surgery. Primary endpoint was accepted as cumulative events including composite of clinically significant hematoma (CSH), pericardial effusion or tamponade, pneumothorax, and infection related to device system. Secondary outcomes included each compenent of cumulative events. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of cumulative events. RESULTS: The overall cumulative event rate was 3.7% (67 of 1807). Cumulative events occured 3.1% (50 of 1601) in the antiplatelet, 5.1% (7 of 136) NOAC, and 14.3% (10 of 70) warfarin groups (p < 0.001). CSH occurred in 2 of 70 patients (2.9%) in the warfarin group, as compared with 5 of 1601 (0.3%) in the antiplatelet group (p: 0.032). However, no significant differences were found between NOAC and warfarin groups in terms of CSH (0.7% vs. 2.9% respectively, p: 0.267). Warfarin treatment was an independent predictor of cumulative events and increased 2.9-fold the risk of cumulative events. Major surgical complications were rare and did not differ significantly between the study groups. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence and severity of complications may be lower in patients treated with periprocedurally antiplatelet or NOAC therapy when compared with warfarin therapy. Further randomized control studies are required to confirm our findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Demir et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures (n=1,807). Warfarin vs. Antiplatelet drugs or NOACs was evaluated on Cumulative events including composite of clinically significant hematoma, pericardial effusion or tamponade, pneumothorax, and infection related to device system (2.9-fold increased risk, p=<0.001). Warfarin therapy increased the risk of cumulative postoperative complications following CIED procedures compared to antiplatelet (14.3% vs 3.1%) and NOAC (5.1%) therapies (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: