Why the study?
Does uninterrupted oral anticoagulation reduce bleeding and prevent thromboembolism compared to interrupted anticoagulation with bridging in patients undergoing CIED implantation or AF ablation?
Does uninterrupted oral anticoagulation reduce bleeding and prevent thromboembolism compared to interrupted anticoagulation with bridging in patients undergoing CIED implantation or AF ablation?
Uninterrupted oral anticoagulation is a safe and effective strategy for patients undergoing CIED implantation or AF ablation, reducing bleeding risks associated with heparin bridging.
Optimal periprocedural OAC strategies for AF ablation and CIEDs remain uncertain; leaves open need for randomized trials before practice change.
More than 150, 000 patients undergo ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) each year.Current guidelines recommend oral anticoagulation in all patients undergoing AF ablation. A large number of patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are on long-term oral anticoagulation. These patients are at increased risk for thromboembolism with interruption of oral anticoagulation. Due to the increased risk for bleeding complications during the procedure combined with the need to prevent thromboembolism, periprocedural management of anticoagulation in these patients can be challenging. In this article we review the current evidence for periprocedural management of oral anticoagulation in patients undergoing ablation and CIED implantation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Worsnick et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: