Why the study?
How should patients taking novel oral anticoagulants be managed during dental treatment to minimize bleeding risk?
How should patients taking novel oral anticoagulants be managed during dental treatment to minimize bleeding risk?
Minor dental procedures do not generally require NOA interruption, whereas invasive procedures may require discontinuation for at least 24 hours based on renal function and bleeding risk.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Requires careful hemostasis assessment for NOA patients in dentistry; leaves open need for prospective trials before practice change.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper is to contribute to the discussion on how to approach patients taking new orally administered anticoagulants (NOAs) dabigatran etexilate (a direct thrombin inhibitor), rivaroxaban and apixaban (factor Xa inhibitors), before, during and after dental treatment in light of the more recent knowledges. DISCUSSION: In dentistry and oral surgery, the major concerns in treatment of patients taking direct thrombin inhibitors and factor Xa inhibitors is the risk of haemorrhage and the absence of a specific reversal agent. The degree of renal function, the complexity of the surgical procedure and the patient's risk of bleeding due to other concomitant causes, are the most important factors to consider during surgical dental treatment of patients taking NOAs. For patients requiring simple dental extraction or minor oral surgery procedures, interruption of NOA is not generally necessary, while an higher control of bleeding and discontinuation of the drug (at least 24 h) should be requested before invasive surgical procedures, depending on renal functionality. The clinician has to consider that the number of patients taking NOAs is rapidly increasing. Since available data are not sufficient to establish an evidence-based dental management, the dentist must use caution and attention when treating patients taking dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Costantinides et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: