Why the study?
Do novel oral anticoagulants effectively prevent thromboembolism and minimize bleeding risks in patients requiring periprocedural anticoagulation bridging?
Do novel oral anticoagulants effectively prevent thromboembolism and minimize bleeding risks in patients requiring periprocedural anticoagulation bridging?
This review highlights the pharmacological advantages and clinical limitations of using novel oral anticoagulants for periprocedural anticoagulation management.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Optimal periprocedural anticoagulation strategy remains unestablished; leaves open the role of NOACs versus heparins in high-risk patients.
Periprocedural anticoagulation bridging is recommended to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in patients at a higher risk of developing thromboembolism during the perioperative period. The optimal periprocedural anticoagulation strategy has not been established. Unfractionated heparin and low molecular heparin are used in preventing thromboembolism in the special population. Novel oral anticoagulants that directly inhibit thrombin (dabigatran) or factor Xa (rivaroxaban, apixaban) are shown as effective anticoagulants in preventing thromboembolism (venous thromboembolism) in various medical conditions. They have the advantage of having a faster onset, shorter half-lives, easier monitoring, and predicable doses. But there are disadvantages to newer anticoagulants such as the unavailability of definitive reversal agents and lack of data in patients with renal insufficiency. We review the latest evidence on the effects of newer oral anticoagulants in preventing thromboembolism and its bleeding risks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kannan et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: