Key result
Adjusting antiplatelet therapy after complications in CF-LVAD patients maintains comparable freedom from bleeding and thrombosis.
Why the study?
Hemorrhagic or thrombotic events are common complications in heart failure patients with CF-LVAD support, prompting investigation into the effect of altering antiplatelet therapy after such events.
Does adjusting antiplatelet therapy prevent recurrences of thrombotic or hemorrhagic events in heart failure patients with CF-LVAD support?
Cohort (n=231)
Does adjusting antiplatelet therapy prevent recurrences of thrombotic or hemorrhagic events in heart failure patients with CF-LVAD support?
Absolute Event Rate: 97% vs 96%
p-value: p=0.421
Adjusting antiplatelet therapy in response to major thrombotic or hemorrhagic events in CF-LVAD patients appears to be a safe strategy to avoid recurrences without significantly increasing opposing risks.
Supports reactive antiplatelet adjustment in CF-LVAD as potentially safe; leaves open confirmation via randomized trials before practice change.
Hemorrhagic or thrombotic events are common complications in heart failure patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) support. Aim of this study is to investigate the effect of change in antiplatelet therapy after thrombotic or hemorrhagic events in patients with CF-LVAD support. A total of 231 CF-LVAD patients were included in this study. Patients with CF-LVAD were categorized into three groups: (1) high antiplatelet regimen as control group (aspirin [ASA] 325 mg; n = 115), (2) low antiplatelet regimen (ASA 81 mg; n = 82), started after hemorrhagic complications, and (3) double antiplatelet therapy (ASA/clopidogrel; n = 34) started after thrombotic complications. In our analysis, indications for low antiplatelet therapy were gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (36%), hemorrhagic stroke (8%), and epistaxis (9%). Freedom from major bleeding events after changing therapy was comparable at 1 year for all three groups respectively 96%, 97%, and 91% (log rank = 0.421). Major indications for double antiplatelet therapy were pump thrombosis (15%) and coronary artery stent placement (2.5%). Freedom from thrombotic events after changing therapy was comparable at 1 year for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, 97%, 98%, and 91% (log rank = 0.317). Logistic regression shows that Heartmate II patients required more antiplatelet therapy changes compared with HeartWare (odds ratio [OR]: 3.611, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8-6.9; p = 0.0001). HeartMate II required more adjustment of antiplatelet therapy during follow-up. Reducing or increasing antithrombotic therapies in response to major thrombotic hemorrhagic events in CF-LVAD patients is a safe strategy to avoid recurrences.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gallo et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Heart failure with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) support (n=231). Change in antiplatelet therapy (low or double regimen) vs. High antiplatelet regimen (ASA 325 mg) was evaluated on Freedom from major bleeding events at 1 year (p=0.421). Adjusting antiplatelet therapy in response to hemorrhagic or thrombotic events in CF-LVAD patients maintained comparable 1-year freedom from major bleeding (96%, 97%, 91%; P=0.421) and thrombosis.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: