Observational studyJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2018
A retrospective analysis of the periprocedural management of oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing interventional radiology procedures.
Observational study in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Limited evidence is available to guide periprocedural management of oral anticoagulants in the setting of interventional radiology (IR) procedures. For direct oral anticoagulants, therapy interruption (TI) is based on medication half-life and procedural bleeding risk. Periprocedural management of warfarin includes INR monitoring, and possible bridging with parenteral anticoagulants. It is unknown if these recommendations apply to IR procedures. To evaluate bleeding complications and thromboembolic events following periprocedural management of the factor Xa (FXa) inhibitors or warfarin in patients undergoing IR procedures. We performed a retrospective, observational study at NYU Langone Health (NYULH) of all adult patients who underwent an IR procedure from January 2015 to July 2017 and were receiving apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin. Patients who were pregnant or who had a mechanical heart valve were excluded. At NYULH, TI is not required for FXa inhibitors, and an INR < 3 is recommended for patients on warfarin undergoing low risk procedures. For moderate/high risk procedures, TI for 48 h or 72 h with reduced renal function, is recommended for FXa inhibitors, and an INR < 1.5 is recommended for patients on warfarin. We evaluated 350 IR procedures, with a total of 174 low bleeding risk and 176 moderate/high bleeding risk. The 30-day major bleeding rate was 0.9%, clinically relevant non-major bleeding rate was 3%, minor bleeding rate was 1% and thromboembolic event rate was 1%. The periprocedural oral anticoagulation management strategy at NYULH appears safe given the low 30-day incidence of bleeding and thromboembolic events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.