ArticleCureus2026
Therapeutic Dilemma in Epidural Catheter Removal During Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Anticoagulation Following Hepatic Artery Injury: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidural catheter removal in the setting of concurrent dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and anticoagulation poses a high risk of neuraxial hematoma. Current guidelines mandate prolonged interruption of antithrombotic therapy, which may be unfeasible in patients with recently implanted arterial stents at high risk of thrombosis. We present the case of a 56-year-old man who underwent combined epidural and general anesthesia for a partial hepatectomy. An inadvertent intraoperative injury to the proper hepatic artery required aborting the surgery and deployment of a rescue drug-eluting stent. Intravenous unfractionated heparin and DAPT (aspirin and clopidogrel) were initiated. On postoperative day 7, inflammatory signs at the epidural catheter site made its removal urgent. However, interrupting clopidogrel for the guideline-recommended five to seven days posed an unacceptable risk of acute thrombosis of the newly deployed hepatic artery stent. To navigate this conflict between preventing neuraxial hematoma and acute hepatic ischemia, a multidisciplinary team reached a consensus to implement an unorthodox 24-hour therapeutic window off antithrombotics. The catheter was removed uneventfully at the end of this period; antiplatelet therapy and enoxaparin were restarted at two and six hours, respectively. No neurological deficits occurred. This case illustrates that, in scenarios of competing high-risk priorities, strict adherence to standardized recommendations may not be feasible. An individualized strategy based on multidisciplinary consensus, careful timing of antithrombotic interruption and reintroduction, and close neurological monitoring was successfully implemented without complications in this patient. However, given the limitations of a single case report, this individualized salvage strategy should not be generalized and requires further clinical evidence.
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.