Pocket haematoma after cardiac electronic device implantation in patients receiving antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatment: A single-centre experience
Göster/ Aç
Erişim
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessTarih
2017Yazar
Demir, Gültekin GünhanBabur Güler, Gamze
Güler, Ekrem
Güneş, Hacı Murat
Kızılırmak, Filiz
Karaca, İbrahim Oğuz
Omaygenç, Mehmet Onur
Çakal, Beytullah
Olgun, Erkam
Savur, Umeyr
İbişoğlu, Ersin
Barutçu, İrfan
Kılıçaslan, Fethi
Üst veri
Tüm öğe kaydını gösterKünye
Demir, G. G., Babur Güler, G., Güler, E., Güneş, H. M., Kızılırmak, F., Karaca, İ. O. ... Kılıçaslan, F. (2017). Pocket haematoma after cardiac electronic device implantation in patients receiving antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatment: A single-centre experience. Acta Cardiologica, 72(1), 47-52. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00015385.2017.1281539Özet
Objective In modern cardiology practice, implantation of cardiac electronic devices in patients taking anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy is a common clinical scenario. Bleeding complications are of particular concern in this patient population and pocket haematoma is one of the most frequent complications. We sought to determine the relationship between periprocedural antiplatelet/anticoagulant therapy and pocket haematoma formation in patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. Methods We conducted a retrospective study including 232 consecutive patients undergoing CIED implantation in the department of cardiology of the Medipol University Hospital. Patients were divided into six groups: clopidogrel group (n = 12), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) group (n = 73), ASA + clopidogrel group (n = 29), warfarin group (n = 34), warfarin + ASA group (n = 21) and no antiplatelet-anticoagulant therapy group as the control group (n = 63). CIED implantations were stratified under four subtitles including implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), permanent pacemaker and the last group as either device upgrade or generator replacement. Results The mean age of the patients was 63 ± 14 years and 140 patients were male (60.3%). A pocket haematoma was documented in 6 of 232 patients (2.6%). None of the patients with pocket haematoma needed pocket exploration or blood transfusion. The type of the device did not have a significant effect on pocket haematoma incidence (P = 0.250). Univariate logistic regression showed that platelet level and ASA plus clopidogrel use were significantly associated with haematoma frequency after CIED implantations, respectively (OR: 0.977, CI 95% [0.958-0.996]; OR: 16.080, CI 95% [2.801-92.306]). Multivariate analysis revealed that dual antiplatelet treatment (ß = 3.016, P = 0.002, OR: 2.410, 95% CI [3.042-136.943]) and baseline platelet level (ß = –0.027, p:0.025, OR: 0.974, 95% CI [0.951-0.997]) were independent risk factors for pocket haematoma formation. Conclusion Dual antiplatelet therapy and low platelet levels significantly increased the risk of pocket haematoma formation in patients undergoing CIED implantations.
WoS Q Kategorisi
Q4Scopus Q Kategorisi
Q3Kaynak
Acta CardiologicaCilt
72Sayı
1Koleksiyonlar
- Makale Koleksiyonu [3676]
- PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [4083]
- Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [6360]
- WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [6476]