Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Amir K. Jaffer is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Amir K. Jaffer.


Chest | 2008

The Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Therapy: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition)

James D. Douketis; Peter B. Berger; Andrew Dunn; Amir K. Jaffer; Alex C. Spyropoulos; Richard C. Becker; Jack Ansell

This article discusses the perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy and is part of the American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). The primary objectives of this article are the following: (1) to address the perioperative management of patients who are receiving vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or antiplatelet drugs, such as aspirin and clopidogrel, and require an elective surgical or other invasive procedures; and (2) to address the perioperative use of bridging anticoagulation, typically with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH). A secondary objective is to address the perioperative management of such patients who require urgent surgery. The recommendations in this article incorporate the grading system that is discussed in this supplement (Guyatt G et al, CHEST 2008; 133:123S-131S). Briefly, Grade 1 recommendations are considered strong and indicate that the benefits do (or do not) outweigh risks, burden, and costs, whereas Grade 2 recommendations are referred to as suggestions and imply that individual patient values may lead to different management choices. The key recommendations in this article include the following: in patients with a mechanical heart valve or atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism (VTE) at high risk for thromboembolism, we recommend bridging anticoagulation with therapeutic-dose subcutaneous (SC) LMWH or IV UFH over no bridging during temporary interruption of VKA therapy (Grade 1C); in patients with a mechanical heart valve or atrial fibrillation or VTE at moderate risk for thromboembolism, we suggest bridging anticoagulation with therapeutic-dose SC LMWH, therapeutic-dose IV UFH, or low-dose SC LMWH over no bridging during temporary interruption of VKA therapy (Grade 2C); in patients with a mechanical heart valve or atrial fibrillation or VTE at low risk for thromboembolism, we suggest low-dose SC LMWH or no bridging over bridging with therapeutic-dose SC LMWH or IV UFH (Grade 2C). In patients with a bare metal coronary stent who require surgery within 6 weeks of stent placement, we recommend continuing aspirin and clopidogrel in the perioperative period (Grade 1C); in patients with a drug-eluting coronary stent who require surgery within 12 months of stent placement, we recommend continuing aspirin and clopidogrel in the perioperative period (Grade 1C). In patients who are undergoing minor dental procedures and are receiving VKAs, we recommend continuing VKAs around the time of the procedure and co-administering an oral prohemostatic agent (Grade 1B); in patients who are undergoing minor dermatologic procedures and are receiving VKAs, we recommend continuing VKAs around the time of the procedure (Grade 1C); in patients who are undergoing cataract removal and are receiving VKAs, we recommend continuing VKAs around the time of the procedure (Grade 1C).


Chest | 2012

Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Therapy: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

James D. Douketis; Alex C. Spyropoulos; Frederick A. Spencer; Michael Mayr; Amir K. Jaffer; Mark H. Eckman; Andrew Dunn; Regina Kunz

BACKGROUND This guideline addresses the management of patients who are receiving anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy and require an elective surgery or procedure. METHODS The methods herein follow those discussed in the Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines. Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines article of this supplement. RESULTS In patients requiring vitamin K antagonist (VKA) interruption before surgery, we recommend stopping VKAs 5 days before surgery instead of a shorter time before surgery (Grade 1B). In patients with a mechanical heart valve, atrial fibrillation, or VTE at high risk for thromboembolism, we suggest bridging anticoagulation instead of no bridging during VKA interruption (Grade 2C); in patients at low risk, we suggest no bridging instead of bridging (Grade 2C). In patients who require a dental procedure, we suggest continuing VKAs with an oral prohemostatic agent or stopping VKAs 2 to 3 days before the procedure instead of alternative strategies (Grade 2C). In moderate- to high-risk patients who are receiving acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and require noncardiac surgery, we suggest continuing ASA around the time of surgery instead of stopping ASA 7 to 10 days before surgery (Grade 2C). In patients with a coronary stent who require surgery, we recommend deferring surgery > 6 weeks after bare-metal stent placement and > 6 months after drug-eluting stent placement instead of undertaking surgery within these time periods (Grade 1C); in patients requiring surgery within 6 weeks of bare-metal stent placement or within 6 months of drug-eluting stent placement, we suggest continuing antiplatelet therapy perioperatively instead of stopping therapy 7 to 10 days before surgery (Grade 2C). CONCLUSIONS Perioperative antithrombotic management is based on risk assessment for thromboembolism and bleeding, and recommended approaches aim to simplify patient management and minimize adverse clinical outcomes.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2015

Perioperative Bridging Anticoagulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Abstr Act; James D. Douketis; Alex C. Spyropoulos; Scott Kaatz; Richard C. Becker; Joseph A. Caprini; Andrew Dunn; David Garcia; Alan M. Jacobson; Amir K. Jaffer; David F. Kong; Sam Schulman; Thomas L. Ortel

BACKGROUND It is uncertain whether bridging anticoagulation is necessary for patients with atrial fibrillation who need an interruption in warfarin treatment for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure. We hypothesized that forgoing bridging anticoagulation would be noninferior to bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of perioperative arterial thromboembolism and would be superior to bridging with respect to major bleeding. METHODS We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which, after perioperative interruption of warfarin therapy, patients were randomly assigned to receive bridging anticoagulation therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin (100 IU of dalteparin per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo administered subcutaneously twice daily, from 3 days before the procedure until 24 hours before the procedure and then for 5 to 10 days after the procedure. Warfarin treatment was stopped 5 days before the procedure and was resumed within 24 hours after the procedure. Follow-up of patients continued for 30 days after the procedure. The primary outcomes were arterial thromboembolism (stroke, systemic embolism, or transient ischemic attack) and major bleeding. RESULTS In total, 1884 patients were enrolled, with 950 assigned to receive no bridging therapy and 934 assigned to receive bridging therapy. The incidence of arterial thromboembolism was 0.4% in the no-bridging group and 0.3% in the bridging group (risk difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to 0.8; P=0.01 for noninferiority). The incidence of major bleeding was 1.3% in the no-bridging group and 3.2% in the bridging group (relative risk, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.78; P=0.005 for superiority). CONCLUSIONS In patients with atrial fibrillation who had warfarin treatment interrupted for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure, forgoing bridging anticoagulation was noninferior to perioperative bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of arterial thromboembolism and decreased the risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health; BRIDGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00786474.).


Annals of Pharmacotherapy | 2008

Delivery of Optimized Anticoagulant Therapy: Consensus Statement from the Anticoagulation Forum

David A. Garcia; Daniel M. Witt; Elaine M. Hylek; Ann K. Wittkowsky; Edith A. Nutescu; Alan K. Jacobson; Stephan Moll; Geno J. Merli; Mark A. Crowther; Laura Earl; Richard C. Becker; Lynn B. Oertel; Amir K. Jaffer; Jack Ansell

Objective: To provide recommendations, policies, and procedures pertaining to the provision of optimized anticoagulation therapy designed to achieve desired clinical endpoints while minimizing the risk of anticoagulant-related adverse outcomes (principally bleeding and thrombosis). Study Selection and Data Extraction: Due to this documents scope, the medical literature was searched using a variety of strategies. When possible, recommendations are supported by available evidence; however, because this paper deals with processes and systems of care, high-quality evidence (eg, controlled trials) is unavailable. In these cases, recommendations represent the consensus opinion of all authors who constitute the Board of Directors of The Anticoagulation Forum, an organization dedicated to optimizing anticoagulation care. The Board is composed of physicians, pharmacists, and nurses with demonstrated expertise and significant collective experience in the management of patients receiving anticoagulation therapy. Data Synthesis: Recommendations for delivering optimized anticoagulation therapy were developed collaboratively by the authors and are summarized in 9 key areas: (I) Qualifications of Personnel, (II) Supervision, (III) Care Management and Coordination, (IV) Documentation. (V) Patient Education, (VI) Patient Selection and Assessment, (VII) Laboratory Monitoring, (VIII) Initiation and Stabilization of Warfarin Therapy, and (IX) Maintenance of Therapy. Recommendations are intended to inform the development of care systems containing elements with demonstrated benefit in improvement of anticoagulation therapy outcomes. Recommendations for delivering optimized anticoagulation therapy are intended to apply to all clinicians involved in the care of outpatients receiving anticoagulation therapy, regardless of the structure and setting in which that care is delivered. Conclusions: Anticoagulation therapy, although potentially life-saving, has inherent risks. Whether a patient is managed in a solo practice or a specialized anticoagulation management service, a systematic approach to the key elements outlined herein will reduce the likelihood of adverse events. The need for continued research to validate optimal practices for managing anticoagulation therapy is acknowledged.


Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis | 2005

Low–Molecular-Weight-Heparins as Periprocedural Anticoagulation for Patients on Long-Term Warfarin Therapy: A Standardized Bridging Therapy Protocol

Amir K. Jaffer; Mudassar Ahmed; Daniel J. Brotman; Lee Bragg; Niranjan Seshadri; Mohammed A. Qadeer; Allan L. Klein

Background: Over 2 million patients in North America are on warfarin anticoagulation therapy for prevention of thromboembolism. Suspension of warfarin therapy is often required to prepare patients for invasive procedures or surgeries. To protect these patients against thromboembolism while they are off warfarin, shorter-acting parenteral agents such as low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are often used. We conducted a retrospective observational study of our anticoagulation clinic patients to assess the safety and efficacy of LMWHs using a standardized protocol for periprocedural anticoagulation therapy.Methods: We included 69 consecutive patients who required interruption of their long-term warfarin therapy between August 2001 and August 2002, and were deemed by the treating physician to be at high enough risk for perioperative thromboembolism to justify bridging anticoagulation. We used a standard bridging therapy protocol in our anticoagulation clinic. Sixty-six patients received enoxaparin and three patients received tinzaparin for a mean duration of 7.7 days postoperatively. Outcomes were assessed for 30 days post-procedure. Safety outcomes included major bleeding and minor bleeding. Efficacy outcomes included thromboembolic event or death.Results: There were two major bleeding events, one minor bleeding event, and no cases of thromboembolism. Twelve patients experienced some bruising around the injection site.Conclusions: LMWH administration using our standard outpatient bridging protocol for perioperative anticoagulation appears to be relatively safe and efficacious, offering an alternative to inpatient administration of intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH). Our study provides additional evidence to the limited published observational data regarding the safety and efficacy of LMWH as bridging therapy in the perioperative and periprocedural setting. Large, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are necessary to fully assess the safety and efficacy of LMWH for perioperative anticoagulation.Abbreviated AbstractWe conducted a retrospective observational study of 69 consecutive anticoagulation clinic patients on warfarin between August 2001 and August 2002, who were undergoing a procedure or surgery. The study was done to assess the safety and efficacy of an outpatient LMWH bridging protocol. Sixty-six patients received enoxaparin and three patients received tinzaparin for a mean duration of 3 days preoperatively and 7.7 days postoperatively. Outcomes were assessed for 30 days post-procedure. Safety outcomes included major bleeding and minor bleeding. Efficacy outcomes included thromboembolic event or death. There were two major bleeding events, one minor bleeding event, and no cases of thromboembolism. Twelve patients experienced some bruising around the injection site.


Mayo Clinic Proceedings | 2005

Duration of anesthesia and venous thromboembolism after hip and knee arthroplasty

Amir K. Jaffer; Wael K. Barsoum; Viktor E. Krebs; Jason G. Hurbanek; Nariman Morra; Daniel J. Brotman

OBJECTIVE To determine whether longer duration of anesthesia predisposes patients undergoing orthopedic surgery to venous thromboembolism (VTE). PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a secondary analysis of a retrospective case-control study that examined risk factors for postoperative VTE in postmenopausal women. We matched women aged 50 years and older with radiographically confirmed postoperative VTE (cases) by age, surgeon, year of surgery, and surgical joint (knee vs hip) with women without postoperative VTE (controls). Duration of anesthesia, operative variables, demographic data, comorbid illnesses, and laboratory data were determined by medical record review. RESULTS Eighty-eight cases were matched with 181 controls. Duration of anesthesia of 3.5 hours or longer (corresponding to the upper tertile of patients) was strongly associated with postoperative VTE compared with a shorter duration of anesthesia (odds ratio, 3.58; 95% confidence Interval, 2.11-6.16; P < .001). This relationship was maintained after controlling for multiple covariates with propensity score methods, Including type of arthroplasty, route of anesthesia, type of antithrombotic prophylaxis, and surgical approach. In multivariate analysis, the Important predictors of VTE included anesthesia duration of 3.5 hours or longer, type of antithrombotic prophylaxis, revision (vs primary) arthroplasty, and allogeneic blood transfusion. CONCLUSION We found a marked association between the duration of anesthesia and postoperative VTE in patients undergoing Joint arthroplasty. Although it is possible that unmeasured intraoperative variables account for this relationship, we suggest that duration of anesthesia may be an important risk factor for postoperative VTE after orthopedic surgery.


Mayo Clinic Proceedings | 2008

Outcomes of patients with stable heart failure undergoing elective noncardiac surgery.

Ye Olivia Xu-Cai; Daniel J. Brotman; Christopher O. Phillips; Franklin A. Michota; W.H. Wilson Tang; Christopher Whinney; Ashok Panneerselvam; Eric D. Hixson; Mario J. Garcia; Gary S. Francis; Amir K. Jaffer

OBJECTIVE To evaluate modern surgical outcomes in patients with stable heart failure undergoing elective major noncardiac surgery and to compare the experience of patients with heart failure who have reduced vs preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (EF). PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively studied 557 consecutive patients with heart failure (192 EF less than or equal to 40% and 365 EF greater than 40%) and 10,583 controls who underwent systematic evaluation by hospitalists in a preoperative clinic before having major elective noncardiac surgery between January 1, 2003, and March 31, 2006. We examined outcomes in the entire cohort and in propensity-matched case-control groups. RESULTS Unadjusted 1-month postoperative mortality in patients with both types of heart failure vs controls was 1.3% vs 0.4% (P equals .009), but this difference was not significant in propensity-matched groups (P equals .09). Unadjusted differences in mean hospital length of stay among heart failure patients vs controls (5.7 vs 4.3 days; P less than .001) and 1-month readmission (17.8% vs 8.5%; P less than .001) were also markedly attenuated in propensity-matched groups. Crude 1-year hazard ratios for mortality were 1.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-2.0) for both types of heart failure, 2.1 (95% CI, 1.7-2.6) in patients with heart failure who had EF less than or equal to 40%, and 1.4 (95% CI, 1.2-1.8) in those who had EF greater than 40% (P less than .01 for all 3 comparisons); however, the differences were not significant in propensity-matched groups (P equals .43). CONCLUSION Patients with clinically stable heart failure did not have high perioperative mortality rates in association with elective major noncardiac surgery, but they were more likely than patients without heart failure to have longer hospital stays, were more likely to require hospital readmission, and had a substantial long-term mortality rate.


Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine | 2009

Perioperative management of warfarin and antiplatelet therapy.

Amir K. Jaffer

Perioperative management of patients on warfarin or antiplatelet therapy involves assessing and balancing individual risks for thromboembolism and bleeding. Discontinuing anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy is usually necessary for major surgery but increases the risk of thrombotic events. Bridge therapy, the temporary perioperative substitution of low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin in place of warfarin, is an effective means of reducing the risk of thromboembolism but may increase the risk of bleeding. The timing of warfarin withdrawal and timing of the preoperative and postoperative components of bridge therapy are critical to balancing these risks. Perioperative management of antiplatelet therapy requires special care in patients with coronary stents; the timing of surgery relative to stent placement dictates management in these patients.


JAMA | 2017

Effect of Genotype-Guided Warfarin Dosing on Clinical Events and Anticoagulation Control Among Patients Undergoing Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: The GIFT Randomized Clinical Trial

Brian F. Gage; Anne R. Bass; Hannah Lin; Scott C. Woller; Scott M. Stevens; Noor Al-Hammadi; Juan Li; Tomás Rodríguez; J. Philip Miller; Gwendolyn A. McMillin; Robert C. Pendleton; Amir K. Jaffer; Cristi R. King; Brandi De Vore Whipple; Rhonda Porche-Sorbet; Lynnae Napoli; Kerri Merritt; Anna M. Thompson; Gina Hyun; Jeffrey L. Anderson; Wesley Hollomon; Robert L. Barrack; Ryan M. Nunley; Gerard Moskowitz; Victor G. Dávila-Román; Charles S. Eby

Importance Warfarin use accounts for more medication-related emergency department visits among older patients than any other drug. Whether genotype-guided warfarin dosing can prevent these adverse events is unknown. Objective To determine whether genotype-guided dosing improves the safety of warfarin initiation. Design, Setting, and Patients The randomized clinical Genetic Informatics Trial (GIFT) of Warfarin to Prevent Deep Vein Thrombosis included patients aged 65 years or older initiating warfarin for elective hip or knee arthroplasty and was conducted at 6 US medical centers. Enrollment began in April 2011 and follow-up concluded in October 2016. Interventions Patients were genotyped for the following polymorphisms: VKORC1-1639G>A, CYP2C9*2, CYP2C9*3, and CYP4F2 V433M. In a 2 × 2 factorial design, patients were randomized to genotype-guided (n = 831) or clinically guided (n = 819) warfarin dosing on days 1 through 11 of therapy and to a target international normalized ratio (INR) of either 1.8 or 2.5. The recommended doses of warfarin were open label, but the patients and clinicians were blinded to study group assignment. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the composite of major bleeding, INR of 4 or greater, venous thromboembolism, or death. Patients underwent a screening lower-extremity duplex ultrasound approximately 1 month after arthroplasty. Results Among 1650 randomized patients (mean age, 72.1 years [SD, 5.4 years]; 63.6% women; 91.0% white), 1597 (96.8%) received at least 1 dose of warfarin therapy and completed the trial (n = 808 in genotype-guided group vs n = 789 in clinically guided group). A total of 87 patients (10.8%) in the genotype-guided group vs 116 patients (14.7%) in the clinically guided warfarin dosing group met at least 1 of the end points (absolute difference, 3.9% [95% CI, 0.7%-7.2%], P = .02; relative rate [RR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.95]). The numbers of individual events in the genotype-guided group vs the clinically guided group were 2 vs 8 for major bleeding (RR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.05-1.15), 56 vs 77 for INR of 4 or greater (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51-0.99), 33 vs 38 for venous thromboembolism (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.54-1.34), and there were no deaths. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients undergoing elective hip or knee arthroplasty and treated with perioperative warfarin, genotype-guided warfarin dosing, compared with clinically guided dosing, reduced the combined risk of major bleeding, INR of 4 or greater, venous thromboembolism, or death. Further research is needed to determine the cost-effectiveness of personalized warfarin dosing. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01006733


Chest | 2012

Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Therapy

James D. Douketis; Alex C. Spyropoulos; Frederick A. Spencer; Michael Mayr; Amir K. Jaffer; Mark H. Eckman; Andrew Dunn; Regina Kunz

BACKGROUND This guideline addresses the management of patients who are receiving anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy and require an elective surgery or procedure. METHODS The methods herein follow those discussed in the Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines. Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines article of this supplement. RESULTS In patients requiring vitamin K antagonist (VKA) interruption before surgery, we recommend stopping VKAs 5 days before surgery instead of a shorter time before surgery (Grade 1B). In patients with a mechanical heart valve, atrial fibrillation, or VTE at high risk for thromboembolism, we suggest bridging anticoagulation instead of no bridging during VKA interruption (Grade 2C); in patients at low risk, we suggest no bridging instead of bridging (Grade 2C). In patients who require a dental procedure, we suggest continuing VKAs with an oral prohemostatic agent or stopping VKAs 2 to 3 days before the procedure instead of alternative strategies (Grade 2C). In moderate- to high-risk patients who are receiving acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and require noncardiac surgery, we suggest continuing ASA around the time of surgery instead of stopping ASA 7 to 10 days before surgery (Grade 2C). In patients with a coronary stent who require surgery, we recommend deferring surgery > 6 weeks after bare-metal stent placement and > 6 months after drug-eluting stent placement instead of undertaking surgery within these time periods (Grade 1C); in patients requiring surgery within 6 weeks of bare-metal stent placement or within 6 months of drug-eluting stent placement, we suggest continuing antiplatelet therapy perioperatively instead of stopping therapy 7 to 10 days before surgery (Grade 2C). CONCLUSIONS Perioperative antithrombotic management is based on risk assessment for thromboembolism and bleeding, and recommended approaches aim to simplify patient management and minimize adverse clinical outcomes.

Collaboration


Dive into the Amir K. Jaffer's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Gerald W. Smetana

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Steven L. Cohn

SUNY Downstate Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Barbara Slawski

Medical College of Wisconsin

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge