Juan V. Llau

Management of severe perioperative bleeding Guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology

The aims of severe perioperative bleeding management are three-fold. First, preoperative identification by anamesis and laboratory testing of those patients for whom the perioperative bleeding risk may be increased. Second, implementation of strategies for correcting preoperative anaemia and stabilisation of the macro- and microcirculations in order to optimise the patients tolerance to bleeding. Third, targeted procoagulant interventions to reduce the amount of bleeding, morbidity, mortality and costs. The purpose of these guidelines is to provide an overview of current knowledge on the subject with an assessment of the quality of the evidence in order to allow anaesthetists throughout Europe to integrate this knowledge into daily patient care wherever possible. The Guidelines Committee of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) formed a task force with members of scientific subcommittees and individual expert members of the ESA. Electronic databases were searched without language restrictions from the year 2000 until 2012. These searches produced 20 664 abstracts. Relevant systematic reviews with meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional surveys were selected. At the suggestion of the ESA Guideline Committee, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) grading system was initially used to assess the level of evidence and to grade recommendations. During the process of guideline development, the official position of the ESA changed to favour the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. This report includes general recommendations as well as specific recommendations in various fields of surgical interventions. The final draft guideline was posted on the ESA website for four weeks and the link was sent to all ESA members. Comments were collated and the guidelines amended as appropriate. When the final draft was complete, the Guidelines Committee and ESA Board ratified the guidelines.

Regional anaesthesia and antithrombotic agents: recommendations of the European Society of Anaesthesiology

Background and objectives Performing neuraxial anaesthesia in patients receiving antithrombotic drugs is controversial due to the increased risk of spinal epidural haematoma. Strict adherence to the recommended time intervals between the administration of anticoagulants, neuraxial blockade and the removal of catheters is thought to improve patient safety and reduce the risk of haematoma. Appropriate guidelines have been prepared by a number of national societies of anaesthesiologists, but they do not have universal acceptance. The introduction of new anticoagulants together with recent reports of stent thrombosis in patients with perioperative cessation of antiplatelet drugs have considerably broadened the issue and made revision necessary. To overcome deficiencies in content and applicability, the European Society of Anaesthesiology has taken the initiative to provide current and comprehensive guidelines for the continent as a whole. Methods Extensive review of the literature. Results and conclusions In order to minimise bleeding complications during regional anaesthetic techniques, care should be taken to avoid traumatic puncture. If a bloody tap occurs when intraoperative anticoagulation is planned, postponing surgery should be considered. Alternatively, catheters can be placed the night before surgery. Regional anaesthesia in patients receiving full anticoagulation treatment continues to be contraindicated. Catheter manipulation and removal carry similar risks to insertion and the same criteria should apply. Appropriate neurological monitoring is essential during the postoperative recovery period and following catheter removal. The final decision to perform regional anaesthesia in patients receiving drugs that affect haemostasis has to be taken after careful assessment of individual risks and benefits.

Surgery and invasive procedures in patients on long-term treatment with direct oral anticoagulants: thrombin or factor-Xa inhibitors. Recommendations of the Working Group on Perioperative Haemostasis and the French Study Group on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAs)--inhibitors of thrombin or factor-Xa--are expected to replace vitamin K antagonists in most of their indications. Patients receiving long-term treatment with DOAs are likely to be exposed to elective or emergency surgery or invasive procedures. Owing to the present lack of experience in such conditions, we cannot make recommendations, but only propose perioperative management for optimal safety regarding the risk of bleeding and thrombosis. DOAs may increase surgical bleeding, they have no validated antagonists, they cannot be monitored by simple standardized laboratory assays and their pharmacokinetics vary significantly between patients. Although DOAs differ in many respects, the proposals in the perioperative setting need not be specific to each. For procedures with low haemorrhagic risk, a therapeutic window of 48 hours (last administration 24 hours before surgery, restart 24 hours after) is proposed. For procedures with medium or high haemorrhagic risk, we suggest stopping DOAs 5 days before surgery to ensure complete elimination in all patients. Treatment should be resumed only when the risk of bleeding has been controlled. In patients at high thrombotic risk (e.g. those in atrial fibrillation with a history of stroke), bridging with heparin (low molecular-weight heparin, or unfractionated heparin, if the former is contraindicated) is proposed. In an emergency, the procedure should be postponed for as long as possible (minimum 1-2 half-lives) and non-specific antihaemorrhagic agents, such as recombinant human activated factor VIIa or prothrombin complex concentrates should not be given for prophylactic reversal due to their uncertain benefit-risk.

The perioperative management of new direct oral anticoagulants: a question without answers

New direct oral anticoagulant agents (DOAC) are currently licensed for thromboprophylaxis after hip and knee arthroplasty and for long-term prevention of thromboembolic events in non-valvular atrial fibrillation as well as treatment and secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism. Some other medical indications are emerging. Thus, anaesthesiologists are increasingly likely to encounter patients on these drugs who need elective or emergency surgery. Due to the lack of experience and data, the management of DOAC in the perioperative period is controversial. In this article, we review available information and recommendations regarding the periprocedural management of the currently most clinically developed DOAC, apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban. We discuss two trends of managing patients on DOAC for elective surgery. The first is stopping the DOAC 1-5 days before surgery (depending on the drug, patient and bleeding risk) without bridging. The second is stopping the DOAC 5 days preoperatively and bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin. The management of patients on DOAC needing emergency surgery is also reviewed. As no data exist for the use of haemostatic products for the reversal of the anticoagulant effect in these cases, rescue treatment recommendations are proposed.

Anticlotting drugs and regional anaesthetic and analgesic techniques: comparative update of the safety recommendations

&NA; The wide use of anticlotting drugs by patients scheduled for surgery is a challenge for the anaesthesiologist when considering a regional anaesthesia technique. This practice seems safe if there is an appropriate management based on safety intervals established according to the pharmacology of the drug and the regional technique. Some anaesthesiology societies have published recommendations for the safe practice of regional anaesthesia with the simultaneous use of anticoagulants (heparin, low molecular weight heparins, oral anticoagulants (OA), fondaparinux and others) and antiplatelet agents (aspirin, clopidogrel, ticlopidine, argatroban and others). One of the most recent guidelines has been published by the Spanish Society of Anaesthesia and Critical Care. This article reviews these recommendations and compares them with others published in the last years. The recommendations are similar, but some interesting differences can be observed and need to be considered. A European consensus in this setting would probably be necessary.

Chirurgies et actes invasifs chez les patients traités au long cours par un anticoagulant oral anti-IIa ou anti-Xa direct: Propositions du Groupe d’intérêt en hémostase périopératoire (GIHP) et du Groupe d’études sur l’hémostase et la thrombose (GEHT)

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAs), inhibitors of factor IIa or Xa, are expected to replace vitamin K antagonists in most of their indications. It is likely that patients on long-term treatment with DOAs will be exposed to elective or emergency surgery or invasive procedures. Due to the present lack of experience in such conditions, we cannot make recommendations, but only propose perioperative management for optimal safety as regards the risk of bleeding and thrombosis. DOAs may increase surgical bleeding, they have no validated antagonists, they cannot be monitored by simple, standardised laboratory assays, and their pharmacokinetics vary significantly from patient to patient. Although DOAs differ in many respects, the proposals in the perioperative setting need not be specific to each. For procedures with low risk of haemorrhage, a therapeutic window of 48 h (last administration 24h before surgery, restart 24h after) is proposed. For procedures with medium or high haemorrhagic risk, we suggest stopping DOAs 5 days before surgery to ensure complete elimination of the drug in all patients. The treatment should be resumed only when the risk of bleeding has been controlled. In patients with a high risk of thrombosis (e.g. those in atrial fibrillation with an antecedent of stroke), bridging with heparin (low molecular weight, or unfractionated if the former is contraindicated) is proposed. In emergency, the procedure should be postponed for as long as possible (minimum 1-2 half-lives) and non-specific anti-haemorrhagic agents, such as recombinant human activated factor VIIa, or prothrombin concentrates, should not be given for prophylactic reversal, due to their uncertain benefit-risk.

New anticoagulants and regional anesthesia.

Purpose of review The use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in the perioperative period may conflict with regional anesthetic techniques in which maintaining hemostatic integrity is essential. Recently, new anticoagulants have been developed with more efficacy and a better safety profile. This article reviews the basis for the actual recommendations and the current status and management of these new drugs. Recent findings Recent studies have outlined that the risk of epidural hematoma after neuraxial anesthesia may be higher than estimated. Therefore, it is imperative to follow the published recommendations. The use of new anticoagulant drugs may take into account the pharmacological profile of each one to safely perform regional anesthesia, mainly the time to reach peak plasma level and half-life. Summary When new anticoagulant drugs are used for thromboprophylaxis in orthopedic surgery, the performance of neuraxial anesthetic techniques should be based on their pharmacology. If a peripheral blockade is chosen, these recommendations should be followed when a block is performed in a noncompressible area.

Surgery and invasive procedures in patients on long-term treatment with oral direct thrombin or factor Xa inhibitors

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAs), inhibitors of factor IIa or Xa, are expected to replace vitamin K antagonists in most of their indications. It is likely that patients on long-term treatment with DOAs will be exposed to elective or emergency surgery or invasive procedures. Due to the present lack of experience in such conditions, we cannot make recommendations, but only propose perioperative management for optimal safety as regards the risk of bleeding and thrombosis. DOAs may increase surgical bleeding, they have no validated antagonists, they cannot be monitored by simple, standardised laboratory assays, and their pharmacokinetics vary significantly from patient to patient. Although DOAs differ in many respects, the proposals in the perioperative setting need not be specific to each. For procedures with low risk of haemorrhage, a therapeutic window of 48 h (last administration 24h before surgery, restart 24h after) is proposed. For procedures with medium or high haemorrhagic risk, we suggest stopping DOAs 5 days before surgery to ensure complete elimination of the drug in all patients. The treatment should be resumed only when the risk of bleeding has been controlled. In patients with a high risk of thrombosis (e.g. those in atrial fibrillation with an antecedent of stroke), bridging with heparin (low molecular weight, or unfractionated if the former is contraindicated) is proposed. In emergency, the procedure should be postponed for as long as possible (minimum 1-2 half-lives) and non-specific anti-haemorrhagic agents, such as recombinant human activated factor VIIa, or prothrombin concentrates, should not be given for prophylactic reversal, due to their uncertain benefit-risk.

Antiagregantes y anticoagulantes: manejo del paciente quirúrgico anticoagulado

Resumen Entre los grupos farmacologicos de mayor consumo por los pacientes se encuentran tanto los antiagregantes plaquetarios (aspirina, clopidogrel, ticlopidina) como los anticoagulants (acenocumarol, warfarina, heparina de bajo peso molecular, fondaparinux). El manejo de los mismos en el periodo perioperatorio constituye uno de los aspectos esenciales en el cuidado de los pacientes debido a la necesidad de equilibrar adecuadamente el riesgo de sangrado frente al riesgo trombotico (arterial o venoso) que se incrementa en los pacientes quirurgicos. En la presente revision se destacan tres aspectos esenciales. En primer lugar, respecto a los antiagregantes plaquetarios, es habitual que se recomiende su retirada entre 1 semana y 10 dias antes de la cirugia para minimizar el sangrado perioperatorio. Sin embargo, esta practica ha sido puesta en entredicho porque un paciente sin la necesaria cobertura antiagregante puede tener mayor riesgo de desarrollar complicaciones cardiacas, cerebrales o vasculares perifericas. Por ello, la recomendacion de retirar el farmaco durante un determinado tiempo de forma sistematica debe ser rechazada. Actualmente, se deben valorar de forma individual dichos riesgos para minimizar el tiempo en que el paciente esta sin la debida proteccion antiagregante. En segundo lugar, la tromboprofilaxis es necesaria en la mayoria de pacientes quirurgicos por la elevada prevalencia de la enfermedad tromboembolica venosa. Ello implica el empleo de farmacos anticoagulantes, habiendose cuestionado la practica de la anesthesia regional en estos casos. Sin embargo, con las recomendaciones de seguridad establecidas por las diferentes sociedades cientificas, esta practica se ha demostrado segura. Finalmente, la «terapia puente» de los pacientes anticoagulados con acenocumarol se debe realizar mas de forma individualizada y no sistematicamente sin tener en cuenta los riesgos tromboticos de cada paciente. El perioperatorio es un periodo de alto riesgo trombotico arterial y venoso, y el uso optimo de los antiagregantes plaquetarios y de los anticoagulantes debe ser una prioridad para minimizar dicho riesgo sin incrementar el hemorragico. El consenso multidisciplinario es esencial en esta cuestion

Chirurgies et actes invasifs chez les patients traités au long cours par un anticoagulant oral anti-IIa ou anti-Xa direct

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAs), inhibitors of factor IIa or Xa, are expected to replace vitamin K antagonists in most of their indications. It is likely that patients on long-term treatment with DOAs will be exposed to elective or emergency surgery or invasive procedures. Due to the present lack of experience in such conditions, we cannot make recommendations, but only propose perioperative management for optimal safety as regards the risk of bleeding and thrombosis. DOAs may increase surgical bleeding, they have no validated antagonists, they cannot be monitored by simple, standardised laboratory assays, and their pharmacokinetics vary significantly from patient to patient. Although DOAs differ in many respects, the proposals in the perioperative setting need not be specific to each. For procedures with low risk of haemorrhage, a therapeutic window of 48 h (last administration 24h before surgery, restart 24h after) is proposed. For procedures with medium or high haemorrhagic risk, we suggest stopping DOAs 5 days before surgery to ensure complete elimination of the drug in all patients. The treatment should be resumed only when the risk of bleeding has been controlled. In patients with a high risk of thrombosis (e.g. those in atrial fibrillation with an antecedent of stroke), bridging with heparin (low molecular weight, or unfractionated if the former is contraindicated) is proposed. In emergency, the procedure should be postponed for as long as possible (minimum 1-2 half-lives) and non-specific anti-haemorrhagic agents, such as recombinant human activated factor VIIa, or prothrombin concentrates, should not be given for prophylactic reversal, due to their uncertain benefit-risk.