↓ Skip to main content

A retrospective analysis of the periprocedural management of oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing interventional radiology procedures

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
A retrospective analysis of the periprocedural management of oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing interventional radiology procedures
Published in
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11239-018-1740-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kassandra Marsh, Tania Ahuja, Veronica Raco, David Green, Akhilesh K. Sista, John Papadopoulos

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 1 4%
Student > Master 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 13 57%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 13%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Unknown 14 61%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 October 2018.
All research outputs
#15,545,423
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#640
of 994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,517
of 341,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#12
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,518 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.