Effect of different antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy on postoperative pocket hematoma after electrophysiological devices placement
10.3760/cma.j.jssn.1673-4904.2016.10.016
- VernacularTitle:不同抗凝或抗血小板方案对老年患者实施心律植入装置术后囊袋血肿的意义
- Author:
Tao LI
;
Sumei LIANG
;
Yan LIU
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Heart-assist devices;
Anticoagulants;
Postoperative complications;
Pocket hematoma
- From:
Chinese Journal of Postgraduates of Medicine
2016;39(10):913-916
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the effect of different antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy on postoperative pocket hematoma after electrophysiological devices placements (EPD). Methods The clinic data of 410 patients who took anti-platelet or anticoagulation therapy and needed to be implanted EPD from February 2012 to February 2015 were selected. According to the type of therapy, patients were divided into 4 groups:dual anti-platelet drug (DAP) treatment group (DAP group, 114 cases), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging treatment group (LMWH group, 98 cases), aspirin (ASA) alone group (ASA group, 94 cases) and warfarin group (104 cases). The incidence of pocket hematoma after electrophysiological devices placements was observed. The risk factors of pocket hematoma were analyzed. Results The incidence of pocket hematoma was higher in LMWH group than that in the other 3 groups: 18.4% (18/98) vs. 4.4% (5/114), 3.2% (3/94) and 2.9% (3/104), and there was statistical difference (P<0.05). But there were no significant differences in the incidence of pocket hematoma among DAP group, ASA group and warfarin group (P>0.05). The multiple Logistic regression analysis revealed that LMWH bridging therapy was an independent risk factor for the development of pocket hematoma (OR=7.105, 95%CI 1.872-17.283). Conclusions LMWH bridging therapy can increase the risk of development of pocket hematomas after electrophysiological devices placement.
