Management of bleeding and emergency invasive procedures in patients on dabigatran: Updated guidelines from the French Working Group on Perioperative Haemostasis (GIHP) - September 2016.

In 2013, the GIHP published guidelines for the management of severe haemorrhages and emergency surgery. This update applies to patients treated with dabigatran, with a bleeding complication or undergoing an urgent invasive procedure. It includes how to handle the available specific antidote (idarucizumab), when to measure dabigatran plasmatic concentration and when to use non-specific measures in these situations. It also includes guidelines on how to perform regional anaesthesia and analgesia procedures.

Management of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing elective invasive procedures. Proposals from the French Working Group on perioperative haemostasis (GIHP) and the French Study Group on thrombosis and haemostasis (GFHT). In collaboration with the French Society for Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (SFAR).

The French Working Group on Perioperative Haemostasis (GIHP) and the French Study Group on Haemostasis and Thrombosis (GFHT) in collaboration with the French Society for Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (SFAR) drafted up-to-date proposals for the management of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing elective invasive procedures. The proposals were discussed and validated by a vote; all proposals but one could be assigned with a high strength. The management of antiplatelet therapy is based on their indication and the procedure. The risk of bleeding related to the procedure can be divided into high, moderate and low categories depending on the possibility of performing the procedure in patients receiving antiplatelet agents (none, monotherapy and dual antiplatelet therapy respectively). If discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy is indicated before the procedure, a last intake of aspirin, clopidogrel, ticagrelor and prasugrel 3, 5, 5 and 7 days before surgery respectively is proposed. The thrombotic risk associated with discontinuation should be assessed according to each specific indication of antiplatelet therapy and is higher for patients receiving dual therapy for coronary artery disease (with further refinements based on a few well-accepted items) than for those receiving monotherapy for cardiovascular prevention, for secondary stroke prevention or for lower extremity arterial disease. These proposals also address the issue of the potential role of platelet functional tests and consider management of antiplatelet therapy for regional anaesthesia, including central neuraxial anaesthesia and peripheral nerve blocks, and for coronary artery surgery.

Comparison of two doses of tranexamic acid in adults undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of tranexamic acid (TA) is still an issue. The authors compared two doses of TA during cardiac surgery in a multicenter, double-blinded, randomized study. METHODS: Patients were stratified according to transfusion risk, then randomized to two TA doses: 10 mg/kg bolus followed by 1 mg·kg·h infusion (low dose) until the end of surgery or 30 mg/kg bolus followed by 16 mg·kg·h infusion (high dose). The primary endpoint was the incidence of blood product transfusion up to day 7. Secondary ones were incidences of transfusion for each type of blood product and amounts transfused, blood loss, repeat surgery, TA-related adverse events, and mortality. RESULTS: The low-dose group comprised 284 patients and the high-dose one 285. The primary endpoint was not significantly different between TA doses (63% for low dose vs. 60% for high dose; P = 0.3). With the high dose, a lower incidence of frozen plasma (18 vs. 26%; P = 0.03) and platelet concentrate (15 vs. 23%; P = 0.02) transfusions, lower amounts of blood products (2.5 ± 0.38 vs. 4.1 ± 0.39; P = 0.02), fresh frozen plasma (0.49 ± 0.14 vs.1.07 ± 0.14; P = 0.02), and platelet concentrates transfused (0.50 ± 0.15 vs. 1.13 ± 0.15; P = 0.02), lower blood loss (590 ± 50.4 vs. 820 ± 50.7; P = 0.01), and less repeat surgery (2.5 vs. 6%; P = 0.01) were observed. These results are more marked in patients with a high risk for transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: A high dose of TA does not reduce incidence of blood product transfusion up to day 7, but is more effective than a low dose to decrease transfusion needs, blood loss, and repeat surgery.

Pharmacological approaches to reducing blood loss and transfusions in the surgical patient.

PURPOSE: To review the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of hemostatic drugs to reduce surgical blood loss. METHODS: Analysis of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses exploring the efficacy of desmopressin, aprotinin, lysine analogues and recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) on clinically important endpoints. MAIN FINDINGS: Although potentially useful in surgical patients with mild hemophilia or type I von Willebrand's disease, desmopressin has no proven benefit in patients without previous hemostatic defects. Aprotinin has been studied extensively in cardiopulmonary bypass surgery, with evidence of a blood sparing effect. Additional benefits are suggested. The drug is less consistently effective in liver transplantation and major orthopedic surgery. Although rare, hypersensitivity reactions to aprotinin may occur, especially on re-exposure. Tranexamic acid can reduce blood transfusion in cardiac surgery, liver transplantation and total knee arthroplasty surgery with a satisfactory safety profile. Epsilon aminocaproic acid has not been investigated adequately, despite its widespread use. While rFVIIa may be beneficial in controlling massive coagulopathic bleeding in trauma and surgical patients, there is currently no evidence to support its prophylactic use in elective surgical patients. CONCLUSION: Aprotinin and tranexamic acid are valuable pharmacologic options for reducing surgical bleeding. The expected benefit of these drugs is highly dependent on the actual blood usage for a given procedure at the institutional level. More studies using clinically significant endpoints are necessary to assess the relative efficacy and optimal dosing of these drugs.