Title Dexmedetomidine: A Novel Drug for the Treatment of Atrial and Junctional Tachyarrhythmias During the Perioperative Period for Congenital Cardiac Surgery: A Preliminary Study.[Miscellaneous Article]
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 107(5):1514-1522, November 2008.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Atrial and junctional tachyarrhythmias occur frequently during the perioperative period for congenital cardiac surgery and can be a cause of increased morbidity and mortality. These rhythm disturbances that may be well tolerated in a normal heart can cause significant hemodynamic instability in patients with congenital heart defects, particularly during the postcardiopulmonary bypass period. Management of these arrhythmias presents more of a challenge, since currently available antiarrhythmic drugs can be ineffective and poorly tolerated. In this study, we examined the possible effect of dexmedetomidine, a primarily sedative drug, on atrial and junctional tachyarrhythmias. Though some animal data have shown that it can prevent certain types of ventricular tachycardia, its therapeutic role during these types of arrhythmias has not been studied.
METHODS: This was a retrospective, nonrandomized, noncontrolled study. Fourteen patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit and who received dexmedetomidine for both, sedation/analgesia and for junctional ectopic tachycardia (JET), atrial ectopic tachycardia (AET), reentry type supraventricular tachycardia (Re-SVT), atrial flutter (AF) or junctional accelerated rhythm (JAR) were included. Dexmedetomidine was used as a primary drug or as a rescue if other antiarrhythmics had been used. Our primary end-points were (a) conversion to normal sinus rhythm (NSR) within 3 min for Re-SVT, and 2 h for all other arrhythmias or (b) heart rate (HR) reduction to improve hemodynamics; JET <=170 bpm, AET >=20%, AF <=150 bpm and for JAR prevention of progression to JET.
RESULTS: The mean age and weight were 2 +/- 3 mo and 4 +/- 1.5 kg, respectively. Most of the arrhythmias (79%) occurred during the postoperative period. Dexmedetomidine was used as a primary treatment in nine and as a rescue in five patients. Ten patients (71%) received an initial loading dose of 1.1 +/- 0.5 [mu]g/kg. A continuous infusion, 0.9 +/- 0.3 [mu]g [middle dot] kg-1 [middle dot] h-1 was administered in 12 patients. Thirteen patients' lungs were mechanically ventilated. Adverse effects were seen in four patients (28%). Three had hypotension that responded to fluid administration and one had a possible brief complete atrioventricular (AV) block. Nine of the 14 patients were transiently paced with atrial (seven) or AV sequential (two) pacing to improve AV synchrony. The primary outcome with rhythm and/or HR control was achieved in 13 patients (93%). JET rate decreased from 197 +/- 22 to 165 +/- 17 bpm within 67 +/- 75 min of dexmedetomidine administration. Five of these patients converted to NSR in 39 +/- 31 h and one remained in JAR. All four patients with Re-SVT had resolution of their tachyarrhythmia. Three converted to NSR and one to JAR. One patient with AET (220-270 bpm) responded well with decreasing HR to 120 bpm within 35 min and to NSR in 85 min. One patient with AF failed to respond. In two patients with JAR, neither progressed to JET and HR decreased from 158 +/- 11 to 129 +/- 1 bpm.
CONCLUSION: This preliminary, observational report suggests that dexmedetomidine may have a potential therapeutic role in the acute phase of perioperative atrial and junctional tachyarrhythmias for either HR control or conversion to NSR.
(C) 2008 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
domingo, 9 de novembro de 2008
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cell Salvage in Routine Cardiac Surgery.
Title A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cell Salvage in Routine Cardiac Surgery.[Miscellaneous Article]
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 107(5):1487-1495, November 2008.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Previous trials have indicated that cell salvage may reduce allogeneic blood transfusion during cardiac surgery, but these studies have limitations, including inconsistent use of other blood transfusion-sparing strategies. We designed a randomized controlled trial to determine whether routine cell salvage for elective uncomplicated cardiac surgery reduces blood transfusion and is cost effective in the setting of a rigorous transfusion protocol and routine administration of antifibrinolytics.
METHODS: Two-hundred-thirteen patients presenting for first-time coronary artery bypass grafting and/or cardiac valve surgery were prospectively randomized to control or cell salvage groups. The latter group had blood aspirate during surgery and mediastinal drainage the first 6 h after surgery processed in a cell saver device and autotransfused. All patients received tranexamic acid and were subjected to an algorithm for red blood cell and hemostatic blood factor transfusion.
RESULTS: There was no difference between the two groups in the proportion of patients exposed to allogeneic blood (32% in both groups, relative risk 1.0 P = 0.89). At current blood products and cell saver prices, the use of cell salvage increased the costs per patient by a minimum of $103. When patients who had mediastinal re-exploration for bleeding were excluded (as planned in the protocol), significantly fewer units of allogeneic red blood cells were transfused in the cell salvage compared with the control group (65 vs 100 U, relative risk 0.71 P = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing routine first-time cardiac surgery in an institution with a rigorous blood conservation program, the routine use of cell salvage does not further reduce the proportion of patients exposed to allogeneic blood transfusion. However, patients who do not have excessive bleeding after surgery receive significantly fewer units of blood with cell salvage. Although the use of cell savage may reduce the demand for blood products during cardiac surgery, this comes at an increased cost to the institution.
(C) 2008 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
DOI Number 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181831e54
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 107(5):1487-1495, November 2008.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Previous trials have indicated that cell salvage may reduce allogeneic blood transfusion during cardiac surgery, but these studies have limitations, including inconsistent use of other blood transfusion-sparing strategies. We designed a randomized controlled trial to determine whether routine cell salvage for elective uncomplicated cardiac surgery reduces blood transfusion and is cost effective in the setting of a rigorous transfusion protocol and routine administration of antifibrinolytics.
METHODS: Two-hundred-thirteen patients presenting for first-time coronary artery bypass grafting and/or cardiac valve surgery were prospectively randomized to control or cell salvage groups. The latter group had blood aspirate during surgery and mediastinal drainage the first 6 h after surgery processed in a cell saver device and autotransfused. All patients received tranexamic acid and were subjected to an algorithm for red blood cell and hemostatic blood factor transfusion.
RESULTS: There was no difference between the two groups in the proportion of patients exposed to allogeneic blood (32% in both groups, relative risk 1.0 P = 0.89). At current blood products and cell saver prices, the use of cell salvage increased the costs per patient by a minimum of $103. When patients who had mediastinal re-exploration for bleeding were excluded (as planned in the protocol), significantly fewer units of allogeneic red blood cells were transfused in the cell salvage compared with the control group (65 vs 100 U, relative risk 0.71 P = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing routine first-time cardiac surgery in an institution with a rigorous blood conservation program, the routine use of cell salvage does not further reduce the proportion of patients exposed to allogeneic blood transfusion. However, patients who do not have excessive bleeding after surgery receive significantly fewer units of blood with cell salvage. Although the use of cell savage may reduce the demand for blood products during cardiac surgery, this comes at an increased cost to the institution.
(C) 2008 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
DOI Number 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181831e54
Tranexamic Acid and Aprotinin in Primary Cardiac Operations: An Analysis of 220 Cardiac Surgical Patients Treated with Tranexamic Acid or Aprotinin.
Title Tranexamic Acid and Aprotinin in Primary Cardiac Operations: An Analysis of 220 Cardiac Surgical Patients Treated with Tranexamic Acid or Aprotinin.[Miscellaneous Article]
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 107(5):1469-1478, November 2008.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Antifibrinolytics are widely used in cardiac surgery to reduce bleeding. Allogeneic blood transfusion, even in primary cardiac operations with low blood loss, is still high. In the present study we evaluated the impact of tranexamic acid compared to aprotinin on the transfusion incidence in cardiac surgical patients with low risk of bleeding.
METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study included 220 patients undergoing primary coronary artery revascularization (coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) or aortic valve replacement (AVR). Randomized in blocks of 20, patients received either tranexamic acid (approximately 6 g) or full-dose aprotinin (approximately 5-6 x 106 Kallikrein Inhibiting Units). Transfusion was guided by a strict transfusion algorithm. Molecular markers of hemostasis were determined to assess differences in the mode of action of the two drugs. Primary end-points were the incidence of allogeneic red cell transfusion and 24-h postoperative blood loss. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle and compared using the [chi]2 and Mann-Whitney U-test.
RESULTS: Two-hundred-twenty patients were enrolled (CABG: 134, AVR: 86). In the aprotinin Group 47% of patients received allogeneic blood during the hospital stay as compared to 61% in the tranexamic acid group (P = 0.036). Aprotinin conferred a 23% reduction in allogeneic transfusion risk (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.53-0.88). Overall, no significant difference in postoperative bleeding was observed, although 24-h blood loss was reduced in aprotinin-treated CABG patients (500, 350-750 mL vs 650, 475-875 mL (median, 25th-75th percentile); P = 0.039). Despite the lower transfusion rate, the hemoglobin concentration on the first postoperative day was higher in the aprotinin group (11.3, 9.9-12.1 vs 10.6, 9.9-11.6 mg/dL; P = 0.023). The fibrinolytic activity at the end of operation determined by D-Dimer was comparable in both groups. (0.15, 0.11-0.17 mg/L [aprotinin] versus 0.18, 0.12-0.24 mg/L [tranexamic acid]). The activated partial thromboplastin time was prolonged up to 4 h postoperatively in the aprotinin group, while the heparin requirement was reduced: 19% of the patients in the aprotinin group and 45% in the tranexamic acid group received at least one additional bolus heparin during cardiopulmonary bypass (P < 0.001). Troponin T levels postoperatively and on postoperative day 1 were significantly higher in the tranexamic acid group (P = 0.017). No differences in renal, cardiac, or mortality outcomes were observed.
CONCLUSION: Considering the rate of transfusion of red blood cells, tranexamic acid was slightly inferior in patients undergoing CABG, but there was no difference in patients receiving AVR. Tranexamic acid seems to be less effective in operations with increased bleeding such as CABG. Clinical benefit depends on specific patient and institution characteristics ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00396760).
(C) 2008 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
DOI Number 10.1213/ane.0b013e318182252b
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 107(5):1469-1478, November 2008.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Antifibrinolytics are widely used in cardiac surgery to reduce bleeding. Allogeneic blood transfusion, even in primary cardiac operations with low blood loss, is still high. In the present study we evaluated the impact of tranexamic acid compared to aprotinin on the transfusion incidence in cardiac surgical patients with low risk of bleeding.
METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study included 220 patients undergoing primary coronary artery revascularization (coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) or aortic valve replacement (AVR). Randomized in blocks of 20, patients received either tranexamic acid (approximately 6 g) or full-dose aprotinin (approximately 5-6 x 106 Kallikrein Inhibiting Units). Transfusion was guided by a strict transfusion algorithm. Molecular markers of hemostasis were determined to assess differences in the mode of action of the two drugs. Primary end-points were the incidence of allogeneic red cell transfusion and 24-h postoperative blood loss. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle and compared using the [chi]2 and Mann-Whitney U-test.
RESULTS: Two-hundred-twenty patients were enrolled (CABG: 134, AVR: 86). In the aprotinin Group 47% of patients received allogeneic blood during the hospital stay as compared to 61% in the tranexamic acid group (P = 0.036). Aprotinin conferred a 23% reduction in allogeneic transfusion risk (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.53-0.88). Overall, no significant difference in postoperative bleeding was observed, although 24-h blood loss was reduced in aprotinin-treated CABG patients (500, 350-750 mL vs 650, 475-875 mL (median, 25th-75th percentile); P = 0.039). Despite the lower transfusion rate, the hemoglobin concentration on the first postoperative day was higher in the aprotinin group (11.3, 9.9-12.1 vs 10.6, 9.9-11.6 mg/dL; P = 0.023). The fibrinolytic activity at the end of operation determined by D-Dimer was comparable in both groups. (0.15, 0.11-0.17 mg/L [aprotinin] versus 0.18, 0.12-0.24 mg/L [tranexamic acid]). The activated partial thromboplastin time was prolonged up to 4 h postoperatively in the aprotinin group, while the heparin requirement was reduced: 19% of the patients in the aprotinin group and 45% in the tranexamic acid group received at least one additional bolus heparin during cardiopulmonary bypass (P < 0.001). Troponin T levels postoperatively and on postoperative day 1 were significantly higher in the tranexamic acid group (P = 0.017). No differences in renal, cardiac, or mortality outcomes were observed.
CONCLUSION: Considering the rate of transfusion of red blood cells, tranexamic acid was slightly inferior in patients undergoing CABG, but there was no difference in patients receiving AVR. Tranexamic acid seems to be less effective in operations with increased bleeding such as CABG. Clinical benefit depends on specific patient and institution characteristics ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00396760).
(C) 2008 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
DOI Number 10.1213/ane.0b013e318182252b
A Thromboelastometric Evaluation of the Effects of Hypothermia on the Coagulation System.
Title A Thromboelastometric Evaluation of the Effects of Hypothermia on the Coagulation System.[Miscellaneous Article]
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 107(5):1465-1468, November 2008.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Hypothermia may be accidental or therapeutic. Therapeutic hypothermia is increasingly used as treatment for various conditions, e.g., neuroprotection after cardiac arrest. Hypothermia leads to an impairment of the coagulation system, but the degree of impairment has been difficult to determine. Most studies have been performed on plasma instead of whole blood. We therefore evaluated whole blood investigating the effects of hypothermia on the coagulation system over a wide range of temperatures (25-40[degrees]C).
METHODS: Blood was drawn from six healthy volunteers into citrated test tubes. Samples were then placed in water baths with temperatures ranging from 25 to 40[degrees]C for 30 min before the coagulation system was studied using rotational thromboelastometry. A contact activator (Ellagic acid) was used for initiation of coagulation. Clotting time, clot formation time, [alpha] angle, and maximum clot strength were measured. All tests were run for 60 min and they were performed at the same temperature as the temperature in the water bath.
RESULTS: Coagulation was increasingly impaired with decreasing temperatures in the temperature range studied. All variables measured were significantly impaired in a stepwise pattern (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation using a whole blood analysis shows that hypothermia progressively impairs the coagulation system.
(C) 2008 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
DOI Number 10.1213/ane.0b013e31817ee955
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 107(5):1465-1468, November 2008.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Hypothermia may be accidental or therapeutic. Therapeutic hypothermia is increasingly used as treatment for various conditions, e.g., neuroprotection after cardiac arrest. Hypothermia leads to an impairment of the coagulation system, but the degree of impairment has been difficult to determine. Most studies have been performed on plasma instead of whole blood. We therefore evaluated whole blood investigating the effects of hypothermia on the coagulation system over a wide range of temperatures (25-40[degrees]C).
METHODS: Blood was drawn from six healthy volunteers into citrated test tubes. Samples were then placed in water baths with temperatures ranging from 25 to 40[degrees]C for 30 min before the coagulation system was studied using rotational thromboelastometry. A contact activator (Ellagic acid) was used for initiation of coagulation. Clotting time, clot formation time, [alpha] angle, and maximum clot strength were measured. All tests were run for 60 min and they were performed at the same temperature as the temperature in the water bath.
RESULTS: Coagulation was increasingly impaired with decreasing temperatures in the temperature range studied. All variables measured were significantly impaired in a stepwise pattern (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation using a whole blood analysis shows that hypothermia progressively impairs the coagulation system.
(C) 2008 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
DOI Number 10.1213/ane.0b013e31817ee955
The effects of interrupted or continuous administration of sevoflurane on preconditioning before cardio-pulmonary bypass in coronary artery surgery: c
The effects of interrupted or continuous administration of sevoflurane on preconditioning before cardio-pulmonary bypass in coronary artery surgery: comparison with continuous propofol.[Article]
Source Anaesthesia. 63(10):1046-1055, October 2008.
Abstract Summary: Volatile anaesthetics have been shown to exert cardioprotective properties in experimental and clinical studies. However, the mode of administration may influence these cardioprotective effects. The present study was designed to compare the effect of interrupted administration of sevoflurane before cardiopulmonary bypass with continuous sevoflurane administration and with propofol-only anaesthesia, on cardioprotection as assessed by left ventricular performance and myocardial cell damage during coronary artery bypass grafting. Forty-two patients scheduled for coronary bypass surgery were randomly assigned to one of three groups: propofol-only (P; n = 14), continuous (SevoC; n = 14) and interrupted sevoflurane administration (SevoI; n = 14). Myocardial cell damage as assessed by Troponin T (cTNT) and creatine kinase MB (CK-MB) were chosen as the primary endpoints and echocardiographic myocardial performance index (MPI) measurements were also performed. Up to 48 h postoperatively, in group SevoI, postoperative cTNT values (mean (SD) 0.13 (0.04) ng.ml-1) were significantly (p < 0.05) lower than both the P (0.26 (0.31) ng.ml-1) and SevoC (0.25 (0.17) ng.ml-1) groups. CK-MB levels were also significantly (p < 0.05) lower in the SevoI group at 24 h after surgery and MPI significantly improved compared with both the P and SevoC groups. There was, however, no difference with respect to cytokine release and length of stay in either the intensive care unit or in the hospital. We conclude that prior interrupted sevoflurane administration confers some cardioprotection as compared with continuous sevoflurane administration or propofol-based anaesthesia.
(C) 2008 Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland
Source Anaesthesia. 63(10):1046-1055, October 2008.
Abstract Summary: Volatile anaesthetics have been shown to exert cardioprotective properties in experimental and clinical studies. However, the mode of administration may influence these cardioprotective effects. The present study was designed to compare the effect of interrupted administration of sevoflurane before cardiopulmonary bypass with continuous sevoflurane administration and with propofol-only anaesthesia, on cardioprotection as assessed by left ventricular performance and myocardial cell damage during coronary artery bypass grafting. Forty-two patients scheduled for coronary bypass surgery were randomly assigned to one of three groups: propofol-only (P; n = 14), continuous (SevoC; n = 14) and interrupted sevoflurane administration (SevoI; n = 14). Myocardial cell damage as assessed by Troponin T (cTNT) and creatine kinase MB (CK-MB) were chosen as the primary endpoints and echocardiographic myocardial performance index (MPI) measurements were also performed. Up to 48 h postoperatively, in group SevoI, postoperative cTNT values (mean (SD) 0.13 (0.04) ng.ml-1) were significantly (p < 0.05) lower than both the P (0.26 (0.31) ng.ml-1) and SevoC (0.25 (0.17) ng.ml-1) groups. CK-MB levels were also significantly (p < 0.05) lower in the SevoI group at 24 h after surgery and MPI significantly improved compared with both the P and SevoC groups. There was, however, no difference with respect to cytokine release and length of stay in either the intensive care unit or in the hospital. We conclude that prior interrupted sevoflurane administration confers some cardioprotection as compared with continuous sevoflurane administration or propofol-based anaesthesia.
(C) 2008 Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland
sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2007
Revisão foramen Oval -achado cirurgico
Title The Incidental Finding of a Patent Foramen Ovale During Cardiac Surgery: Should It Always Be Repaired? A Core Review.[Review]
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 105(3):602-610, September 2007.
Abstract With the increased use of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography, patent foramen ovale (PFO) has become a common finding during heart surgery. This finding presents a difficult dilemma for cardiac surgeons, since the impact of intraoperatively diagnosed PFOs on postoperative outcome is unknown. Changes in the surgical plan required for closure of a PFO subject the patient to the possibility of additional risk. On the other hand, a decision to not close a PFO exposes the patient to unclear immediate and long-term consequences. Deciding whether or not to close a PFO currently depends on the clinicians' personal preferences, the probability of intraoperative and postoperative hypoxemia, and any anticipated deviation from the initial surgical plan. Most clinicians agree that an intraoperatively diagnosed PFO must be closed when surgery leads to a high risk of hypoxemia (e.g., left ventricular assist devices placement, heart transplantation); should be closed in most cases when minimal deviation from the initial surgical plan is needed for PFO closure (e.g., mitral valve or tricuspid valve surgeries); and probably, should be closed during heart surgeries performed without atriotomy and bicaval cannulation when the risk of perioperative or remote PFO-related complications is increased. The recent development of percutaneous methods of PFO closure provides a valuable backup for those cases when PFO is not closed and postoperative hypoxemia or other complications may be attributable to the uncorrected PFO.
(C) 2007 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 105(3):602-610, September 2007.
Abstract With the increased use of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography, patent foramen ovale (PFO) has become a common finding during heart surgery. This finding presents a difficult dilemma for cardiac surgeons, since the impact of intraoperatively diagnosed PFOs on postoperative outcome is unknown. Changes in the surgical plan required for closure of a PFO subject the patient to the possibility of additional risk. On the other hand, a decision to not close a PFO exposes the patient to unclear immediate and long-term consequences. Deciding whether or not to close a PFO currently depends on the clinicians' personal preferences, the probability of intraoperative and postoperative hypoxemia, and any anticipated deviation from the initial surgical plan. Most clinicians agree that an intraoperatively diagnosed PFO must be closed when surgery leads to a high risk of hypoxemia (e.g., left ventricular assist devices placement, heart transplantation); should be closed in most cases when minimal deviation from the initial surgical plan is needed for PFO closure (e.g., mitral valve or tricuspid valve surgeries); and probably, should be closed during heart surgeries performed without atriotomy and bicaval cannulation when the risk of perioperative or remote PFO-related complications is increased. The recent development of percutaneous methods of PFO closure provides a valuable backup for those cases when PFO is not closed and postoperative hypoxemia or other complications may be attributable to the uncorrected PFO.
(C) 2007 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
Revisão heparina e trombocitopenia
Title Reducing Thrombotic Complications in the Perioperative Setting: An Update on Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia.[Review]
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 105(3):570-582, September 2007.
Abstract Heparins are widely used in the perioperative setting. Immune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a serious, antibody-mediated complication of heparin therapy that occurs in approximately 0.5%-5% of patients treated with heparin for at least 5 days. An extremely prothrombotic disorder, HIT confers significant risks of thrombosis and devastating consequences on affected patients: approximately 38%-76% develop thrombosis, approximately 10% with thrombosis require limb amputation, and approximately 20%-30% die within a month. HIT antibodies are transient and typically disappear within 3 mo. In patients with lingering antibodies, however, re-exposure to heparin can be catastrophic. In the perioperative setting, heightened awareness is important for the prompt recognition, diagnosis, and treatment of HIT. HIT should be considered if the platelet count decreases 50% and/or thrombosis occurs 5-14 days after starting heparin, with other diagnoses excluded. On strong clinical suspicion of HIT, heparin should be discontinued and a parenteral alternative anticoagulant initiated, even before laboratory confirmation of HIT is obtained. Subsequent laboratory test results may help with the decision to continue with nonheparin therapy or switch back to heparin. Heparin avoidance in patients with current or previous HIT is feasible in most clinical situations, except perhaps in cardiovascular surgery. If the surgery cannot be delayed until HIT antibodies have disappeared, intraoperative alternative anticoagulation is recommended.
(C) 2007 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
Source Anesthesia & Analgesia. 105(3):570-582, September 2007.
Abstract Heparins are widely used in the perioperative setting. Immune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a serious, antibody-mediated complication of heparin therapy that occurs in approximately 0.5%-5% of patients treated with heparin for at least 5 days. An extremely prothrombotic disorder, HIT confers significant risks of thrombosis and devastating consequences on affected patients: approximately 38%-76% develop thrombosis, approximately 10% with thrombosis require limb amputation, and approximately 20%-30% die within a month. HIT antibodies are transient and typically disappear within 3 mo. In patients with lingering antibodies, however, re-exposure to heparin can be catastrophic. In the perioperative setting, heightened awareness is important for the prompt recognition, diagnosis, and treatment of HIT. HIT should be considered if the platelet count decreases 50% and/or thrombosis occurs 5-14 days after starting heparin, with other diagnoses excluded. On strong clinical suspicion of HIT, heparin should be discontinued and a parenteral alternative anticoagulant initiated, even before laboratory confirmation of HIT is obtained. Subsequent laboratory test results may help with the decision to continue with nonheparin therapy or switch back to heparin. Heparin avoidance in patients with current or previous HIT is feasible in most clinical situations, except perhaps in cardiovascular surgery. If the surgery cannot be delayed until HIT antibodies have disappeared, intraoperative alternative anticoagulation is recommended.
(C) 2007 by International Anesthesia Research Society.
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)
Postagens
