Risk of pocket hematoma in patients on chronic anticoagulation with warfarin undergoing electrophysiological device implantation: a comparison of different peri-operative management strategies

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Periprocedural management of warfarin remains challenging in patients requiring electrophysiological device surgery. For patients at high risk of thromboembolic events, guidelines recommend bridging therapy with heparin; however, this strategy is associated with a high risk of pocket hematoma. This paper systematically reviews studies appraising the risk of pocket hematoma with different perioperative anticoagulation strategies. METHODS: All relevant studies identified in MEDLINE/PubMed, The Cochrane Collaboration CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.org and in bibliographies of key articles. Estimates were combined using a fixed effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by p values of chi(2) statistics and I-2. Publication bias was assessed by visual examination of funnel plots and by Egger test. Fifteen studies enrolling 5911 patients met all inclusion criteria and were included in this review. RESULTS: Heparin bridging compared with no heparin was associated with increased risk of pocket hematoma (OR = 4.47, 95% CI 3.21-6.23, p < 0.00001), and prolonged hospital stay (9.13 +/- 1.9 days vs. 5.11 +/- 1.39 days, p < 0.00001). Warfarin continuation was not associated with increased pocket hematoma compared to warfarin discontinuation (p = 0.38), but was associated with reduced risk of pocket hematoma compared with heparin bridging (OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.2-0.69, p = 0.002). Thromboembolic complications were reduced with heparin bridging vs. no heparin (0.50% vs.1.07%, p = 0.02), and no significant differences were reported between heparin bridging vs. warfarin continuation (p = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Heparin bridging is associated with a higher risk of pocket hematoma and a prolonged hospital stay. Perioperative continuation of warfarin reduces the occurence of pocket hematoma compared with heparin bridging without any significant differences in thromboembolic complications