Dataset Information

Aspirin Before Elective Surgery-Stop or Continue?

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Cessation of long-term aspirin treatment before noncardiac surgery can cause adverse cardiac events in patients at risk, particularly in those with previous percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with stent implantation. The factors influencing the clinical decision to stop aspirin treatment are currently unknown. METHODS:In a single-center, cross-sectional study (retrospective registration: NCT03049566) carried out from February to December 2014, we took a survey among patients scheduled for noncardiac surgery who were under long-term aspirin treatment, and among their treating anesthesiologists using standardized questionnaires on preoperative aspirin use, comorbidities, and risk-benefit assessments. The main objective was to identify factors associated with the decision to stop aspirin treatment. The results of multivariable logistic regressions and intraclass correlations are presented. RESULTS:805 patients were included in the study, and 636 questionnaires were returned (203 of which concerned patients with coronary stents). 46.8% of the patients stopped their long-term aspirin treatment before surgery; 38.7% of these patients stopped it too early (>10 days before surgery) or too late (? 3 days before surgery). A prior PCI with stent implantation lowered the probability of aspirin cessation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.47 [0.31; 0.72]; p <0.001). On the other hand, patients were more likely to stop their long-term aspirin treatment if it had already been discontinued once before (OR = 4.58 [3.06; 6.84]; p <0.001), if there was a risk of bleeding into a closed space (OR = 4.54 [2.02; 10.22]; p <0.001), if they did not know why they were supposed to take aspirin (OR = 2.12 [1.05; 4.28]; p = 0.036), or if the preoperative consultation with the anesthesiologist occurred <2 days before surgery (OR = 1.60 [1.08; 2.37]; p = 0.018). Patients often assessed the risks related to aspirin cessation lower than their physicians did. CONCLUSION:This study reveals discordance between guideline recommendations and everyday clinical practice in patients with coronary stents. The early integration of cardiologists and anesthesiologists and a more widespread use of stent implant cards could promote adherence to the guidelines.

SUBMITTER: Plumer L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5545631 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Aspirin Before Elective Surgery-Stop or Continue?

Plümer Lili L Seiffert Moritz M Punke Mark Andree MA Kersten Jan Felix JF Blankenberg Stefan S Zöllner Christian C Petzoldt Martin M

Deutsches Arzteblatt international 20170701 27-28

<h4>Background</h4>Cessation of long-term aspirin treatment before noncardiac surgery can cause adverse cardiac events in patients at risk, particularly in those with previous percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with stent implantation. The factors influencing the clinical decision to stop aspirin treatment are currently unknown.<h4>Methods</h4>In a single-center, cross-sectional study (retrospective registration: NCT03049566) carried out from February to December 2014, we took a survey am ...[more]

PMID: 28764836

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThere is limited evidence on whether the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion beginning in 2014 improved access to elective procedures. Uninsured individuals are at higher risk of obesity and may have experienced improved uptake of bariatric surgery following Medicaid expansion.ObjectiveTo examine the association between Medicaid expansion and the receipt of inpatient elective bariatric surgery among Medicaid-covered and uninsured individuals aged 26 to 64 years.Design setting and participantsThis cohort study used difference-in-differences analysis of all-payer data (2010-2017) of 637 557 elective bariatric surgeries for patients aged 26 to 74 years from 11 Medicaid expansion states and 6 nonexpansion states. Nonexpansion states and individuals aged 65 to 74 years were control cohorts. Data analysis was performed from July 6, 2020, to July 23, 2021.ExposureLiving in a Medicaid expansion state.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were the (1) number of elective bariatric surgeries, (2) population count, and (3) rate of bariatric surgery (number of surgeries per 10 000 population) among Medicaid-covered and uninsured individuals.ResultsOf the 600 798 elective bariatric surgeries in adults aged 26 to 64 years between 2010 and 2017 from the 17 study states, Medicaid-covered and uninsured individuals accounted for 18.3% of the total surgery volume in expansion states and 14.5% in nonexpansion states. A total of 296 798 patients (78.9%) in expansion states were women vs 177 386 (78.9%) in nonexpansion states. Among individuals aged 26 to 64 years, the median age was 44 (IQR, 37-52) years. Racial and ethnic distribution was non-Hispanic White, 60.2%; non-Hispanic Black, 17.7%; Hispanic, 16.6%; and other, 5.5%. Between 2013 and 2017, the volume of bariatric surgeries for Medicaid-covered and uninsured patients increased annually by 30.3% in expansion states and 16.5% in nonexpansion states. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 36.6% annual increase (95% CI, 8.2% to 72.5%) in surgery volume, a 9.0% annual increase (95% CI, 3.8% to 14.5%) in the population, and a 25.5% change (95% CI, -1.3% to 59.4%) in the rate of bariatric surgery. By race and ethnicity, Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase in the rate of bariatric surgery among non-Hispanic White individuals (31.6%; 95% CI, 6.1% to 63.0%) but no significant change among non-Hispanic Black (5.9%; 95% CI, -19.8% to 39.9%) and Hispanic (28.9%; 95% CI, -24.4% to 119.8%) individuals.Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study found that Medicaid expansion was associated with increased rates of bariatric surgery among lower-income non-Hispanic White individuals, but not among Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black individuals.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess whether offering free mailed nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and telephone counselling to smokers on elective surgery waiting lists increases quitting before surgery.Design, settingRandomised, controlled trial at Frankston Hospital, a public tertiary referral hospital in Melbourne.ParticipantsAdult smokers added to elective surgery waiting lists for operations at least ten days in the future, 1 April 2019 - 3 April 2020.InterventionIn addition to normal care, intervention participants received a brochure on the risks of low frequency smoking, an offer of Quitline call-back registration, and an offer of mailed NRT according to reported daily smoking: 1-9 cigarettes/day, 2 mg lozenges; 10-15/day, 7-14 mg patches [three weeks] and 2 mg lozenges; > 15/day, 7-21 mg patches [five weeks] and 2 mg lozenges.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome: quitting at least 24 hours before surgery, verified by exhaled carbon monoxide testing.Secondary outcomesquitting at least four weeks before surgery, adverse events, and (for those who had quit before surgery) abstinence three months after surgery.ResultsOf 748 eligible participants (control, 363; intervention, 385), 516 (69%) had undergone elective surgery when the trial was terminated early (for COVID-19-related reasons) (intervention group, 274; control group, 242). 122 of the 385 intervention participants (32%) had accepted the offer of cessation support. The proportions of intervention participants who quit at least 24 hours before surgery (18% v 9%; odds ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% CI, 1.22-3.15) or at least four weeks before surgery (9% v 4%; OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.08-4.50) were larger than for the control group. Three months after surgery, 27 of 58 intervention (47%) and 12 of 25 control participants (48%) who quit before surgery reported not smoking in the preceding seven days. No major adverse events were reported.ConclusionUptake of free mailed NRT and Quitline support by smokers on elective surgery waiting lists was good, and offering additional support was associated with higher proportions of smokers quitting before surgery.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12619000032156 (prospective).

Project description:BackgroundHealth behavior changes made by patients during the perioperative period can impact the outcomes and success of elective surgeries. However, there remains a limited understanding of how best to support patients during this time, particularly through the use of digital health interventions. Recognizing and understanding the potential unmet needs of elective orthopedic surgery patients is central to motivating healthier behavior change, improving recovery, and optimizing overall surgical success in the short and long term.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to explore patient perspectives on technology features that would help support them to change their lifestyle behaviors during the pre- and postoperative periods, and that could potentially maintain long-term healthy lifestyles following recovery.MethodsSemistructured interviews with pre- and postoperative elective orthopedic patients were conducted between May and June 2020 using telephone and video call-based software. Patient perspectives on the use of digital technologies to complement current surgical care and support with lifestyle behavior changes were discussed. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Reflexive thematic analysis enabled the development of themes from the data, with QSR NVivo software (version 12) facilitating data management. Ethical approval was obtained from the National Health Service Health Research Authority.ResultsA total of 18 participants were interviewed. Four themes were developed from the data regarding the design and functionality of digital technologies to best support the perioperative journey. These center around an intervention's ability to incorporate interactive, user-centered features; direct a descriptive and structured recovery; enable customizable, patient-controlled settings; and deliver both general and specific surgical advice in a timely manner. Interventions that are initiated preoperatively and continued postoperatively were perceived as beneficial. Interventions designed with personalized milestones were found to better guide patients through a structured recovery. Individualized tailoring of preparatory and recovery information was desired by patients with previously high levels of physical activity before surgery. The use of personalized progression-based exercises further encouraged physical recovery; game-like rewards and incentives were regarded as motivational for making and sustaining health behavior change. In-built video calling and messaging features offered connectivity with peers and clinicians for supported care delivery.ConclusionsSpecific intervention design and functionality features can provide better, structured support for elective orthopedic patients across the entire surgical journey and beyond. This study provides much-needed evidence relating to the optimal design and timing of digital interventions for elective orthopedic surgical patients. Findings from this study suggest a desire for personalized perioperative care, in turn, supporting patients to make health behavior changes to optimize surgical success. These findings should be used to influence future co-design projects to enable the design and implementation of patient-focused, tailored, and targeted digital health technologies within modern health care settings.

Project description:IntroductionWe compared smoking cessation outcomes between those who used a pharmacist-led community-based smoking cessation intervention and those who did not, prior to total joint replacement (TJR) surgery. Also, we examined intervention characteristics (e.g. number/duration of sessions attended, recommended therapy) and smoking cessation outcomes.MethodsThis prospective evaluation was nested within a comparative study from a centralized clinic that prepares over 3000 patients annually for TJR and focused on participants referred to the community-based smoking cessation program preoperatively. Pharmacists offered an individualized evidence-based intervention and collected visit, duration and intervention data. Smoking cessation, the primary outcome, was ascertained independently of participating pharmacists at 6 weeks post-operative using exhaled CO monitoring and at 6 months post-recruitment via telephone interview.ResultsOf 286 eligible candidates, 104 agreed to participate, with one subsequently withdrawing (n=103). At 6 weeks post-operatively, 66/103 (64%) participants returned for study re-assessment while 63/103 (61%) participants completed the post-recruitment interview at 6 months; non-respondents to study follow-up were considered smokers. Of 103 participants, 58 (56%) consulted with a pharmacist; those who did not consult a pharmacist (n=45) were slightly younger (p=0.02) with significantly higher CO level (p=0.02) on study entry. Validated 7-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) at 6 weeks post-operative was 11/58 (19%) in pharmacist-compliant participants compared to 2/45 (4%) in non-compliant participants (p=0.04). At 6 months post-recruitment, 19/58 (33%) pharmacistcompliant participants self-reported a 7-day PPA compared to 2/45 (4%) by non-compliant participants (p<0.001). For pharmacist-compliant participants, 33/58 (54%) saw the pharmacist 4 times; the mean overall pharmacist time was 71.8±24.4 minutes/patient with 26/58 (45%) and 19/58 (33%) prescribed nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline, respectively, and 13/58 (22%) not using medication; post hoc analysis suggested varenicline was marginally more effective for smoking cessation than no medication (p=0.04).ConclusionsCommunity-based pharmacist-led smoking cessation programs are an effective addition to usual preoperative care for smokers awaiting elective TJR. Using existing community resources led to higher smoking cessation rates in smokers waiting for TJR relative to those not using these resources.

Project description:ImportanceThere has been a resurgence of interest in the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotics (OAB) before elective colorectal surgery. Until now, clinical trials and meta-analyses have not compared all 4 approaches (MBP with OAB, OAB only, MBP only, or no preparation) simultaneously.ObjectiveTo perform a network meta-analysis to clarify which approach in colorectal surgery is associated with the lowest rate of surgical site infection (SSI).Data sourcesFive electronic databases were searched, including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ACP Journal Club. and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness from database inception to November 27, 2017.Study selectionOnly data from randomized clinical trials were included. Inclusion criteria were RCTs that reported on SSI rates or other complications based on MBP or OAB status. Quality of studies was appraised by the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.Data extraction and synthesisThe study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.Main outcomes and measuresTotal, incisional, and organ/space SSI rates. Secondary outcomes included rates of anastomotic leak, mortality, readmissions/reoperations, urinary tract infection, and pulmonary complications.ResultsThirty-eight randomized clinical trials among 8458 patients (52.1% male) were included, providing 4 direct comparisons and 2 indirect comparisons for 8 outcome measures. On Bayesian analysis, MBP with OAB vs MBP only was associated with reduced SSI (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% equal-tail credible interval [CrI], 0.57-0.88). There was no significant difference between MBP with OAB vs OAB only (OR, 0.95; 95% CrI, 0.56-1.62). Oral antibiotics without MBP was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in SSI compared with any other group (except for a risk reduction in organ/space SSI when indirectly compared with no preparation) (OR, 0.13; 95% CrI, 0.02-0.55). There was no difference in SSI between MBP only vs no preparation (OR, 0.84; 95% CrI, 0.69-1.02).Conclusions and relevanceIn this network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, MBP with OAB was associated with the lowest risk of SSI. Oral antibiotics only was ranked as second best, but the data available on this approach were limited. There was no difference between MBP only vs no preparation. In addition, there was no difference in rates of anastomotic leak, readmissions, or reoperations between any groups.

Dataset Information

Aspirin Before Elective Surgery-Stop or Continue?

Publications

Aspirin Before Elective Surgery-Stop or Continue?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure