Search

Abstract: Background context: Low-dose aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular disease is recommended to be discontinued at least 7 days before spinal surgery. Purpose: To determine the effect of stopping low-dose aspirin at least 7 days before surgery on the level of the perioperative blood loss or complications related to hemorrhage. Study design: Retrospective case study. Patient sample: Patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery for degenerative lumbar disease. Outcome measure: Clinical outcome was measured by the Oswestry Disability Index. Methods: The aspirin group included 38 patients who had taken 100 mg aspirin for an average of 40.3 months. They stopped aspirin for at least 7 days before surgery (mean, 9.0 days). The control group included 38 patients who had not taken aspirin. Both groups were matched in terms of age, gender, number of fused segments, and surgical procedures. The diagnosis in all patients was degenerative spinal disease. Results: The mean age in the aspirin and control groups was 68.5 and 69.1 years, respectively. The mean number of levels fused was 2.0 segments in both groups. During surgery, the estimated blood loss was 855.3 cc in the aspirin group and 840.8 cc in the control group with no significant difference (p=.84). However, there was a significant difference in blood drainage after surgery. The hemovac blood drainage after surgery was 864.4 cc in the aspirin group but only 458.4 cc in the control group (p<.001). Therefore, the transfusion requirement after surgery was significantly greater in the aspirin group than in the control group (p=.03). The rate of complications related to hemorrhage was higher in the aspirin group than in the control group. Conclusions: The intraoperative blood loss during spinal fusion surgery was similar in both groups. However, the blood drainage after surgery was significantly higher in the aspirin group despite stopping aspirin 7 days before surgery. Hence, surgeons should pay careful attention to postoperative blood loss and complications related to hemorrhage in patients who have been taking low-dose aspirin. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a novel technique that is expected to be a curative treatment for early gastric cancers. Anti-coagulants and anti-platelet agents are widely used, especially in elderly patients, to prevent thromboembolic disease. However, the feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for such patients has not been investigated. Aims: To determine the feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for patients using anti-coagulant and anti-platelet agents via retrospective investigation of clinical outcomes. Methods: Of 408 patients with 444 early gastric cancers consecutively treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection from January 2000 to December 2007 in our hospital, 47 patients with 56 early gastric cancers were receiving anti-coagulants or anti-platelet agents. All patients were classified into groups for high and low risk of thromboembolism. In 44 low-risk patients, these agents were stopped for 1 week before and after treatment. Only three high-risk patients underwent intravenous heparin replacement during the cessation period. Results: Comparison with other patients showed no significant differences in complete en-bloc resection (96.4%) or perforation (1.8%). Postoperative bleeding requiring endoscopic treatment occurred for six early gastric cancers (10.7%) in the anti-coagulant and anti-platelet group; this frequency was slightly higher than that observed for other patients (5.2%). The healing of endoscopic submucosal dissection ulcers was not delayed by anti-coagulant and anti-platelet treatment (91% in the scarring stage) when checked at the 8th week after endoscopic submucosal dissection. Conclusion: The clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancers in patients receiving anti-coagulants or anti-platelet agents indicated that endoscopic submucosal dissection for low-risk patients could be a reliable technique with equivalent efficacy and risk in comparison with that for other early gastric cancer patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]