Incidence of bleeding in patients on different anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapies undergoing thoracentesis.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracentesis is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the inpatient setting. Although coagulation profile is usually evaluated prior to thoracentesis, bleeding is a rare complication, occurring in less than 1% of the cases. Several society guidelines recommend holding antiplatelet medications and anticoagulants prior to thoracentesis. Clinical practice guidelines also recommend correcting international normalised ratios of more than two and platelet counts <50 X10∧9/L. METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive study that included 292 patients who underwent thoracentesis in the inpatient setting at Ascension St John Hospital in Detroit, Michigan, USA from 2016 to 2018. We identified patients who had uncorrected risk for bleeding and collected data about their demographics, comorbidities, use of antiplatelet or anticoagulants and procedural details including complications. We looked for any postprocedural bleeding events to study their relation to the already established bleeding risk. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-two thoracenteses were performed, 95.5% (n=279) were performed by interventional radiology. Majority of patients were at risk of bleeding 83% (n=242). No bleeding events occurred. Medications that were not held prior to thoracentesis included: clopidogrel 11% (n=32), novel anticoagulants 8.2% (n=24) and unfractionated heparin 50% (n=146). Use of ultrasound guidance decreased the amount of haemoglobin decline from 1 to 2 g/L (p=0.029). Seventeen patients suffered pneumothorax, eight of which required intervention. DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that performing thoracentesis without correction of underlying coagulopathy may be safe. This may prevent consequences of holding essential medications and reduce the amount of blood products administered to patients in need of thoracentesis.

Association of Race with Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Popliteal and Infra-Popliteal Percutaneous Peripheral Arterial Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Race-related differences in clinical features, presentation, treatment and outcomes of patients with various cardiovascular diseases have been reported in previous studies. However, the long-term outcomes in black versus white patients with popliteal and/or infra-popliteal peripheral arterial disease (PAD) undergoing percutaneous peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) are not well known. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively evaluated long-term outcomes in 696 patients (263 blacks and 433 whites) who underwent PVI for popliteal and/or infra-popliteal PAD at our institution between 2007 and 2012. When compared to white patients, black patients were younger (70 ±â€¯11 vs. 72 ±â€¯11; P = 0.002) and had more comorbidities: higher creatinine (2.04 ±â€¯2.08 vs. 1.33 ±â€¯1.16; P < 0.0001) with more ESRD (19% vs. 6%; P < 0.0001) and more diabetes (64% vs. 55%; P = 0.004). At mean follow-up of 36 ±â€¯20 months, there was no statistically significant difference between black and white patients either in all-cause mortality (29% vs. 32%; P = 0.38) or in major amputation (4.4% vs. 4.2%; P = 0.88), respectively. In a multi-variate Cox proportional hazard model, repeat ipsilateral percutaneous revascularization or bypass were lower in black patients (HR = 0.64 [95% CI 0.46-0.89]; P = 0.007) and major adverse vascular events (MAVE) were lower in black patients as well (HR = 0.7 [95% CI 0.56-0.89]; P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Black patients undergoing popliteal or infra-popliteal PVI had similar mortality and major amputation, but lower repeat revascularization and MAVE compared to white patients. These data support the use of PVI in minorities despite higher baseline comorbidities and call for more research to understand the mechanisms underlying the high mortality irrespective of race.