RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The decision to maintain or halt antiplatelet medication in septic patients admitted to intensive care units presents a clinical dilemma. This is due to the necessity to balance the benefits of preventing thromboembolic incidents and leveraging anti-inflammatory properties against the increased risk of bleeding. METHODS: This study involves a secondary analysis of data from a prospective cohort study focusing on patients diagnosed with severe sepsis or septic shock. We evaluated the outcomes of 203 patients, examining mortality rates and the requirement for transfusion. The cohort was divided into two groups: those whose antiplatelet therapy was sustained (n = 114) and those in whom it was discontinued (n = 89). To account for potential biases such as indication for antiplatelet therapy, propensity score matching was employed. RESULTS: Therapy continuation did not significantly alter transfusion requirements (discontinued vs. continued in matched samples: red blood cell concentrates 51.7% vs. 68.3%, p = 0.09; platelet concentrates 21.7% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.82; fresh frozen plasma concentrates 38.3% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.7). 90-day survival was higher within the continued group (30.0% vs. 70.0%; p < 0.001) and the Log-rank test (7-day survivors; p = 0.001) as well as Cox regression (both matched samples) suggested an association between continuation of antiplatelet therapy < 7 days and survival (HR: 0.24, 95%-CI 0.10 to 0.63, p = 0.004). Sepsis severity expressed by the SOFA score did not differ significantly in matched and unmatched patients (both p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that continuing antiplatelet therapy in septic patients admitted to intensive care units could be associated with a significant survival benefit without substantially increasing the need for transfusion. These results highlight the importance of a nuanced approach to managing antiplatelet medication in the context of severe sepsis and septic shock.