Bleeding Events After Image-Guided Breast Biopsies: Comparison of Patients Temporarily Discontinuing Versus Maintaining Antithrombotic Therapy During Biopsy.

BACKGROUND. Antithrombic (AT) therapy is commonly temporarily discontinued before breast core needle biopsy (CNB), introducing risks of thrombotic events and diagnostic delay. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to compare the frequency of postbiopsy bleeding events among patients without AT use, patients temporarily discontinuing AT therapy, and patients maintaining AT therapy during breast CNB. METHODS. This retrospective study included 5302 patients (median age, 52 years) who underwent image-guided breast or axillary CNB between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. From January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016, patients temporarily discontinued all AT therapy for 5 days before CNB; from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019, patients maintained AT therapy during CNB. Immediate postbiopsy mammograms were reviewed for imaging-apparent hematoma. Patients were called 24-48 hours after biopsy and asked regarding palpable hematoma and breast bruise. The EMR was reviewed for clinically significant postbiopsy hematoma (i.e., hematoma requiring drainage, primary care or emergency department visit for persistent symptoms, or hospital admission). Bleeding events were compared among groups, including Firth bias-reduced multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS. During CNB, 4665 patients were not receiving AT therapy, 423 temporarily discontinued AT therapy, and 214 maintained AT therapy. Imaging-apparent hematoma occurred in 3% of patients without AT use, 6% of patients discontinuing AT therapy, and 7% of patients maintaining AT therapy (p = .60 [discontinuing vs maintaining]). Palpable hematoma occurred in 2% of patients without AT use, 4% of patients maintaining AT therapy, and 4% of patients discontinuing AT therapy (p = .92 [discontinuing vs maintaining]). Breast bruise occurred in 2% of patients without AT use, 1% of patients discontinuing AT therapy, and 6% of patients maintaining AT therapy (p < .001 [discontinuing vs maintaining]). In multivariable analysis adjusting for age, biopsy imaging modality, needle gauge, number of biopsy samples, and pathologic result, discontinued AT therapy (using maintained AT therapy as reference) was not a significant independent predictor of imaging-apparent hematoma (p = .23) or palpable hematoma (p = .91) but independently predicted decreased risk of bruise (OR = 0.11, p < .001). No patient developed clinically significant postbiopsy hematoma. CONCLUSION. Frequencies of imaging-apparent and palpable hematoma were not significantly different between patients temporarily discontinuing versus maintaining AT therapy. CLINICAL IMPACT. The findings support the safety of continuing AT therapy during CNB. Patients who maintain AT therapy should be counseled regarding risk of bruise.

Benchmarks of Significant Change After Aphasia Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: To establish benchmarks of significant change for aphasia rehabilitation outcome measures (ie, Western Aphasia Battery-Aphasia Quotient [WAB-AQ], Communicative Effectiveness Index [CETI], Boston Naming Test [BNT]) and assess if those benchmarks significantly differ across subgroups (ie, time post onset, dose frequency, treatment type). DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive literature search of 12 databases, reference lists of previous reviews, and evidence-based practice materials was conducted. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, single-subject design, and case studies that used a standardized outcome measure to assess change were included. Titles and full-text articles were screened using a dual review process. Seventy-eight studies met criteria for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted independently, and 25% of extractions were checked for reliability. All included studies were assigned quality indicator ratings and an evidence level. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted separately for each study design group (ie, within-/between-group comparisons). For within-group designs, the summary effect size after aphasia rehabilitation was 5.03 points (95% confidence interval, 3.95-6.10, P<.001) on the WAB-AQ, 10.37 points (6.08-14.66, P<.001) on the CETI, and 3.30 points (2.43-4.18, P<.001) on the BNT. For between-group designs, the summary effect size was 5.05 points (1.64-8.46, P=.004) on the WAB-AQ and 0.55 points (-1.33 to 2.43, P=.564) on the BNT, the latter of which was not significant. Subgroup analyses for the within-group designs showed no significant differences in the summary effect size as a function of dose frequency or treatment type. CONCLUSIONS: This study established benchmarks of significant change on 3 standardized outcome measures used in aphasia rehabilitation.