Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2021
Per-oral endoscopic myotomy in patients with antithrombotic agents: A large-scale multicenter study in Japan.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shimamura Yuto, Sato Hiroki, Onimaru Manabu, Tanaka Shinwa, Shiwaku Hironari, Shiota Junya, Sato Chiaki, Ogawa Ryo, Yokomichi Hiroshi, Inoue Haruhiro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The perioperative management and clinical course of per-oral endoscopic myotomy for patients receiving antithrombotic therapy remains unknown. This study aimed to clarify the status of antithrombotic therapy in per-oral endoscopic myotomy and to determine its safety and efficacy.
METHODS: Patients treated with per-oral endoscopic myotomy from 2010 to 2019 in seven high-volume centers in Japan were retrospectively investigated. The patients' characteristics and antithrombotic agent management were analyzed; clinical outcomes were compared with those without antithrombotic agents.
RESULTS: Of 2752 patients who underwent per-oral endoscopic myotomy, 120 patients on antithrombotic therapy (mean age 71.0 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists class II-IV [67.5%]) were identified. Antiplatelet, anticoagulant, and a combination of antithrombotic agents were used in 82, 30, and 8 patients, respectively. The perioperative management adhered to the therapeutic endoscopy guidelines published by the Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Endoscopy in most patients (88.3%). A poorer clinical baseline status (American Society of Anesthesiologists class II-IV; 67.0% vs 24.3%) and the sigmoid type (40.7% vs 22.3%) were more frequently observed in patients with achalasia on antithrombotic therapy. However, the clinical success (Eckardt score ≤ 3; 97.6% vs 94.6) and adverse event rates, such as bleeding and thromboembolic events (5.5% vs 4.7%), did not show inferiority.
CONCLUSIONS: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy on antithrombotic therapy is safe and effective. However, caution is required as patients on antithrombotic therapy tend to have poorer baseline health and achalasia statuses. Our experience should help establish perioperative management with antithrombotic therapy.
METHODS: Patients treated with per-oral endoscopic myotomy from 2010 to 2019 in seven high-volume centers in Japan were retrospectively investigated. The patients' characteristics and antithrombotic agent management were analyzed; clinical outcomes were compared with those without antithrombotic agents.
RESULTS: Of 2752 patients who underwent per-oral endoscopic myotomy, 120 patients on antithrombotic therapy (mean age 71.0 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists class II-IV [67.5%]) were identified. Antiplatelet, anticoagulant, and a combination of antithrombotic agents were used in 82, 30, and 8 patients, respectively. The perioperative management adhered to the therapeutic endoscopy guidelines published by the Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Endoscopy in most patients (88.3%). A poorer clinical baseline status (American Society of Anesthesiologists class II-IV; 67.0% vs 24.3%) and the sigmoid type (40.7% vs 22.3%) were more frequently observed in patients with achalasia on antithrombotic therapy. However, the clinical success (Eckardt score ≤ 3; 97.6% vs 94.6) and adverse event rates, such as bleeding and thromboembolic events (5.5% vs 4.7%), did not show inferiority.
CONCLUSIONS: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy on antithrombotic therapy is safe and effective. However, caution is required as patients on antithrombotic therapy tend to have poorer baseline health and achalasia statuses. Our experience should help establish perioperative management with antithrombotic therapy.