4.5 Article

Antiplatelet Resumption after Antiplatelet-Related Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Retrospective Hospital-Based Study

Journal

WORLD NEUROSURGERY
Volume 106, Issue -, Pages 85-91

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.WNEU.2017.06.015

Keywords

Antiplatelet medication; Intracerebral hemorrhage

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet resumption in patients who developed intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) while on antiplatelet therapy (antiplatelet-related ICH) represents an important medical dilemma. We aimed to study the long-term cardiovascular outcomes of antiplatelet-related ICH survivors, and the risk of recurrent ICH with antiplatelet resumption. METHODS: This was an observational study of 109 antiplatelet-related ICH survivors. The clinical end points were recurrent ICH, ischemic vascular events, and vascular death (fatal ICH or ischemic vascular events). Predictors of recurrent ICH and vascular death were derived using a multivariable Cox regression model. RESULTS: The median duration of follow-up was 3.5 years (interquartile range, 1.6-5.8 years). Ischemic vascular events were more common than recurrent ICHs (6.8 per 100 patient-years vs. 2.6 per 100 patient-years; P = 0.028). Antiplatelet use was not associated with an elevated risk of recurrent ICH (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-4.62). A mean follow-up systolic blood pressure of >140 mmHg increased the risk of both recurrent ICH (HR, 4.28; 95% CI, 1.01-18.11) and vascular death (HR, 11.14; 95% CI, 2.72-45.62). Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) was an independent predictor for recurrent ICH (HR, 24.34; 95% CI, 2.80-211.47). CONCLUSIONS: Antiplatelet resumption after antiplatelet-related ICH did not appear to carry a clinically significant risk of recurrent ICH, whereas inadequate blood pressure control and CAA contributed to a more robust risk. Antiplatelet resumption should be considered, especially in survivors with adequate blood pressure control and without CAA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available