Pocket hematoma after pacemaker or defibrillator surgery: Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists

Abstract

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the preferred choice of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Randomized trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of DOAC in patients undergoing a cardiac implantable electronic device procedure (CIED); however, there is limited real-world data. Objective: To evaluate the outcome of patients undergoing an elective CIED procedure in a tertiary referral center with an interrupted DOAC or continued vitamin K antagonist (VKA) regimen. Methods: This was a retrospective single-center study of consecutive patients with AF undergoing an elective CIED procedure between January 2016 and June 2019. The primary endpoint was a clinically significant pocket hematoma < 30 days after surgery. The secondary endpoint was any systemic thromboembolic complication < 30 days after surgery. Results: Of a total of 1,033 elective CIED procedures, 283 procedures were performed in patients with AF using oral anticoagulation. One-third of the procedures were performed under DOAC (N = 81, 29%) and the remainder under VKA (N = 202, 71%). The DOAC group was younger, had less chronic renal disease, more paroxysmal AF and a lower HAS-BLED score. The VKA group more often underwent a generator change only in comparison to the DOAC group. Clinically significant pocket hematoma occurred in 5 patients (2.5%) in the VKA group and did not occur in the DOAC group (P = 0.33). There were no thromboembolic events reported. Conclusion: In patients with AF undergoing an elective CIED procedure, the risk of a pocket hematoma and a systemic thromboembolic event is comparably low when using either continued VKA or interrupted DOAC.

Keywords

• Atrial fibrillation
• Bleeding
• Direct oral anticoagulant
• Implantable cardioverter defibrillator
• non-vitamin K antagonist
• Pacemaker