Anticoagulants -latest recs

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

clubdeac

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
5,386
Reaction score
2,526
I can’t seem to find old threads. Anyone have the latest ASRA, SIS or whatever guidelines they recommend. My hospital just told me I need to hold thinners for RFA and facets and I told them that’s not recommended but can’t find the guidelines. They apparently are using 2019 ACR guidelines which look ridiculous upon review

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
This full text is available online:

Goodman BS, House LM, Vallabhaneni S, Mallempati S, Willey MR, Smith MT. Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet Management for Spinal Procedures: A Prospective, Descriptive Study and Interpretation of Guidelines. Pain Med. 2017 Jul 1;18(7):1218-1224. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnw227. PMID: 28339551.
 

Attachments

  • goodman_anticoagulants.pdf
    215.6 KB · Views: 89
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
ASRA has a good phone app as well. It's based on the 2018 consensus guidelines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks guys. Appreciate the help
 
+1 for ASRA Coags app. Includes recommendations for regional and pain procedures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
1645550294786.png


1645550316957.png



Here is what ASRA recommends. But they are biased in killing patients with MI and CVA over morbidity if hematoma.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Do you guys stop aspirin 81 for SCS trials and implants?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Guy in my group holds NSAIDS for facets and it infuriates me.
 
We hold NSAIDs for SCS trials per ASRA guidelines. My group also tends to hold statins because of bad experience once upon a time despite my screaming from the rooftops it's not necessary.
 
Anyone hold SSRI or fish oil for higher risk? I don't even inquire about it but maybe I should.
 
I heard once upon a time that all SCS trials bleed in the epidural space, it's just a matter of how much and if there is any compression.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ssri? Statins?

W
T
F
?

Holding nsaids and asa is dumb enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
People also don’t use contrast or prep for seafood allergy…
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I think this is mostly a product of nursing influence. No matter what I say, it's a question about shellfish during the time out. Makes me hungry every time.
when they mention shellfish allergy I say, "good, more for me"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ssri? Statins?

W
T
F
?

Holding nsaids and asa is dumb enough.
There are case reports in the literature of epidural hematomas forming after ESIs in patients on NSAIDS and concomitant SSRIs. Combination doubles risk of bleed compared to either alone
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
There are case reports in the literature of epidural hematomas forming after ESIs on patients on NSAIDS and concomitant SSRIs. Combination doubles risk of bleed compared to either alone
Case reports of epidural hematoma spontaneously. Your point being?
All of these are rare events and determining absolute risk attribution is difficult if not impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Case reports of epidural hematoma spontaneously. Your point being?
All of these are rare events and determining absolute risk attribution is difficult if not impossible.
no not spontaneously Steve, after an epidural. Unless you're saying they were spontaneous and the fact they just had an epidural was coincidence. And I'm not saying to hold them however I would think twice if I were doing a cervical stim on a patient on chronic NSAID + SSRI.

Pride comes before the fall my friend
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
unless placed on ASA by an MD for CVA/MI recurrence, I have patients hold ASA and NSAIDs for CESI and cervical stim trials.

Why not stack the odds in your favor?
 
By causing an MI or CvA?
how am I going to cause an MI/CVA?

I'm talking about only holding ASA/NSAIDS for our riskiest procedure, CESI/cervical SCS in patients who are taking OTC NSAIDs, and patients taking ASA because thought it was a good idea after seeing it in Readers Digest.

As I explained above, I'm not holding ASA in patients who were placed on ASA by an MD for a true medical reason
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
how am I going to cause an MI/CVA?

I'm talking about only holding ASA/NSAIDS for our riskiest procedure, CESI/cervical SCS in patients who are taking OTC NSAIDs, and patients taking ASA because thought it was a good idea after seeing it in Readers Digest.

As I explained above, I'm not holding ASA in patients who were placed on ASA by an MD for a true medical reason
I agree, I also do this.

If patient has no medical reason for ASA 81, it’s primary prophylaxis, and I’m doing a CESI or even a LESI, I will stop it. I always stop NSAIDs because it’s an elective procedure with elective NSAID use. I stop fish oil because why not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I agree, I also do this.

If patient has no medical reason for ASA 81, it’s primary prophylaxis, and I’m doing a CESI or even a LESI, I will stop it. I always stop NSAIDs because it’s an elective procedure with elective NSAID use. I stop fish oil because why not.
b/c if a patient shows up and DIDN't stop the fish oil, then are you gonna cancel the procedure? if not, then they really didnt need to stop it in the first place. same rationale with nsaids and ASA.
 
b/c if a patient shows up and DIDN't stop the fish oil, then are you gonna cancel the procedure? if not, then they really didnt need to stop it in the first place. same rationale with nsaids and ASA.
I disagree. I see no reason not to stop NSAIDs. Fish oil obviously less important. I do cancel CESI with recent NSAID use. There is no medical benefit to continuing an NDAID.
 
I disagree. I see no reason not to stop NSAIDs. Fish oil obviously less important. I do cancel CESI with recent NSAID use. There is no medical benefit to continuing an NDAID.
thats insane. but you'll grow out of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I disagree. I see no reason not to stop NSAIDs. Fish oil obviously less important. I do cancel CESI with recent NSAID use. There is no medical benefit to continuing an NDAID.
Why would you do that?

If I come to get a CESI and you cancel me bc I took Motrin you'll never see me again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I’m going to say something, because I feel like instigating.

On the one hand, we have people who are doing cervical epidurals on patients who are on NSAIDs. This is in spite of a known increase in the risk of bleeding in patients on NSAIDs, though not with a known/calculated risk of increased symptomatic bleeding in the setting of cervical ESI. In other words, there is a theoretical, but not proven (I don’t think?) increased risk of catastrophic injury when performing cervical ESI on patients who are taking NSAIDs, and 0 risk in stopping the medication.

On the other hand, we had a conversation months ago with some of the same people arguing about live fluoroscopy when dex is used for lumbar TFESI as mandatory, even though there is no known/calculated increased safety associated with live fluoro when dex is used. In other words, there is a theoretical, but not proven (I don’t think?), increased risk of catastrophic injury (vasospasm?) when performing lumbar TFESI on patients without live fluoro when using dex, with the only “risk” of using live fluoro being increased procedure time/radiation exposure.

Thoughts? Justifications?
 
I’m going to say something, because I feel like instigating.

On the one hand, we have people who are doing cervical epidurals on patients who are on NSAIDs. This is in spite of a known increase in the risk of bleeding in patients on NSAIDs, though not with a known/calculated risk of increased symptomatic bleeding in the setting of cervical ESI. In other words, there is a theoretical, but not proven (I don’t think?) increased risk of catastrophic injury when performing cervical ESI on patients who are taking NSAIDs, and 0 risk in stopping the medication.

On the other hand, we had a conversation months ago with some of the same people arguing about live fluoroscopy when dex is used for lumbar TFESI as mandatory, even though there is no known/calculated increased safety associated with live fluoro when dex is used. In other words, there is a theoretical, but not proven (I don’t think?), increased risk of catastrophic injury (vasospasm?) when performing lumbar TFESI on patients without live fluoro when using dex, with the only “risk” of using live fluoro being increased procedure time/radiation exposure.

Thoughts? Justifications?
I think only argument for live with dex would be to increase efficiency from med not getting siphoned away from target. But this can generally be done without live. In terms of vasospasm, if you see vascular, you've already stuck the vessel and injected, so does injecting more increase risk? Is vasospasm even a documented thing in lumbar?

Anyone making the efficacy argument should also be doing MBBs with contrast, no?
 
Why would you do that?

If I come to get a CESI and you cancel me bc I took Motrin you'll never see me again.
Maybe I won’t cancel it, I’ve obviously done them in ibuprofen, but when I book the injection I go through meds and ask the person don’t take ibuprofen 24 hours before the injection. Just like how I go through why they are on ASA 81 and decide if there is an indication to continue for the injection. This is the most conservative thing to do. If they take the ibuprofen I advise them there is a small theoretical risk, and more likely than not just do the injection the day of.
 
I think only argument for live with dex would be to increase efficiency from med not getting siphoned away from target. But this can generally be done without live. In terms of vasospasm, if you see vascular, you've already stuck the vessel and injected, so does injecting more increase risk? Is vasospasm even a documented thing in lumbar?

Anyone making the efficacy argument should also be doing MBBs with contrast, no?

I agree with your reasoning. This was my argument previously, which several agreed with, several disagreed with.

I do use contrast for MBB, because the insurance companies in my region mandate it. Every so often I catch something that requires repositioning, which may or not change the diagnostic value of the block. I don’t use live fluoro for MBBs. My PD was a big proponent of not using contrast. He only used 0.3cc of anesthetic per location and was concerned based on his own cadaver studies that injectate plus contrast would cause spread to adjacent levels (cause false positive) or dilute the med enough to cause a false negative. Who knows.
 
I’m going to say something, because I feel like instigating.

On the one hand, we have people who are doing cervical epidurals on patients who are on NSAIDs. This is in spite of a known increase in the risk of bleeding in patients on NSAIDs, though not with a known/calculated risk of increased symptomatic bleeding in the setting of cervical ESI. In other words, there is a theoretical, but not proven (I don’t think?) increased risk of catastrophic injury when performing cervical ESI on patients who are taking NSAIDs, and 0 risk in stopping the medication.

On the other hand, we had a conversation months ago with some of the same people arguing about live fluoroscopy when dex is used for lumbar TFESI as mandatory, even though there is no known/calculated increased safety associated with live fluoro when dex is used. In other words, there is a theoretical, but not proven (I don’t think?), increased risk of catastrophic injury (vasospasm?) when performing lumbar TFESI on patients without live fluoro when using dex, with the only “risk” of using live fluoro being increased procedure time/radiation exposure.

Thoughts? Justifications?
first, there are actual case reports and documented risk of using nonparticulate steroids in TFESI. in a CME from ASA, there was a study showing increased risk of bleeding with concurrent NSAID use. i cant find the study, however.

second, here is the exact SIS statement regarding TFESI:

• Lumbar transforaminal ESIs should be performed by injecting contrast medium under real-time fluoroscopy and/or DSA, using an AP view, before injecting any substance that may be hazardous to the patient.
o Transforaminal ESIs can be performed without contrast in patients with a documented contraindication to iodinated, non-ionic contrast and gadolinium-based contrast media (e.g. significant history of contrast allergy or anaphylactic reaction), but in these circumstances, only preservative-free, particulate-free steroids should be used.
that statement does not state that there is mandatory requirement for live fluoroscopy and clearly states that no live fluoro is needed when not using contrast.

i would argue that if you are vascular, even with nonparticulate steroids, you should not be injecting.


third, these measures arent for efficiency or benefit from procedure, but for risk reduction. contrast for MBB is about improving likelihood of benefit from procedure, not about risk reduction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
While it arguably is "safer" to stop NSAIDs prior to ESI, no guideline states it's necessary to stop based on current evidence. You're not going to harm your patients by stopping NSAIDs (unlike other blood thinners perhaps), but it's not helping them either. It's an unnecessary requirement.
 
Top