↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks in patients taking anticoagulant or thromboprophylactic drugs: challenges and solutions

Overview of attention for article published in Local and Regional Anesthesia , August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks in patients taking anticoagulant or thromboprophylactic drugs: challenges and solutions
Published in
Local and Regional Anesthesia , August 2015
DOI 10.2147/lra.s55306
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jinlei Li, Thomas Halaszynski

Abstract

Incidence of hemorrhagic complications from neuraxial blockade is unknown, but classically cited as 1 in 150,000 epidurals and 1 in 220,000 spinals. However, recent literature and epidemiologic data suggest that for certain patient populations the frequency is higher (1 in 3,000). Due to safety concerns of bleeding risk, guidelines and recommendations have been designed to reduce patient morbidity/mortality during regional anesthesia. Data from evidence-based reviews, clinical series and case reports, collaborative experience of experts, and pharmacology used in developing consensus statements are unable to address all patient comorbidities and are not able to guarantee specific outcomes. No laboratory model identifies patients at risk, and rarity of neuraxial hematoma defies prospective randomized study so "patient-specific" factors and "surgery-related" issues should be considered to improve patient-oriented outcomes. Details of advanced age, older females, trauma patients, spinal cord and vertebral column abnormalities, organ function compromise, presence of underlying coagulopathy, traumatic or difficult needle placement, as well as indwelling catheter(s) during anticoagulation pose risks for significant bleeding. Therefore, balancing between thromboembolism, bleeding risk, and introduction of more potent antithrombotic medications in combination with regional anesthesia has resulted in a need for more than "consensus statements" to safely manage regional interventions during anticoagulant/thromboprophylactic therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
Netherlands 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 69 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 11 15%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Professor 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 18 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 53%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Sports and Recreations 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 27 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 August 2015.
All research outputs
#20,823,121
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Local and Regional Anesthesia
#81
of 108 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,722
of 276,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Local and Regional Anesthesia
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 108 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.