Continued versus interrupted aspirin use and bleeding risk after endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric neoplasms: A meta-analysis

18Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background Balancing the risk of bleeding and thromboembolic events for patients who use aspirin and need to undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric neoplasms is a delicate process. The current guidelines from different associations provide inconsistent recommendations. Methods MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched through August 2017 for studies that compared the risk of post-ESD bleeding in patients who continued aspirin vs. those who discontinued aspirin preoperatively. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effect model, generic inverse variance method. The between-study heterogeneity was quantified using the Q statistic and I2. Results A total of five studies that included 700 patients were identified. Our meta-analysis could not demonstrate a significantly increased risk of post-ESD bleeding among the aspirin-continued group compared to the aspirin-interrupted group, the pooled OR being 1.81 (95%CI 0.85-3.83). The statistical heterogeneity was insignificant, with an I2 of 25%. Nine thrombotic events occurred in the aspirin-interrupted group whereas none occurred in the aspirin-continued group. Conclusions This meta-analysis could not demonstrate that continuation of aspirin significantly increases the risk of post-ESD bleeding. However, the analysis was restricted by the small sample size and the observational nature of the primary studies. Randomized controlled trials are still needed to clarify this risk.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jaruvongvanich, V., Sempokuya, T., Wijarnpreecha, K., & Ungprasert, P. (2018). Continued versus interrupted aspirin use and bleeding risk after endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric neoplasms: A meta-analysis. Annals of Gastroenterology, 31(3), 344–349. https://doi.org/10.20524/aog.2018.0251

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free