Skip to content
naulon
Not checkedNot checked for notices yet.

Periprocedural outcomes of protamine administration after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

Jakrin Kewcharoen, Kuldeep Shah, Rahul Bhardwaj and 5 more

Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2022

doi:10.31083/j.rcm2301034 (opens in a new tab)

We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.

Abstract

Background: Perioperative anticoagulation management with uninterrupted or minimally interrupted anticoagulation during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is thought to be critical to minimize thromboembolic complications. Protamine is often administered to neutralize the effects of heparin and expedite vascular hemostasis post-procedure. Objective: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of protamine to expedite vascular hemostasis and ambulation in patients undergoing AF ablation. Methods: Electronic searches on PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases from the inception through August 7, 2021, were performed. The primary outcomes included—time to hemostasis (minutes) and time to ambulation (minutes). The secondary outcomes included - any vascular complications (excluding minor hematoma), minor hematoma, or cerebrovascular accidents (CVA). Results: A total of 5 eligible studies (3 retrospective cohort studies and two randomized trials) consisting of 1012 patients (515 patients received protamine group and 497 patients did not receive protamine group) were included in the meta-analysis. There was a significant reduction in time to ambulation [weighted mean difference (WMD) –176.6 minutes, 95% Confidence interval (CI) –266.9 to –86.3; p < 0.01] and time to hemostasis (WMD –13.72 minutes, 95% CI –22 to –5.4, p < 0.01) in the protamine group compared to the contrary. At a follow-up up to 3 months, there was no statistical difference between the two groups with regards to vascular complications (2.9% vs. 7.4%; Risk ratio (RR) 0.46 95% CI 0.17 to 1.24; p = 0.12), minor hematoma (2.1% vs. 5.8%; RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.2; p = 0.11) or CVA (0 vs. 0.3%; RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.08 to 4.98; p = 0.65). Conclusion: Protamine administration was associated with reduced time to ambulation (176 minutes reduction) and time to hemostasis (13 minutes reduction) without an increase in any adverse events.

Abstract licence: CC BY

References13

    13 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

    Reads

    Read by people on this page

    None yet.

    Checked or read by AI through naulon

    None yet.

    A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

    Are you an author?

    Is this your paper?

    Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.