[Intracranial hemorrhage in adults: place of antithrombotic treatment]

Abstract

Background and purpose: Antithrombotic (anticoagulants and antiplatelets) are responsible for iatrogenic accidents, with a specific impact in neurosurgery. Bleeding complications are the most common and best-known. But the link to antiplatelet or to dual association of antithrombotic treatment with intracranial haemorrhage is not complete yet. We studied the proportion of patients under antithrombotic treatment, when an intracranial hemorrhage occurred, as well as the morbi-mortality of each group of patients (with or without antithrombotic treatment). Finally, we studied the proportion of off-label prescriptions.

Methods: We conducted a monocentric and comprehensive prospective study on a group of patients. All patients that had been admitted for intracranial hemorrhage to our hospital, in a 5-month period were included in the study.

Results: One hundred and sixty patients admitted for an intracranial hemorrhage were included during 70days of call. Seventy-four of these patients (46.25%) were under antithrombotic treatment: 40 under antiplatelet treatment (54%), 29 under anticoagulant treatment (39.2%), four under dual antithrombotic treatment (5.4%), and one under Arixtra(®). Half of the patients under antithrombotic treatment had poor prognosis as compared to 40% of patients without antithrombotic treatment. Off-label antithrombotic therapy was estimated at 27.3% of all prescriptions.

Conclusions: The prevalence of antithrombotic therapy in patients is high when intracranial hemorrhage occurs. Some complications could be avoided by decreasing the number of off-label prescriptions and by better controlling their use (using standardized INR). Antiplatelet treatments and new antithrombotic therapies require better drug monitoring which could be part of the establishment of a specific register.