Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Aug;43(4):445-449.
doi: 10.1007/s00068-017-0772-z. Epub 2017 May 19.

The impact of pre-injury direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in geriatric G-60 trauma patients

Affiliations

The impact of pre-injury direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in geriatric G-60 trauma patients

J F Barletta et al. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2017 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: Pre-injury oral anticoagulants are associated with worse outcomes in geriatric (G-60) trauma patients, but there are limited data comparing warfarin with direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). We sought to compare outcomes in G-60 trauma patients taking pre-injury DOACs vs. warfarin.

Methods: All trauma patients, age ≥60 who were admitted to the hospital and taking an oral anticoagulant pre-injury were retrospectively identified. Patients were excluded if their reason for admission was a suicide attempt or penetrating extremity injury. Outcome measures included blood transfusions, hospital LOS, and mortality. A second analysis was performed, whereby patients were matched using ISS and age.

Results: There were 3,941 patients identified; 331 had documentation of anticoagulant use, pre-injury (warfarin, n = 237; DOAC, n = 94). Demographics were similar, but ISS [9 (4-13) vs. 8 (4-9), p = .027], initial INR [2.2 (1.8-2.9) vs. 1.2 (1.1-1.5), p < .001], and the use of pharmacologic reversal agents (48 vs. 14%, p < .001) were higher in the warfarin group. There was no difference in the use of blood transfusions (24 vs. 17%, p = .164) or mortality (5.9 vs. 4.3%, p = .789) between warfarin and DOAC groups, respectively. However, LOS was longer in the warfarin group [5 (3-7.5) vs. 4 (2-6.3) days, p = .02]. Matched analysis showed no difference in blood transfusions (23 vs. 17%, p = .276), mortality (2.1 vs. 4.3%, p = .682) or LOS [5 (3-7) vs. 4 (2-6.3) days, p = .158] between warfarin and DOAC groups, respectively.

Conclusion: Pre-injury DOACs are not associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to warfarin in G-60 trauma patients. Higher use of pharmacologic reversal agents with warfarin may be related to differences in mechanism of action and effect on INR.

Keywords: Direct oral anticoagulant; Pre-injury; Trauma; Warfarin.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Am Surg. 2015 Oct;81(10):1039-42 - PubMed
    1. Crit Care. 2016 Apr 12;20:100 - PubMed
    1. Clin Ther. 2015 Nov 1;37(11):2506-2514.e4 - PubMed
    1. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015 Mar;78(3):614-21 - PubMed
    1. Neurocrit Care. 2016 Feb;24(1):6-46 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources