Delphi consensus recommendations for neuraxial anesthesia in adults with platelet disorders and coagulation defects: communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on von Willebrand Factor. Journal Articles uri icon

  •  
  • Overview
  •  
  • Research
  •  
  • Identity
  •  
  • Additional Document Info
  •  
  • View All
  •  

abstract

  • Neuraxial anesthesia is used for pain management in surgical and nonsurgical settings. Spinal/epidural hematomas likely occur in between 1:10 000 and 1:200 000 procedures. Risk is believed to be greater in patients with bleeding disorders/thrombocytopenia, and there are no existing comprehensive recommendations to guide neuraxial anesthesia in these patients. The study's objective was to develop recommendations to advise clinicians on treatment thresholds for neuraxial anesthesia in patients with platelet disorders/coagulation defects. A 4-round electronic modified Delphi consensus study was conducted. A steering committee generated the original Delphi statements and refined them based on panelist feedback. Consensus was achieved if ≥70% of participants agreed/strongly agreed or disagreed/strongly disagreed with a statement. This project was endorsed by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization Committee Subcommittee on von Willebrand Factor. Forty-five experts participated (42% response rate) with an essentially equal number of hematologists and anesthesiologists. Thirty consensus statements were developed for 11 disorders ranging from various causes of thrombocytopenia, inherited platelet function disorders, and single or multiple coagulation defects in obstetrical and nonobstetrical patients. Risk of sampling bias is present due to a predominantly North American sample, attrition (common in Delphi studies), and steering committee participation in the Delphi rounds. This is the first set of consensus recommendations for neuraxial anesthesia in adult patients with an array of platelet disorders/coagulation defects. These recommendations, based on the best available evidence and expert opinion, provide a decision framework for clinicians when faced with this challenging scenario.

authors

  • Peterson, Wynn
  • Martin, Rachel
  • Arnold, Donald
  • Carvalho, Brendan
  • Cuker, Adam
  • Gadsden, Jeff
  • Provan, Drew
  • Rydz, Natalia
  • Shore, Eliane
  • Kuter, David
  • Kouides, Peter
  • Lavin, Michelle
  • James, Paula
  • Engen, Dale
  • Sholzberg, Michelle

publication date

  • February 12, 2025