Anticoagulation in CKD and ESRD
Kelvin Cheuk-Wai Leung1,2, Jennifer Marie MacRae3,4
1Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. kcwleung@ucalgary.ca.
Insights
Anticoagulation in nephrology patients is complex. While chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients with atrial fibrillation benefit from anticoagulation, its use in dialysis patients remains controversial due to bleeding risks.
Area of Science:
- Nephrology
- Cardiology
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Anticoagulation management in nephrology patients, particularly those with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atrial fibrillation, presents unique challenges.
- The efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in patients undergoing dialysis remain debated due to increased bleeding risks.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review the current literature on anticoagulation strategies for nephrology patients.
- To discuss the role of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in CKD patients.
- To provide guidance on bridging anticoagulation for interventional procedures and anticoagulation in acute coronary syndromes.
Main Methods:
- Literature review of studies on anticoagulation in CKD and dialysis patients.
- Analysis of data regarding the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this population.
- Evaluation of evidence for unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in various clinical scenarios.
Main Results:
- CKD patients with atrial fibrillation generally benefit from anticoagulation.
- Anticoagulation in dialysis patients is controversial due to elevated bleeding risks; DOACs require cautious use pending further studies.
- UFH and renally dosed LMWH are suitable for acute coronary syndromes in non-end-stage CKD.
- UFH and LMWH show comparable efficacy for thromboembolic prophylaxis and extracorporeal circuit anticoagulation in dialysis patients.
Conclusions:
- Anticoagulation in CKD requires careful consideration of bleeding risks, especially in dialysis patients.
- DOACs offer new possibilities but need cautious application in advanced CKD and dialysis.
- A risk-based approach is recommended for bridging anticoagulation during interventional procedures.
- Heparin-based anticoagulants remain valuable options for specific indications in nephrology patients.
Abstract:
In this review we discuss the evolving literature of anticoagulation in the context of the nephrology patient. Whereas CKD patients with atrial fibrillation, should be anticoagulated, the benefit of anticoagulation for those on dialysis remains controversial due to an increased risk of bleeding. The availability of direct oral anticoagulants offers new options for those with CKD. Until studies are available in stage 4 and 5/dialysis, this class of medication should be used with caution in this population. For anticoagulated patients requiring interventional procedures, a risk-based approach should be employed to determine those who will benefit from bridging anticoagulation. Either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin are adequate choices for bridging anticoagulation. Unfractionated heparin and renally dosed low molecular weight heparin can be safely used in non-end stage CKD patients with an acute coronary syndrome. Similarly, the use of unfractionated heparin and low molecular weight heparin are comparable for thromboembolic prophylaxis in CKD/dialysis and extracorporeal circuit anticoagulation of the dialysis circuit.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
01:18Anticoagulant Drugs: Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants
Warfarin, a prominent vitamin K antagonist family member, exerts its effect by inhibiting the enzyme VKORC1 (vitamin K epoxide reductase complex 1). By hindering this enzyme, warfarin...
01:30Anticoagulant Drugs: Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins