Skip to main content

Table 2 Procedure related characteristics between the tranexamic acid and control groups

From: Bleeding complications during cardiac electronic device implantation in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy: is there any value of local tranexamic acid?

Characteristic

All patients (n = 135)

Tranexamic acid (n = 52)

Control (n = 83)

P-value

INR at the day of implanta

2.1 (1.9–2.5)

2.1(1.9–2.5)

2.1(1.9–2.5)

0.932

Generator exchange and/or pocket revision, n (%)

14 (10.4)

5 (9.6)

9 (10.8)

0.968

New implantation, n (%)

101 (74.8)

39 (75.0)

62 (74.7)

1.0

Upgrade and/or lead revision, n (%)

20 (14.8)

8 (15.4)

12 (14.5)

1.0

Pacemaker, n (%)

24 (17.8)

9 (17.3)

15 (18.1)

1.0

ICD, n (%)

111 (83)

43 (82.7)

68 (81.9)

 

Number of leads implanted

 One, n (%)

26 (19.3)

12 (23.1)

14 (16.9)

0.505

 Two, n (%)

50 (37.0)

18 (34.6)

32 (38.6)

0.645

 Three, n (%)

45 (33.3)

17 (32.7)

28 (33.7)

0.900

 Submuscular pocket, n (%)

5 (3.7)

2 (3.8)

3 (3.6)

1.0

Venous route other than subclavian

 Axillary, n (%)

12 (8.9)

4 (7.7)

8 (9.6)

0.767

 Cephalic, n (%)

7 (5.2)

3 (5.8)

4 (4.8)

1.0

  1. DAPT dual antiplatelet therapy, ICD implantable cardioverter defibrillator, INR international normalized ratio
  2. aThe median INR level of patients with warfarin continuation strategy