2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.11.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Portable Compression Device and Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Compared With Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Thromboprophylaxis After Total Joint Arthroplasty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
29
0
2

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
29
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…115 Four trials were included [116][117][118][119] ; we identifi ed another study that was published more recently. 120 We reanalyzed the original data by adding this additional study without reextracting the data in the Cochrane review, bringing the total number of patients included to . 2,400.…”
Section: Use Of Combination Thromboprophylaxismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…115 Four trials were included [116][117][118][119] ; we identifi ed another study that was published more recently. 120 We reanalyzed the original data by adding this additional study without reextracting the data in the Cochrane review, bringing the total number of patients included to . 2,400.…”
Section: Use Of Combination Thromboprophylaxismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With this in mind, early mobilization and pneumatic compression devices have been used with greater frequency following total joint arthroplasty [19,20]. Portable, intermittent pneumatic compression devices have been shown to increase the velocity of venous blood flow in the lower extremities and increase local and systemic fibrinolysis, with reports from multiple institutions showing their effectiveness in VTE prevention [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. At our institution, a risk stratification protocol has been implemented in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty in which patients deemed "routine" risk receive a mobile pneumatic compression device in conjunction with aspirin, while patients deemed "high" risk are placed on warfarin for thromboprophylaxis.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous guidelines from both organizations (2009 and 2008) viewed outpatient chemoprophylaxis as the standard-of-care and inpatient mechanical compression as adjunctive [16,64,65]. However, with mobile compression device development and concerns about bleeding, compression device usage has become more common among practitioners [16,29,37,66,67].…”
Section: Guidelines: Aaos Accp and Scip Guidelines Relevance To Mecmentioning
confidence: 98%