Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Egawa, Noriko; Hiromatsu, Shinichi; Shintani, Yusuke; Kanaya, Kurando; Fukunaga, Shuji; Aoyagi, Shigeaki

doi:10.1177/0218492309348639

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[127][128][129][130][131] Possible factors that increase the risk of VTE in cardiac surgery include older age, 130 postoperative complications, 127,130 prolonged preoperative hospitalization or postoperative recovery, 128,129 CABG surgery compared with valve surgery, 129 and off-pump CABG compared with cardiopulmonary bypass. 132 …”

Section: Baseline Risk Risk Factors and Risk Stratifi Cation For Vtementioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention of VTE in Nonorthopedic Surgical Patients

Gould

García

Wren

et al. 2012

Chest

1,854

744

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(Grade 2C) prophylaxis be used other than early ambulation. For patients at low risk for VTE ( ‫ف‬ 1.5%), we suggest mechanical prophylaxis, preferably with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC), over no prophylaxis (Grade 2C). For patients at moderate risk for VTE ( ‫ف‬ 3%) who are not at high risk for major bleeding complications, we suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) (Grade 2B), low-dose unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B), or mechanical prophylaxis with IPC (Grade 2C) over no prophylaxis. For patients at high risk for VTE ( ‫ف‬ 6%) who are not at high risk for major bleeding complications, we recommend pharmacologic prophylaxis with LMWH (Grade 1B) or low-dose unfractionated heparin (Grade 1B) over no prophylaxis. In these patients, we suggest adding mechanical prophylaxis with elastic stockings or IPC to pharmacologic prophylaxis (Grade 2C). For patients at high risk for VTE undergoing abdominal or pelvic surgery for cancer, we recommend extended-duration, postoperative, pharmacologic prophylaxis (4 weeks) with LMWH over limited-duration prophylaxis (Grade 1B). For patients at moderate to high risk for VTE who are at high risk for major bleeding complications or those in whom the consequences of bleeding are believed to be particularly severe, we suggest use of mechanical prophylaxis, preferably with IPC, over no prophylaxis until the risk of bleeding diminishes and pharmacologic prophylaxis may be initiated (Grade 2C). For patients in all risk groups, we suggest that an inferior vena cava fi lter not be used for primary VTE prevention (Grade 2C) and that surveillance with venous compression ultrasonography should not be performed (Grade 2C). We developed similar recommendations for other nonorthopedic surgical populations. Conclusions: Optimal thromboprophylaxis in nonorthopedic surgical patients will consider the risks of VTE and bleeding complications as well as the values and preferences of individual patients. CHEST 2012; 141(2)(Suppl):e227S-e277SAbbreviations: CABG 5 coronary artery bypass graft; ES 5 elastic stockings; ICH 5 intracranial hemorrhage; IPC 5 intermittent pneumatic compression; IVC 5 inferior vena cava; LDUH 5 low-dose unfractionated heparin; LMWH 5 low-molecular-weight heparin; PE 5 pulmonary embolism; QALY 5 quality-adjusted life year; RR 5 risk ratio; VCU 5 venous compression ultrasonography

show abstract

Section: Baseline Risk Risk Factors and Risk Stratifi Cation For Vtementioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention of VTE in Nonorthopedic Surgical Patients

Gould

García

Wren

et al. 2012

Chest

1,854

744

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of the studies were observational studies (n=49), 16 studies were RCTs, and 3 were meta‐analyses (Tables 1 and 2). 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84 Of the 16 RCTs identified,1...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism and Benefits and Risks of Thromboprophylaxis After Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Bham

Pavey

2015

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOptimal thromboprophylaxis after cardiac surgery is uncertain. This systematic review aimed to define the incidence and risk factors for deep vein thrombosis (DVT), fatal and nonfatal pulmonary embolism (PE), and assess whether venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis was effective in reducing VTE without complications after cardiac surgery.Methods and ResultsTwo reviewers independently searched and assessed the quality and outcomes of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies on VTE after cardiac surgery in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane controlled trial register (1966 to December 2014). Sixty‐eight studies provided data on VTE outcomes or complications related to thromboprophylaxis after cardiac surgery. The majority of the studies were observational studies (n=49), 16 studies were RCTs, and 3 were meta‐analyses. VTE prophylaxis was associated with a reduced risk of PE (relative risk [RR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28–0.72; P=0.0008) or symptomatic VTE (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28–0.71; P=0.0006) compared to the control without significant heterogeneity. Median incidence (interquartile range) of symptomatic DVT, PE, and fatal PE were 3.2% (0.6–8.1), 0.6% (0.3–2.9), and 0.3% (0.08–1.7), respectively. Previous history of VTE, obesity, left or right ventricular failure, and prolonged bed rest, mechanical ventilation, or use of a central venous catheter were common risk factors for VTE. Bleeding or cardiac tamponade requiring reoperation owing to pharmacological VTE prophylaxis alone, without systemic anticoagulation, was not observed.ConclusionsUnless proven otherwise by adequately powered RCTs, initiating pharmacological VTE prophylaxis as soon as possible after cardiac surgery for patients who have no active bleeding is highly recommended.

show abstract

“…The high risk for VTE in this population, other than cancer itself (10,14), can be attributed to the fact that these patients often have additional VTE risk factors (13)(14)(15), including advanced age, malignancy, obesity, smoking, and prolonged immobilization, especially if mechanically ventilated. In the latest guidelines, ACCP recommended: For thoracic surgery patients at high risk for VTE who are not at high risk for perioperative bleeding, we suggest LDUH (grade 1B) or LMWH (grade 1B) over no prophylaxis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of low molecular weight heparin on venous thromboembolism disease in thoracotomy patients with cancer

Dong¹,

Wang²,

Feng³

et al. 2018

J. Thorac. Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Much attention has been given to venous thromboembolism (VTE) disease, and many guidelines for prophylaxis have been published. However, there are few published data on patients who underwent thoracotomy. This study is to compare the effect of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) combined mechanical approaches with mechanical approaches alone in prevention of VTE in the post thoracotomy cancer patients. Methods: This study used a prospective, randomized-controlled design. Patients with cancer who were scheduled for thoracotomy were divided into two groups: group A and group B. In group A, patients were given intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) and elastic stockings (ES) postoperatively. Additionally, at 24 hours post-operation, patients were subcutaneously injected with LMWH calcium (nadroparin calcium; GlaxoSmithKline, China) for 7 days. In group B, patients were only given postoperative IPC and ES. The primary end points were incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and the PE severity index (PESI) of PE patients. The secondary end points were hemoglobin (HGB), platelet (PLT), D-dimer, the PO2/FiO2 ratio (P/F) at postoperative day (POD) 7, the chest drainage time (CDT) and the length of stay (LOS) in hospital after operation. Results: A total of 90 patients were included in the final data analysis (40 patients in group A and 50 patients in group B). At POD7, the incidence of PE, DVT and PESI was 17.50%, 5.00% and 102.14±9.87, respectively, in group A. And 8.00%, 8.00% and 97.00±4.24, respectively, in group B. There were no significant differences between two groups (all P values were >0.05). There were no significant differences of HGB, PLT, D-dimer and P/F between two groups at the 7th day post operation (all P value >0.05).Conclusions: LMWH combined mechanical prophylaxis did not significant reduced the rate of VTE in thoracotomy cancer patients.

show abstract

Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Cited by 12 publications

References 13 publications

Prevention of VTE in Nonorthopedic Surgical Patients

Prevention of VTE in Nonorthopedic Surgical Patients

Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism and Benefits and Risks of Thromboprophylaxis After Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Effect of low molecular weight heparin on venous thromboembolism disease in thoracotomy patients with cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About