RESUMO
Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including both deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a major complication of musculoskeletal surgery in general, and the risk is heightened in musculoskeletal oncology surgery. Despite the well-known association between cancer and VTE, the mechanism promoting this pathology is not entirely well understood. It is estimated that nearly all cancer patients will experience from some form of VTE, whether or not clinically relevant, during the course of their disease. Nonetheless, numerous studies have analyzed the occurrence and prevention of VTE in patients with cardiovascular disease or suffering trauma, but very few have specifically examined the safety or efficacy of preventing VTE in cancer patients with metastatic skeletal disease. This review will examine the various types of prophylactic treatment, timing of administration, risk stratification for determining the appropriate course of anticoagulation (AC), and discuss current views on chemical prophylaxes relativity to wound complications and excessive bleeding in orthopedic oncology patients. Overall, careful choice of anticoagulant and timing of administration must be made in order to avoid bleeding complications. A risk stratification system to determine which chemical prophylaxis to administered could be beneficial in both reducing the occurrence of VTE and decreasing associated wound complications or mortality. Further study should be conducted to tailor chemical prophylaxes recommendations to this largely affected population and effectively reduce the occurrence of VTE.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Whether arthroscopic or open surgical management for diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumor (D-TGCT) of the knee is associated with a lower rate of recurrence is unknown. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched on December 3, 2020. Retrospective studies that reported on recurrence rates for arthroscopic versus open management of D-TGCT were included. A total of 16 studies evaluating 1143 patients with D-TGCT of the knee were included (nopen = 551, narthroscopic = 350 patients, and narthroscopic/open = 23 patients). Random-effects meta-analyses were used to summarize and compare the reported recurrence rates, stratified by approach and overall recurrence. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO. RESULTS: The recurrence rate per year (incidence) for arthroscopic procedures was 0.11 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.16, P < 0.0001) and for open procedures was 0.07 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.13, P < 0.0001). There was a 1.56 times (95% CI 1.04 to 2.34, P = 0.0332) increased risk of recurrence when treating D-TGCT of the knee with an arthroscopic approach. When evaluating only the subset of studies that had data for both arthroscopic and open approaches, the incidence rate per year for arthroscopic procedures was 0.17 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.27, P < 0.0001) and for open procedures was 0.11 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.19, P < 0.0001). The rate of overall complications was 0.04 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.08, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic surgical management of D-TGCT of the knee in our study resulted in a 1.56 times risk of recurrence as compared with the open approach. The percent of overall complications was minimal.