Persistent underuse of extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer operations.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend extended venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis for high-risk populations undergoing major abdominal cancer operations. Few studies have evaluated extended VTE prophylaxis in the Medicare population who are at higher risk due to age. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using a 20% random sample of Medicare claims, 2012-2017. Patients ≥65 years with an abdominal cancer undergoing resection were included. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving new extended VTE prophylaxis prescriptions at discharge. Secondary outcomes included postdischarge VTE and hemorrhagic events. RESULTS: The study included 72 983 patients with a mean age of 75. Overall, 8.9% of patients received extended VTE prophylaxis. This proportion increased (7.2% in 2012, 10.6% in 2017; p < 0.001). Incidence of postdischarge hemorrhagic events was 1.0% in patients receiving extended VTE prophylaxis and 0.8% in those who did not. The incidence of postdischarge VTE events was 5.2% in patients receiving extended VTE prophylaxis and 2.4% in those who did not. CONCLUSION: Adherence to guideline-recommended extended VTE prophylaxis in high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal cancer operations is low. The higher rate of VTE in the prophylaxis group may suggest we captured some therapeutic anticoagulation, which would mean the actual rate of thromboprophylaxis is lower than reported herein.

Incidence of Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolisms in Stroke Patients.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common but preventable complication observed in critically ill patients. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is the most common type of VTE, with clinical significance based on location and symptoms. There is an increased incidence of DVT and pulmonary embolism (PE) in ischemic stroke patients using unfractionated heparin (UFH) for VTE prophylaxis compared with those using enoxaparin. However, UFH is still used in some patients due to its perceived safety, despite conflicting literature suggesting that enoxaparin may have a protective effect. The current study aimed to determine the incidence of VTEs in patients with acute ischemic strokes on UFH versus enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis, subclassifying the VTEs depending on their location and symptoms. It also aimed to examine the safety profile of both drugs. A total of 909 patients admitted to the Neuro-ICU with the diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke were identified, and 634 patients were enrolled in the study-170 in the enoxaparin group and 464 in the UFH group-after applying the exclusion criteria. Nineteen patients in the UFH group (4.1%) and 3 patients in the enoxaparin group (1.8%) had a VTE. The incidence of DVT in the UFH group was 12 (2.6%), all of which were symptomatic, compared with 3 (1.8%) in the enoxaparin group, wherein one case was symptomatic. Nine patients (1.9%) in the UFH group developed a PE during the study period, and all of them were symptomatic. No patients in the enoxaparin group developed PE. No statistically significant difference was found between both groups. However, 18 patients in the UFH group (3.9%) experienced intracranial hemorrhage compared with none in the enoxaparin group, and this difference was statistically significant. Enoxaparin was found to be as effective as and potentially safer than UFH when used for VTE prophylaxis in stroke patients.

Prevalence of risk factors for venous thromboembolism and aspirin resistance in Australian patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Aspirin is used for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). However, its efficacy is unclear in patients with multiple VTE risk factors and at risk of aspirin resistance (AR). BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To determine the prevalence of risk factors for VTE and AR in patients after THA/TKA and to determine the relationship between risk factors and drugs prescribed for thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of elective-THA/TKA in six Australian hospitals over a 1-year period. Medical records were manually reviewed to determine demographics, thromboprophylaxis regimen and presence of risk factors. The relationship between individual and cumulative risk factors with the thromboprophylaxis regimen was determined. RESULTS: In total, 1011 patients were included with a mean (SD) age of 65.9 (±11.0) years, and 56.4% were female. The five most prevalent risk factors were obesity (59.1%), age ≥65 years (58.2%), hypertension (45.3%), dyslipidaemia (35.9%) and diabetes (19.7%). Most patients had ≥1 risk factor for VTE (93.6%) and AR (93.6%), with 49.0% and 35.0% having ≥3 concurrent VTE and AR risk factors, respectively. The only significant relationship between risk factors and drugs was diabetes (P < 0.01). Rivaroxaban was more commonly used as the number of concurrent VTE risk factors increased (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients had a high prevalence of VTE and AR risk factors, suggesting aspirin may not be beneficial in many patients. Only diabetes was linked to the selection of thromboprophylaxis. Patients who received rivaroxaban had a greater average number of VTE risk factors. Guidelines should promote individualised prescribing in higher-risk patients.

Survey of medical oncologists and trainee practice on venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in solid cancers.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) has a significant adverse impact on the outcomes of patients with active solid malignancies. Prophylaxis is indicated for cancer-associated VTE (CA-VTE) using the Khorana score for risk stratification. We surveyed medical oncology fellows and trainees regarding their practice in CA-VTE. Regarding treatment of CA-VTE, practice was consistent with guidelines. However, regarding prophylaxis for CA-VTE, there was a high degree of uncertainty, which highlights the need for ongoing education.

Safety and comparative efficacy of initiating low-molecular-weight heparin within 24 hours of injury or surgery for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients with spinal cord injury: a prospective TRACK-SCI registry study.

OBJECTIVE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) following traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) is a significant clinical concern. This study sought to determine the incidence of VTE and hemorrhagic complications among patients with SCI who received low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) within 24 hours of injury or surgery and identify variables that predict VTE using the prospective Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in SCI (TRACK-SCI) database. METHODS: The TRACK-SCI database was queried for individuals with traumatic SCI from 2015 to 2022. Primary outcomes of interest included rates of VTE (including deep vein thrombosis [DVT] and pulmonary embolism [PE]) and in-hospital hemorrhagic complications that occurred after LWMH administration. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, discharge location type, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 162 patients with SCI. Fifteen of the 162 patients withdrew from the study, leading to loss of data for certain variables for these patients. One hundred thirty patients (87.8%) underwent decompression and/or fusion surgery for SCI. DVT occurred in 11 (7.4%) of 148 patients, PE in 9 (6.1%) of 148, and any VTE in 18 (12.2%) of 148 patients. The analysis showed that admission lower-extremity motor score (p = 0.0408), injury at the thoracic level (p = 0.0086), admission American Spinal Injury Association grade (p = 0.0070), and younger age (p = 0.0372) were significantly associated with VTE. There were 3 instances of postoperative spine surgery-related bleeding (2.4%) in the 127 patients who had spine surgery with bleeding complication data available, with one requiring return to surgery (0.8%). Thirteen (8.8%) of 147 patients had a bleeding complication not related to spine surgery. There were 2 gastrointestinal bleeds associated with nasogastric tube placement, 3 cases of postoperative non-spine-related surgery bleeding, and 8 cases of other bleeding complications (5.4%) not related to any surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of LMWH within 24 hours was associated with a low rate of spine surgery-related bleeding. Bleeding complications unrelated to SCI surgery still occur with LMWH administration. Because neurosurgical intervention is typically the limiting factor in initializing chemical DVT prophylaxis, many of these bleeding complications would have likely occurred regardless of the protocol.

Patient's compliance is a contributor to failure of extended antithrombotic prophylaxis in colorectal surgery: prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) continue to be a major source of morbidity following colorectal surgery. Selective extended VTE prophylaxis for high-risk patients is recommended; however, provider compliance is low. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether the "global" extended use of enoxaparin in all colorectal patients is feasible and safe. METHODS: This is a prospective study conducted at a tertiary care center. All Patients undergoing elective colorectal procedures from November 1, 2017 to October 31, 2018 were discharged on 30 days of enoxaparin. Safety of use and patient compliance were examined. RESULTS: Total of 270 patients received extended prophylaxis during the study period (100% of intended patients) with five VTE recorded (1.85%). There was no significant difference in rates of VTE or complications when compared to years of selective prophylaxis (1.26% for 2016, 2.32% for 2017). Only 64% of patients reported full compliance. CONCLUSION: Global use of extended enoxaparin prophylaxis is safe, but does not decrease rates of VTE when compared to selective use. Patient's non-adherence is likely a significant contributing factor.

Prophylaxis for preventing venous thromboembolism in knee arthroscopy and soft tissue reconstruction: consensus statements from an international panel of experts.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of consensus regarding need for Venous Thrombo Embolism (VTE) prophylaxis following arthroscopic knee surgery and open soft tissue knee reconstruction. Clear cut guidelines like ones for trauma surgery and arthroplasty do not exist and the published literature is limited to case reports with a few society guidelines. Given this lack of consensus, we conducted a modified Delphi questionnaire of international experts to provide recommendations on this topic. METHODS: The consensus statements were generated using an anonymised 3 round modified Delphi questionnaire, sent to an international panel of 38 knee surgeons, with an 80% agreement being set as the limit for consensus. The responses were analysed using descriptive statistics with measures like mode, median and box plots. Feedback was provided to all panelists based on responses from the previous rounds to help generate the consensus. RESULTS: Six consensus statements were generated after the three rounds of Delphi. Patient factors, prolonged surgery duration and family history of thrombogenic events emerged as the main points to be taken into consideration for prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: It was established through this study, that there exists a select group of patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery that justify the usage of VTE prophylaxis. The expert responses to most of the questions in different scenarios favoured usage of VTE prophylaxis based on patient factors like advanced age, past history of VTE, smoking, oral contraceptive use etc. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Comparison between standard Vs. Escalated dose venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A two centers, observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19 was found to be significantly higher in patients who experienced thromboembolic events. Thus, several guidelines recommend using prophylactic anticoagulants in all COVID-19 hospitalized patients. However, there is uncertainty about the appropriate dosing regimen and safety of anticoagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Thus, this study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of standard versus escalated dose pharmacological venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A two-center retrospective cohort study including critically ill patients aged ≥ 18-years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at two tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia from March 1st, 2020, until January 31st, 2021. Patients who received either Enoxaparin 40 mg daily or Unfractionated heparin 5000 Units three times daily were grouped under the "standard dose VTE prophylaxis and patients who received higher than the standard dose but not as treatment dose were grouped under "escalated VTE prophylaxis dose". The primary outcome was the occurance of thrombotic events, and the secondary outcomes were bleeding, mortality, and other ICU-related complications. RESULTS: A total of 758 patients were screened; 565 patients were included in the study. We matched 352 patients using propensity score matching (1:1). In patients who received escalated dose pharmacological VTE prophylaxis, any case of thrombosis and VTE were similar between the two groups (OR 1.22;95 %CI 0.52-2.86; P = 0.64 and OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.16-3.38; P = 0.70 respectively). However, the odds of minor bleeding was higher in patients who received escalated VTE prophylaxis dose (OR 3.39; 95% CI 1.08-10.61; P = 0.04). There was no difference in the 30-day mortality nor in-hospital mortality between the two groups (HR 1.17;95 %CI0.79-1.73; P = 0.43 and HR 1.08;95 %CI 0.76-1.53; P = 0.83, respectively). CONCLUSION: Escalated-dose pharmacological VTE prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19 was not associated with thrombosis, or mortality benefits but led to an increased risk of minor bleeding. This study supports previous evidence regarding the optimal dosing VTE pharmacological prophylaxis regimen for critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Blank spaces in the management of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis at surgical departments and the impact of a clinical pharmacist.

INTRODUCTION: A venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis policy should be in place at all hospitals. While professional societies provide general guidance, they do not take into account the full range of procedures in this area. The aim of this study was to fill these “blank spaces” and design a VTE prophylaxis system which would reflect the wide range of surgical procedures. METHODS: We conducted an extensive literature review. Surgeons were subsequently asked to help score procedures according to VTE and bleeding risk while taking into consideration procedure type and duration, surgical techniques, etc. Results: Clinical pharmacists proposed a standardized VTE prophylaxis protocol. For some surgical fields the Caprini risk assessment model (RAM) was adapted. A unique VTE prophylaxis system was created for surgical fields where Caprini RAM has not been validated. We proposed dosage adjustments for obese patients and for patients with renal impairment. A dedicated software application was developed. CONCLUSION: The implementation of the VTE prophylaxis system resulted in a uniform and more rational prescription of pharmacological and mechanical prophylaxis as well as in financial savings. The development of the app increased compliance with the system and, in combination with real-time auditing, significantly improved safe drug administration practices at Military University Hospital Prague. The system is unique in continental Europe and contains wide range of surgical procedures and matching VTE prophylaxis, which has never before been published in this scope. It demonstrates the contribution of clinical pharmacists to the improvement of hospital care quality.

A cross-sectional, multicenter, observational study to assess the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in Lebanese and Jordanian hospitals.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of evidence showing substantial underuse of appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients at risk. In the present study, our goal was to assess the current practices in the use rate of VTE prophylaxis among hospitalized patients in Jordan and Lebanon. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multicenter, observational study was conducted on 40 centers across Lebanon and Jordan. We included patients who were admitted to the participating hospitals for the treatment of a serious medical or surgical illness. The patients' records were screened for the fulfillment of inclusion/exclusion criteria during a single assessment visit. The proportion of medical and surgical patients who were at risk of VTE and the thrombo-prophylactic measures employed by physicians for these patients were assessed according to the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP 2016) guidelines. RESULTS: The present study included 704 patients (400 from Jordan and 304 from Lebanon) with a mean age of 54.9 ± 17.5 years. Almost 59% of the patients received prophylaxis treatment in form of pharmacological anticoagulant prophylaxis and/or mechanical prophylaxis. Low molecular weight heparin was the most commonly used anticoagulant for VTE prophylaxis in 366 out of the total 704 (51.9%) patients in the analysis cohort. Two hundred and sixteen patients (52, 95% confidence interval [47.1-56.9%]) received appropriate prophylactic agents out of 415 patients who were eligible for prophylaxis according to the ACCP 2016 guidelines. On the other hand, 199 (72.1, 95% confidence interval [66.4-77.3%) patients received prophylaxis out of 276 ineligible patients. The rate of compliance to guidelines showed wide variations according to the type of hospital, specialty, and the patients' age. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only age was a significant predictor of appropriate VTE prophylaxis (odds ratio [OR] 1.05, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The rates of the appropriate use of VTE prophylaxis are low in Lebanon and Jordan. There is a lack of compliance to guidelines for VTE prophylaxis use for hospitalized patients in both countries.

Utilization Patterns, Efficacy, and Complications of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Strategies in Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty as Reported by American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Candidates.

BACKGROUND: The optimum venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis strategy to minimize risk of VTE and bleeding complications following revision total hip and knee arthroplasty (rTHA/rTKA) is controversial. The purpose of this study is to describe current VTE prophylaxis patterns following revision arthroplasty procedures to determine efficacy, complication rates, and prescribing patterns for different prophylactic strategies. METHODS: The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II (oral) examination case list database was analyzed. Current Procedural Terminology codes for rTHA/rTKA were queried and geographic region, VTE prophylaxis strategy, and complications were obtained. Less aggressive prophylaxis patterns were defined if only aspirin and/or sequential compression devises were utilized. More aggressive VTE prophylaxis patterns were considered if any of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin), warfarin, rivaroxaban, fondaparinux, or other strategies were used. RESULTS: In total, 6387 revision arthroplasties were included. The national rate of less aggressive VTE prophylaxis strategies was 35.3% and more aggressive in 64.7%. Use of less aggressive prophylaxis strategy was significantly associated with patients having no complications (89.8% vs 81.9%, P < .001). Use of more aggressive prophylaxis patterns was associated with higher likelihood of mild thrombotic (1.2% vs 0.3%, P < .001), mild bleeding (1.7% vs 0.6%, P < .001), moderate thrombotic (2.6% vs 0.4%, P < .001), moderate bleeding (6.2% vs 4.0%, P < .001), severe bleeding events (4.4% vs 2.4%, P < .001), infections (6.4% vs 3.8%, P < .001), and death within 90 days (3.1% vs 1.3%, P < .001). There were no significant differences in rates of fatal pulmonary embolism (0.1% vs 0.04%, P = .474). Subgroup analysis of rTHA and rTKA patients showed similar results. CONCLUSION: The individual rationale for using a more aggressive VTE prophylaxis strategy was unknown; however, more aggressive strategies were associated with higher rates of bleeding and thrombotic complications. Less aggressive strategies were not associated with a higher rate of thrombosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III.

Factor Xa Levels in Patients Receiving Prophylactic Enoxaparin Sodium in the Intensive Care Unit of an Academic Hospital.

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the anti-factor Xa levels in patients receiving enoxaparin sodium for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in the intensive care unit (ICU). Patients and methods: Using a cross-sectional study methodology, 73 ICU patients receiving 40 mg enoxaparin sodium daily were enrolled in this study. Anti-factor Xa levels were measured following the second dose. Prophylactic and subprophylactic groups of patients were compared for age, sex, weight, body mass index, total bilirubin, serum albumin, and APACHE II score. Results: Anti-factor Xa levels were prophylactic (0.2-0.6 IU/mL) in 44 (60.3%) patients and subprophylactic (<0.2 IU/mL) in 29 (39.7%) patients. The mean (SD) actual delivered dose of enoxaparin per kilogram body weight was significantly higher, at 0.59 (0.11) mg/kg in the prophylactic group compared to 0.53 (0.13) mg/kg in the subprophylactic group (p = 0.043). The subprophylactic group had significantly lower serum albumin levels compared to the prophylactic group. The total bilirubin levels were not found to be significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.110). Conclusion: A fixed prophylactic 40 mg dose of enoxaparin was associated with a high proportion of subprophylactic anti-factor Xa levels. Weight-based dose and serum albumin level were independent predictors of achieving the prophylactic target range. How to cite this article: Baloo MM, Scribante J, Perrie H, Calleemalay D, Omar S. Factor Xa Levels in Patients Receiving Prophylactic Enoxaparin Sodium in the Intensive Care Unit of an Academic Hospital. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(8):917-919.

Retrospective Analysis of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin and Unfractionated Heparin in Pediatric Trauma Patients: A Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chemoprophylaxis with either unfractionated heparin (UFH) or Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin (LMWH) are recommended to prevent Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) after trauma. Experimental work has shown beneficial effects of LMWH in animal models, but it is unknown if similar effects exist in humans. We hypothesized that treatment with LMWH is associated with a survival benefit when compared to UFH. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of our level I trauma center database from January 2009 to June 2018. Pediatric patients (age < 18) were included if they received either LMWH or UFH during their stay. Outcome measures included mortality, VTE complications, and hospital length of stay (HLOS). RESULTS: A total of 354 patients were included. Patients who received LMWH had lower mortality compared to those who received UFH. After multivariate logistic regression, LMWH was still independently associated with improved survival. No association was found between LMWH and UFH regarding deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) rates. No association was found between LMWH with HLOS. CONCLUSIONS: LMWH was associated with improved survival compared to UFH in our pediatric trauma patients. This was independent of injury severity or VTE complications. Further studies are required to understand better the mechanisms by which LMWH improves survival. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Prospective evaluation of drug-drug interactions in ambulatory cancer patients initiated on prophylactic anticoagulation.

INTRODUCTION: Drug options for VTE prophylaxis are increasing for ambulatory cancer patients and data regarding anticoagulant-drug interactions and their relationship to VTE and bleeding are needed to improve care. METHODS: Over one year, 108 cancer patients with high VTE risk were prospectively identified. Potential anticoagulant-drug interactions were ascertained by chart review and graded on need for intervention. Providers selected anticoagulant prophylaxis based on potential drug interactions and patient-provider discussion. A cross-sectional analysis was performed thereafter to evaluate VTE and bleeding endpoints within one year of anticoagulant initiation. RESULTS: The average number of potential drug interactions per patient was higher for warfarin than others (3.04 vs. 1.28 (apixaban), 1.02 (rivaroxaban), and 0.98 (LMWH)). The severity of the interactions based on grade was, for apixaban: 1.6% grade X, 50.8% grade D, and 47.5% grade C; for rivaroxaban: 2.1% grade X, 64.9% grade D, 33.0% grade C; for LMWH, 0% grade X, 66.7% grade D, 33.3% grade C; and for warfarin, 0% grade X, 29.4% grade D, 70.6% grade C. At the end of the investigational period, 11 bleeds and 7 VTEs were reported. Drug combinations significantly associated with an increased bleeding risk were crizotinib with apixaban or rivaroxaban and PPIs with warfarin. The use of sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim with warfarin was associated with an increased VTE risk. CONCLUSIONS: DOACs had fewer DDIs than warfarin, although interaction severity differed between anticoagulants. Some anticoagulant-drug interactions were associated with bleeding or VTE. Although not powered for analysis, DDI severity did not affect bleeding rates and inversely correlated with VTE risk.

Low-Dose Aspirin Is Safe and Effective for Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in Patients Undergoing Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no established universal standard of care for prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism (VTE) in orthopedic patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). The aim of this study is to determine whether a protocol of 81-mg aspirin (ASA) bis in die (BID) is safe and/or effective in preventing VTE in patients undergoing rTHAs vs 325-mg ASA BID. METHODS: In 2017, a large academic medical center adopted a new protocol for VTE prophylaxis in arthroplasty patients at standard risk. Initially, patients received 325-mg ASA BID but switched to 81-mg ASA BID. A retrospective review (2011-2019) was performed to identify 1361 consecutive rTHA patients and their associated 90-day postoperative complications such as VTE, including pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or deep vein thrombosis (DVT), as the primary outcome; and gastrointestinal and wound bleeding, acute periprosthetic joint infection, and mortality as the secondary outcome. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2017, 973 rTHAs were performed and 13 total VTE cases were diagnosed (1.34%). From 2017 to 2019, 388 rTHAs were performed with 3 total VTE cases identified (0.77%). Chi-squared analyses and logistic regression models showed no differences in rates or odds in postoperative PE (P = .09), DVT (P = .79), PE and DVT (P = .85), and total VTE (P = .38) using either dose. There were also no differences between bleeding complications (P = .14), infection rate (P = .46), and mortality (P = .53). CONCLUSION: Using a protocol of 81-mg of ASA BID is noninferior to 325-mg ASA BID and may be safe and effective in maintaining low rates of VTE in patients undergoing rTHA.

Significant practice variability exists in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in injured children: results from a joint survey of the Pediatric Trauma Society and the Trauma Center Association of America.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to characterize current practices to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in children and measure adherence to recent joint consensus guidelines from the Pediatric Trauma Society and Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (PTS/EAST). METHODS: An 18-question survey was sent to the membership of PTS and the Trauma Center Association of American. Responses were compared with Chi-square test. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine members completed the survey. Most respondents were from academic (84.5%), Level 1 pediatric (62.0%) trauma centers. Criteria for VTE prophylaxis varied between hospitals with freestanding pediatric trauma centers significantly more likely to stratify children by risk factors than adult trauma centers (p = 0.020). While awareness of PTS/EAST guidelines (58.7% overall) was not statistically different between hospital types (44% freestanding adult, 52% freestanding pediatric, 71% combined adult pediatric, p = 0.131), self-reported adherence to these guidelines was uniformly low at 37.2% for all respondents. Lastly, in three clinical scenarios, respondents chose VTE screening and prophylaxis plans in accordance with a prospective application of PTS/EAST guidelines 55.0% correctly. CONCLUSION: Currently no consensus regarding the prevention of VTE in pediatric trauma exists. Prospective application of PTS/EAST guidelines has been limited, likely due to poor quality of evidence and a reliance on post-injury metrics. Results of this survey suggest that further investigation is needed to more clearly define the risk of VTE in children, evaluate, and prospectively validate alternative scoring systems for VTE prevention in injured children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A-Survey.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in traumatic brain injury patients: An audit of clinical practice in AlRass General Hospital, Saudi Arabia and proposal for future clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To review clinical practice with regards to venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in traumatic brain injury patients and to propose guidelines. METHODS: The retrospective study was conducted at Al Rass General Hospital, Saudi Arabia, and comprised medical records of all traumatic brain injury patients admitted to the Neurosurgery Department between November, 2017, and January, 2018. Data was noted using a proforma. Literature review was done to ascertain best clinical evidence and proposed guidelines for practice. RESULTS: Of the 26 patients, 23(88.5 %) were males, and 3(11.5 %) were females. The overall mean age was 32.2±13.4 years. Of the total, 8(30.8%) patients had mechanical venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, while 1(3.8%) received enoxaparin as chemoprophylaxis. There were no reported thromboembolic events or complications related to enoxaparin usage. CONCLUSIONS: The usage of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis was found to be low in clinical practice. A modified Parkland Model approach seemed the most appropriate to avoid venous thromboembolism related events.

Utilization Patterns, Efficacy, and Complications of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Strategies in Primary Hip and Knee Arthroplasty as Reported by American Board of Orthopedic Surgery Part II Candidates.

BACKGROUND: Many strategies for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following hip and knee arthroplasty exist, with extensive controversy regarding the optimum strategy to minimize risk of VTE and bleeding complications. Data from the American Board of Orthopedic Surgery Part II (oral) Examination case list database was analyzed to determine efficacy, complication rates, and prescribing patterns for different prophylactic strategies. METHODS: The American Board of Orthopedic Surgery case database was queried utilizing Current Procedural Terminology codes 27447 and 27130 for primary total knee and hip arthroplasty, respectively. Geographic region, patient age, gender, deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis strategy, and complications were obtained. Less aggressive prophylaxis patterns were considered if only aspirin and/or sequential compression devises were utilized. More aggressive VTE prophylaxis patterns were considered if any of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin), warfarin, rivaroxaban, fondaparinux, or other strategies was used. RESULTS: In total, 22,072 cases of primary joint arthroplasty were analyzed from 2014 to 2016. The national rate of less aggressive VTE prophylaxis strategies was 45.4%, while more aggressive strategies were used in 54.6% of patients. Significant regional differences in prophylactic strategy patterns exist between the 6 regions. The predominant less aggressive prophylaxis pattern was aspirin with sequential compression devises at 84.8% with 14.8% receiving aspirin alone. Use of less aggressive prophylaxis strategy was significantly associated with patients having no complications (95.5% vs 93.0%). Use of more aggressive prophylaxis patterns was associated with higher likelihood of mild thrombotic (0.9% vs 0.2%), mild bleeding (1.3% vs 0.4%), moderate thrombotic (1.2% vs 0.4%), moderate bleeding (2.7% vs 2.1%), severe thrombotic (0.1% vs 0.0%), severe bleeding events (1.2% vs 0.9%), infections (1.9% vs 1.3%), and death within 90 days (0.7% vs 0.3%). Similar results were found in subgroup analysis of total hip and knee arthroplasty patients. CONCLUSION: It was not possible to ascertain the individual rationale for use of more aggressive VTE prophylaxis strategies; however, more aggressive strategies were associated with higher rates of bleeding and thrombotic complications. Less aggressive strategies were not associated with a higher rate of thrombosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed in the study are the sole views of the authors and do not represent the views of the American Board of Orthopedic Surgery.

Venous Hemodynamics After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Comparison Between Portable vs Stationary Pneumatic Compression Devices and the Effect of Body Position.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in device design have allowed for portable pneumatic compression devices (PPCDs). However, portability results in smaller pumps that move less blood. Additionally, although patients often stand when wearing PPCDs, few studies have evaluated the hemodynamic effects of PCDs while standing. METHODS: A crossover study was performed to compare a PPCD (ActiveCare+S.F.T.; Medical Compression Systems, Or Akiva, Israel) to a stationary pneumatic compression device (SPCD) (VenaFlow; DJO Global, Carlsbad, CA) on hemodynamics in supine and standing positions among 2 cohorts composed of 10 controls and 10 total hip arthroplasty patients. Differences in baseline peak venous velocity (PVV), PVV with each PCD, and delta PVV with each PCD were assessed. A multivariate analysis was performed to examine differences between cohorts, devices, and position. RESULTS: In both positions, the SPCD demonstrated a larger change in PVV when compared to the PPCD (P < .001). The total hip arthroplasty group had a greater delta PVV while standing when considering both PCDs together (P < .001). When considering both cohorts, delta PVV was greater while standing, only when the SPCD was used (P < .001). There was no difference between standing and supine positions when the PPCD was used. CONCLUSION: The SPCD demonstrated a greater capacity to increase PPV in the supine and standing positions. The SPCD generated greater values of PVV and delta PVV in the standing position. Although these results demonstrate a difference between devices, it is important to establish the PVV necessary to prevent VTE before one is considered more effective.

ERAS: Safety checklists, antibiotics, and VTE prophylaxis.

The concept rested on several components that many of us have now tried to adopt or improve on, inclusive of a multidisciplinary team, a multimodal approach to anesthesia and preoperative preparedness, evidence-based approach to care protocols; and a change in management using interactive and continuous audit prior to and post-procedure. This article describes the development of ERAS protocols relative to checklist implementation, antibiotic use, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, how these ideas are developed and operationalized as well as how they are evolving and spreading across the care continuum to achieve sustained outcome improvements.