Optimal Timing of Perioperative Chemical Thromboprophylaxis in Elective Major Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of the timing of chemoprophylaxis on venous thromboembolisms (VTEs) and bleeding rates in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. BACKGROUND: Postoperative bleeding and VTE incur significant morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Chemoprophylaxis is used routinely to prevent VTEs but increases bleeding risk. The perioperative timing of chemoprophylaxis initiation may influence both VTE and bleeding risks. The optimal window for commencing chemoprophylaxis in the perioperative period is unclear. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched using PRISMA guidelines. Randomized trials and cohort studies published between January 1, 2000 to May 10, 2022, which reported on chemoprophylaxis timing as well as the incidence of VTE and bleeding after elective abdominal surgery were meta-analyzed. RESULTS: From 6175 studies, 14 (24,922 patients) were meta-analyzed. Bariatric (4 studies), antireflux (1 study), hepato-pancreatic-biliary (5 studies), colorectal (1 study), ventral hernia (1 study), and major intra-abdominal surgeries (2 studies) were included. Chemoprophylaxis was initiated before skin closure in 10,403 patients, and postoperatively in 14,519 patients. Both symptomatic [risk ratios (RR), 0.81; 95% CI, 0.45-1.43; P =0.460] and overall (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.45-1.24; P =0.250) VTE rates were comparable between study groups. Compared with postoperative chemoprophylaxis, early usage increased the risk of all bleeding (RR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.13-2.15; P =0.007), major bleeding (RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.16-2.28; P =0.005), blood transfusion (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.24-1.76; P <0.001), and reintervention (RR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.19-3.18; P =0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings advocate for initiating chemoprophylaxis postoperatively in elective abdominal surgery to minimize bleeding risk without compromising VTE protection.

Surgical approaches for achalasia and obesity: a systematic review and patient-level meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Synchronous and metachronous presentations of achalasia and obesity are increasingly common. There is limited data to guide the combined or staged surgical approaches to these conditions. METHODS: A systematic review (MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science) and patient-level meta-analysis of published cases were performed to examine the most effective surgical approach for patients with synchronous or metachronous presentations of achalasia and obesity. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies with 93 patients were reviewed. Eighteen patients underwent concurrent achalasia and bariatric surgery, with the most common (n = 12, 72.2%) being laparoscopic Heller's myotomy (LHM) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This combination achieved 68.9% excess weight loss and 100% remission of achalasia (mean follow-up: 3 years). Seven (6 RYGB, 1 biliopancreatic diversion) patients had bariatric surgery following achalasia surgery. Of these, all 6 RYGBs had satisfactory bariatric outcomes, with complete remission of their achalasia (mean follow-up: 1.8 years). Sixty-eight patients underwent myotomy following bariatric surgery; the majority (n = 55, 80.9%) were following RYGB. In this scenario, per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) achieved higher treatment success than LHM (n = 33 of 35, 94.3% vs. n = 14 of 20, 70.0%, p = 0.021). Moreover, conversion to RYGB following a restrictive bariatric procedure during achalasia surgery was also associated with higher achalasia treatment success. CONCLUSION: In patients with concurrent achalasia and obesity, LHM and RYGB achieved good outcomes for both pathologies. For those with weight gain post-achalasia surgery, RYGB provided satisfactory weight loss, without adversely affecting achalasia symptoms. For those with achalasia after bariatric surgery, POEM and conversion to RYGB produced greater treatment success.