RESUMO
UNLABELLED: ESSENTIALS: We performed a pooled analysis of 926 patients with cancer-associated incidental pulmonary embolism (IPE). Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) are associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage. Recurrence risk is comparable after subsegmental and more proximally localized IPE. Our results support low molecular weight heparins over VKA and similar management of subsegmental IPE. BACKGROUND: Incidental pulmonary embolism (IPE) is defined as pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosed on computed tomography scanning not performed for suspected PE. IPE has been estimated to occur in 3.1% of all cancer patients and is a growing challenge for clinicians and patients. Nevertheless, knowledge about the treatment and prognosis of cancer-associated IPE is scarce. We aimed to provide the best available evidence on IPE management. METHODS: Incidence rates of symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major hemorrhage, and mortality during 6-month follow-up were pooled using individual patient data from studies identified by a systematic literature search. Subgroup analyses based on cancer stage, thrombus localization, and management were performed. RESULTS: In 926 cancer patients with IPE from 11 cohorts, weighted pooled 6-month risks of recurrent VTE, major hemorrhage and mortality were 5.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.7-8.3%), 4.7% (95% CI 3.0-6.8%), and 37% (95% CI 28-47%). VTE recurrence risk was comparable under low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) (6.2% vs. 6.4%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.9; 95% CI 0.3-3.1), while 12% in untreated patients (HR 2.6; 95% CI 0.91-7.3). Risk of major hemorrhage was higher under VKAs than under LMWH (13% vs. 3.9%; HR 3.9; 95% CI 1.6-10). VTE recurrence risk was comparable in patients with an subsegmental IPE and those with a more proximally localized IPE (HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.50-2.4). CONCLUSION: These results support the current recommendation to anticoagulate cancer-associated IPE with LMWH and argue against different management of subsegmental IPE.
Assuntos
Hemorragia/complicações , Neoplasias/complicações , Embolia Pulmonar/complicações , Tromboembolia Venosa/complicações , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Coortes , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Feminino , Seguimentos , Hemorragia/diagnóstico , Hemorragia/prevenção & controle , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Embolia Pulmonar/diagnóstico , Recidiva , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de Risco , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Resultado do Tratamento , Tromboembolia Venosa/diagnóstico , Vitamina K/antagonistas & inibidores , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Cancer and its treatment are recognized risk factors for VTE. Compliance rate with published VTE prophylaxis guidelines is low. Decision on when to offer prophylaxis for hospitalized cancer patients is difficult to make. This paper describes current clinical practice in offering VTE prophylaxis to hospitalized cancer patients. Prophylaxis rate and rate of VTE will be correlated with the risk level. We prospectively followed all consecutive adult cancer patients admitted to medical units over a 5-month period. Caprini risk assessment model, with some modifications, was utilized to determine risk of VTE. Six hundred and six patients (51% males, median age 52 years, range 18-91) were included. Reasons for admission included infections (25%), chemotherapy (22%) and palliative care (10%). In addition to cancer, the most frequently encountered risk factors for VTE were: Immobilization (35%), age > 60 years (31%) and body mass index > 30 in (20%). Patients were grouped according to their total risk score: low (9%), moderate (44%) and high risk (47%). VTE prophylaxis rate was 55.1% for the whole study group. Following discharge, patients were followed for 60 days. The incidence of VTE was 3.4% in the moderate and 4.2% in the high risk groups, while none in the low risk group developed VTE. Many additional risk factors for VTE are usually encountered in hospitalized cancer patients. Cancer alone may not be an enough reason for VTE prophylaxis. Risk assessment model able to stratify patients into different risk categories will simplify decision making and enhance VTE prophylaxis rate.