Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding in patients with acute isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 10 % of all diagnosed pulmonary embolism are isolated to the subsegmental vessels. The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with an acute subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) managed with or without anticoagulant therapy remains poorly understood. METHODS: This is an observational cohort study including consecutive adult patients diagnosed with acute isolated SSPE between June 01, 2019, and August 31, 2022. We excluded patients with a concomitant diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis and those who had an indication for long-term anticoagulation. The primary outcome was objectively confirmed recurrent VTE. RESULTS: Overall, 118 patients with acute SSPE were included in the analysis. The mean (± standard deviation [SD]) age of the participants was 59 ± 17 years and 44 % of them had active cancer. Mean (±SD) duration of follow-up was 438 ± 426 days. Seventy-seven patients (65 %) were initially treated with anticoagulation, whereas 41 patients (35 %) were not. Of the 77 patients receiving anticoagulant therapy, 23 (30 %) received extended-duration anticoagulation (beyond 3 months) for secondary prevention. Overall, recurrent VTE events occurred in 6/118 (5 %, 95 % CI 2.4 to 10.7) patients. Four events (4/77 = 5.2 %, 95 % CI 2.0 to 12.6) occurred in initially treated patients. Two recurrent VTE occurred in patients initially left untreated (2/41 = 4.9 %, 95 % CI 1.4 to 16.1). Half of the recurrent VTE occurred in patients with active cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients diagnosed with an acute SSPE received anticoagulation. The incidence of recurrent VTE detected over time was relatively high, especially in patients with cancer.

Rates of venous thromboembolism and use of thromboprophylaxis after major orthopedic surgery in patients with congenital hemophilia A or B: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a well-recognized complication after total joint replacement (TJR). Persons with hemophilia A or B are considered at low postoperative VTE risk due to their coagulation factor deficiencies, and administering pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis is often considered contraindicated. However, using factor replacement therapy could increase the postoperative VTE risk. OBJECTIVES: To analyze best available evidences of VTE rates in persons with hemophilia A or B undergoing lower limb TJR and the use of postoperative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: We systematically screened 4 online biomedical databases to identify studies reporting VTE rates in patients with hemophilia after TJR. Case reports and case series with less than 10 patients were excluded. RESULTS: Twenty-six observational studies were included in this systematic review, reporting 1181 TJRs in patients with hemophilia A or B. Eight studies had VTE rates as the primary outcome. Five studies reported screen-detected VTE, while 21 reported symptomatic VTE events. Overall, 17 VTE events were reported (1.4%; 95% CI, 0.9%-2.3%), including 10 (6.6%) after 151 surgeries with postoperative VTE screening and 7 (0.7%) after 1080 surgeries without postoperative screening. Thromboprophylaxis protocols were specified in 21 studies; postoperative thromboprophylaxis was used in 15 (1.3%) surgeries. This information was not available for 29.0% of the analyzed population. CONCLUSION: Despite the low thromboprophylaxis use in patients with hemophilia, rates of symptomatic VTE after TJR appeared to be low. We also highlighted the need to better report the thrombotic outcome in persons with hemophilia to face the ongoing changes in the hemophilia landscape.