Venous Thromboembolism: Review of Clinical Challenges, Biology, Assessment, Treatment, and Modeling.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a massive clinical challenge, annually affecting millions of patients globally. VTE is a particularly consequential pathology, as incidence is correlated with extremely common risk factors, and a large cohort of patients experience recurrent VTE after initial intervention. Altered hemodynamics, hypercoagulability, and damaged vascular tissue cause deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, the two permutations of VTE. Venous valves have been identified as likely locations for initial blood clot formation, but the exact pathway by which thrombosis occurs in this environment is not entirely clear. Several risk factors are known to increase the likelihood of VTE, particularly those that increase inflammation and coagulability, increase venous resistance, and damage the endothelial lining. While these risk factors are useful as predictive tools, VTE diagnosis prior to presentation of outward symptoms is difficult, chiefly due to challenges in successfully imaging deep-vein thrombi. Clinically, VTE can be managed by anticoagulants or mechanical intervention. Recently, direct oral anticoagulants and catheter-directed thrombolysis have emerged as leading tools in resolution of venous thrombosis. While a satisfactory VTE model has yet to be developed, recent strides have been made in advancing in silico models of venous hemodynamics, hemorheology, fluid-structure interaction, and clot growth. These models are often guided by imaging-informed boundary conditions or inspired by benchtop animal models. These gaps in knowledge are critical targets to address necessary improvements in prediction and diagnosis, clinical management, and VTE experimental and computational models.

Thrombosis in multiple myeloma: mechanisms, risk assessment and management.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is associated with an increased risk of venous and arterial thrombosis. Pathophysiologic mechanisms include patient, disease and treatment related factors. Risk assessment models have been developed to determine whichpatients are at highest thrombotic risk and pursuant to this, risk adapted thrombosis prophylaxis has been suggested. Areas in which further basic and clinical research is imperative include the molecular and cellular mechanisms of thrombosis in myeloma, the inclusion of relevant biomarkers in risk assessment scores and controlled clinical trials of VTE prophylaxis and treatment using direct oral anticoagulants.

Venous thromboembolism among Medicare acute ischaemic stroke patients with and without COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This study examined the prevalence of VTE among acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) patients with and without a history of COVID-19. METHODS: We identified AIS hospitalisations of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries aged ≥65 years from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2022. We compared the prevalence and adjusted prevalence ratio of VTE among AIS patients with and without a history of COVID-19. RESULTS: Among 283 034 Medicare FFS beneficiaries with AIS hospitalisations, the prevalence of VTE was 4.51%, 2.96% and 2.61% among those with a history of hospitalised COVID-19, non-hospitalised COVID-19 and without COVID-19, respectively. As compared with patients without a history of COVID-19, the prevalence of VTE among patients with a history of hospitalised or non-hospitalised COVID-19 were 1.62 (95% CI 1.54 to 1.70) and 1.13 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.23) times greater, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There appeared to be a notably higher prevalence of VTE among Medicare beneficiaries with AIS accompanied by a current or prior COVID-19. Early recognition of coagulation abnormalities and appropriate interventions may help improve patients' clinical outcomes.

Cost Burden and Cost Influencers of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval among Medicare Beneficiaries with Acute Venous Thromboembolism.

PURPOSE: To examine the frequency, costs, and cost influencers of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) placements and retrievals among a national sample of patients using Medicare data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the U.S. Medicare 100% database, a nationally representative sample of all U.S. patients aged ≥65 years, from 2014 through 2020. Procedures and clinical characteristics were identified from the diagnosis and procedure codes on Medicare claims. Beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with newly diagnosed venous thromboembolism (VTE) were identified and followed to obtain data on IVCF placements and retrievals. Data on the costs of the index IVCF procedures and any subsequent IVCF placements and retrievals were obtained. Multivariate models were used to estimate the impact of patient and clinical characteristics on costs. RESULTS: Among 501,216 patients with newly diagnosed VTE, 4,995 (1%) received an IVCF placement; of these, 1,215 (24.3%) had a retrieval procedure. Beneficiaries with IVCF placements and retrievals differed from a demographic and clinical perspective than from those without. Costs varied by the site of service, VTE acuity, and VTE type. Cost influencers included age, race, census region, service location, and VTE type. CONCLUSIONS: IVCF placement costs were driven by baseline patient characteristics (age, race, geographic residence, acute VTE diagnosis, and inpatient site of service), whereas retrieval costs were driven by age and deep vein thrombosis diagnosis. Strategies to mitigate the retrieval costs or the need to retrieve IVCFs may reduce the overall cost burden of IVCFs.

Cost-of-Illness Analysis of Long-Term Health Care Resource Use and Disease Burden in Patients With Pulmonary Embolism: Insights From the PREFER in VTE Registry.

Background As mortality from pulmonary embolism (PE) decreases, the personal and societal costs among survivors are receiving increasing attention. Detailing this burden would support an efficient public health resource allocation. We aimed to provide estimates for the economic and disease burden of PE also accounting for long-term health care use and both direct and indirect costs beyond the acute phase. Methods and Results This is a cost-of-illness analysis with a bottom-up approach based on data from the PREFER in VTE registry (Prevention of Thromboembolic Events-European Registry in Venous Thromboembolism). We calculated direct (clinical events and anticoagulation) and indirect costs (loss of productivity) of an acute PE event and its 12-month follow-up in 2020 Euros. We estimated a disability weight for the 12-month post-PE status and corresponding disability adjusted life years presumably owing to PE. Disease-specific costs in the first year of follow-up after an incident PE case ranged between 9135 Euros and 10 620 Euros. The proportion of indirect costs was 42% to 49% of total costs. Costs were lowest in patients with ongoing cancer, mainly because productivity loss was less evident in this already burdened population. The calculated disability weight for survivors who were cancer free 12 months post-PE was 0.017, and the estimated disability adjusted life years per incident case were 1.17. Conclusions The economic burden imposed by PE to society and affected patients is considerable, and productivity loss is its main driver. The disease burden from PE is remarkable and translates to the loss of roughly 1.2 years of healthy life per incident PE case.

Incidence, risk factors and management of venous thromboembolism in patients with primary CNS lymphoma.

INTRODUCTION: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a known complication of malignancy. While brain tumors in general predispose to VTE, the incidence in primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is poorly characterized. We sought to characterize incidence, risk factors, management, and outcome of VTE in PCNSL METHOD: Retrospective study of 78 PCNSL patients from 2/1/2002 to 4/1/2020 at the University of Virginia RESULTS: 31% (24/78) of patients developed VTE. 12.8% (10/78) had deep venous thrombosis (DVT) alone, 11.5% (9/78) isolated pulmonary embolism (PE) and 6.4% (5/78) both. The median time from PCNSL diagnosis to VTE was 3 months. In a univariate competing risks analysis, previous VTE (p < 0.001), impaired ambulation (p = 0.035), baseline hemoglobin < 10 g/dL (p = 0.025) and history of diabetes mellitus (type 1 or 2) (p = 0.007) were associated with increased VTE risk. 34.8% were anticoagulated acutely with heparin (8/23) or 65.2% LMWH (15/23), and 25.0% (6/24) received warfarin, 41.7% (10/24) LMWH, and 33.3% (8/24) DOACs long-term. One adverse event was attributable to anticoagulation (arm hematoma with hemoglobin decrease). Five patients received IVC filters with concomitant oral anticoagulation; one experienced IVC thrombosis after anticoagulation discontinuation. Six of the 24 patients experienced recurrent VTE, four while anticoagulated. CONCLUSION: Patients with PCNSL are at high risk of VTE, most of which accrues in the first few months. History of VTE, diabetes mellitus (type 1 or 2), impaired ambulatory status, or hemoglobin < 10 g/dL may predispose patients to this complication. While optimal management is uncertain, anticoagulation prevented recurrent VTE in most patients without intracranial bleeding.

Pulmonary Embolism Response Team utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may predispose patients to venous thromboembolism (VTE). Limited data are available on the utilization of the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) in the setting of the COVID-19 global pandemic. We performed a single-center study to evaluate treatment, mortality, and bleeding outcomes in patients who received PERT consultations in March and April 2020, compared to historical controls from the same period in 2019. Clinical data were abstracted from the electronic medical record. The primary study endpoints were inpatient mortality and GUSTO moderate-to-severe bleeding. The frequency of PERT utilization was nearly threefold higher during March and April 2020 (n = 74) compared to the same period in 2019 (n = 26). During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was significantly less PERT-guided invasive treatment (5.5% vs 23.1%, p = 0.02) with a numerical but not statistically significant trend toward an increase in the use of systemic fibrinolytic therapy (13.5% vs 3.9%, p = 0.3). There were nonsignificant trends toward higher in-hospital mortality or moderate-to-severe bleeding in patients receiving PERT consultations during the COVID-19 period compared to historical controls (mortality 14.9% vs 3.9%, p = 0.18 and moderate-to-severe bleeding 35.1% vs 19.2%, p = 0.13). In conclusion, PERT utilization was nearly threefold higher during the COVID-19 pandemic than during the historical control period. Among patients evaluated by PERT, in-hospital mortality or moderate-to-severe bleeding were not significantly different, despite being numerically higher, while invasive therapy was utilized less frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Outcomes and Prognosis Factors in Patients With Vena Cava Filters in a Quaternary Medical Center: A 5-Year Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Indications for inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) placement are controversial. This study assesses the proportion of different indications for IVCF placement and the associated 30-day event rates and predictors for all-cause mortality, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, and bleeding after IVCF placement. METHOD: In this 5-year retrospective cohort observational study in a quaternary care center, consecutive patients with IVCF placement were identified through cross-matching of 3 database sets and classified into 3 indication groups defined as "standard" in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and contraindication to anticoagulants, "extended" in patients with VTE but no contraindication to anticoagulants, and "prophylactic" in patients without VTE. RESULTS: We identified 1248 IVCF placements, that is, 238 (19.1%) IVCF placements for standard indications, 583 (46.7%) IVCF placements for extended indications, and 427 (34.2%) IVCF placements for prophylactic indications. Deep vein thrombosis rates [95% confidence interval] were higher in the extended (8.06% [5.98-10.58]) and prophylactic (7.73% [5.38-10.68]) groups than in the standard group (3.36% [1.46-6.52]). Mortality rates were higher in the standard group (12.18% [8.31-17.03]) than in the extended group (7.55% [5.54-9.99]) and the prophylactic (5.85% [3.82-8.52]) group. Bleeding rates were higher in the standard group (4.62% [2.33-8.12]) than in the prophylactic group (2.11% [0.97-3.96]). Best predictors for VTE were acute medical conditions; best predictors for mortality were age, acute medical conditions, cancer, and Medicare health insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic and extended indications account for the majority of IVCF placements. The standard indication is associated with the lowest VTE rate that may be explained by the competing risk of mortality higher in this group and related to the underlying medical conditions and bleeding risk. In the prophylactic group (no VTE at baseline), the exceedingly high DVT rate may be related to the IVCF placement.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with venous thromboembolism according to diagnosis on weekends versus on weekdays.

There are uncertainties on the influence of the days of diagnosis in a week (weekends versus weekdays) on clinical outcomes in patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), including pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The COMMAND VTE registry is a multicenter cohort study enrolling 3027 consecutive patients with acute symptomatic VTE. The current study population consisted of 337 patients diagnosed on weekends and 2690 patients diagnosed on weekdays. We compared the clinical characteristics, management strategies and 30-day outcomes between the 2 groups. The patients diagnosed on weekends more often presented with PE (72% vs. 55%, P < 0.001), and with more severe hemodynamic condition for PE patients. The patients diagnosed on weekends more often received initial parenteral anticoagulation therapy and thrombolysis than those diagnosed on weekdays. The cumulative 30-day incidence of all-cause death was not significantly different between the two groups among PE patients (diagnosis on weekends: 6.2% vs. diagnosis on weekdays: 6.5%, P = 0.87), as well as among DVT patients (0.0% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.24). The most frequent cause of deaths was fatal PE in both groups among PE patients. The risks for recurrent VTE and major bleeding at 30-day were not significantly different between the 2 groups among PE patients, nor among DVT only patients. In conclusion, the VTE patients diagnosed on weekends presented more often with PE, and with more severe condition for PE patients. Nevertheless, the risk for 30-day mortality was not significantly different between patients diagnosed on weekends and on weekdays.

The hypercoagulable state in COVID-19: Incidence, pathophysiology, and management.

The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) presents with a large variety of clinical manifestations ranging from asymptomatic carrier state to severe respiratory distress, multiple organ dysfunction and death. While it was initially considered primarily a respiratory illness, rapidly accumulating data suggests that COVID-19 results in a unique, profoundly prothrombotic milieu leading to both arterial and venous thrombosis. Consistently, elevated D-dimer level has emerged as an independent risk factor for poor outcomes, including death. Several other laboratory markers and blood counts have also been associated with poor prognosis, possibly due to their connection to thrombosis. At present, the pathophysiology underlying the hypercoagulable state is poorly understood. However, a growing body of data suggests that the initial events occur in the lung. A severe inflammatory response, originating in the alveoli, triggers a dysfunctional cascade of inflammatory thrombosis in the pulmonary vasculature, leading to a state of local coagulopathy. This is followed, in patients with more severe disease, by a generalized hypercoagulable state that results in macro- and microvascular thrombosis. Of concern, is the observation that anticoagulation may be inadequate in many circumstances, highlighting the need for alternative or additional therapies. Numerous ongoing studies investigating the pathophysiology of the COVID-19 associated coagulopathy may provide mechanistic insights that can direct appropriate interventional strategies.

Call to Action to Prevent Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Patients: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major preventable disease that affects hospitalized inpatients. Risk stratification and prophylactic measures have good evidence supporting their use, but multiple reasons exist that prevent full adoption, compliance, and efficacy that may underlie the persistence of VTE over the past several decades. This policy statement provides a focused review of VTE, risk scoring systems, prophylaxis, and tracking methods. From this summary, 5 major areas of policy guidance are presented that the American Heart Association believes will lead to better implementation, tracking, and prevention of VTE events. They include performing VTE risk assessment and reporting the level of VTE risk in all hospitalized patients, integrating preventable VTE as a benchmark for hospital comparison and pay-for-performance programs, supporting appropriations to improve public awareness of VTE, tracking VTE nationwide with the use of standardized definitions, and developing a centralized data steward for data tracking on VTE risk assessment, prophylaxis, and rates.

Risk assessment of venous thromboembolism in hematological cancer patients: a review.

Introduction: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent and serious complication in cancer patients. Nonetheless, patients with hematological cancers receive less attention as compared with their solid tumor counterparts regarding this potentially fatal complication.Areas covered: Risk factors that are associated with the development of VTE in hematological cancers are discussed, based on a PubMed literature search. Since different hematological malignancies carry different risks of VTE, risk assessment in individual types of hematological cancers, including acute leukemias, lymphomas, myeloma, and myeloproliferative neoplasms are examined separately. Clinical relevance of VTE assessment and current guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in patients with hematological malignancies are also briefly reviewed.Expert opinion: When assessing VTE risk in patients with hematological cancers, in addition to the non-cancer specific risk factors, individual cancer-type-specific and the therapy-related factors must be taken into consideration. Primary thromboprophylaxis should be considered in high-risk patients.

The effect of catheter-directed thrombolytic use on readmission rates and in-hospital outcomes among cancer patients with venous thromboembolism in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Cancer inducing a hypercoagulable state, venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. We assessed the impacts of cancer on the likelihood for readmission after a VTE-targeted procedure. METHODS: We created a new cohort using discharge-level data from all hospitalizations from State Inpatient Databases of geographically dispersed participating states (18-27 states). RESULTS: In those presenting with VTE during index-admission (619 241), 2.4% patients underwent catheter directed thrombolytic therapy (CDL) on index admission and among those 20.3% had cancer. Moreover, the 30-day readmission rate amongst CDL recipients (10 776 overall) was 14.3% in those with cancer compared to 8.8% in those with no cancer history (P < .0001). Additionally, in-hospital mortality (5.7% vs 1.1%; P = 0.009) and cost-of-care ($11 014 ± 914 vs $10 520 ± 534; P = .04) was significantly higher in cancer compared to noncancer. CONCLUSION: The use of CDL does not appear to reduce the risk of returning for a VTE-related admission in cancer.

The True Effect of a Lumbar Dural Tear on Complications and Cost.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective database analysis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to match risk factors for complications in patients who did and did not sustain a dural tear while undergoing posterior lumbar spine surgery and compare local and systemic complications. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current data do not adequately define whether the event of sustaining an isolated dural tear increases the risk for postoperative complications while controlling for other confounding risk factors. METHODS: The PearlDiver Database was queried for patients who underwent posterior lumbar spine decompression and/or fusion for degenerative pathology. Patients with and without dural tears were 1:2 matched based on demographic variables and comorbidities. Complications, cost, length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates were analyzed. RESULTS: The 1:2 matched cohort included 9038 patients with a dural tear and 17,340 patients without a dural tear. All complications assessed were significantly higher in the dural tear group (P < 0.03). Venothromboembolic (VTE) events occurred in 1.3% of patients with a dural tear and 0.9% of patients without a dural tear (odds ratio [OR] 1.46, P < 0.0001). Meningitis occurred in 25 patients (0.3%) with a dural tear and eight patients (<0.1%) without a dural tear (OR 6.0, P < 0.0001). Patients with a dural tear had 120% higher medical costs, 200% greater LOS, and were two times more likely to be readmitted (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Sustaining a dural tear while undergoing posterior lumbar spinal decompression and/or fusion for degenerative pathology significantly increased the risk of complications and increased length of stay, risk of readmission, and overall 90-day hospital cost. Dural tears specifically increased the risk of a VTE complication by 1.46 times and meningitis by six times; these are important complications to have a high degree of suspicion for in the setting of durotomy, as they can lead to significant morbidity for the patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Conhecimento, avaliação de risco e autoeficácia quanto a tromboembolismo venoso entre enfermeiros / Conocimientos, evaluación de riesgos y autoeficacia sobre tromboembolismo venoso entre enfermeros / Nurses' knowledge, risk assessment, and self-efficacy regarding venous thromboembolism

Resumo Objetivo Comparar o conhecimento autopercebido e objetivo de enfermeiros sobre tromboembolismo venoso e identificar suas práticas e barreiras percebidas para a avaliação de risco e autoeficácia em realizar cuidados preventivos para a doença. Métodos Estudo descritivo transversal realizado com enfermeiros assistenciais lotados nas unidades nos setores de cuidados a pacientes adultos de um hospital-escola da cidade de São Paulo. Os enfermeiros responderam a um instrumento sobre conhecimento percebido e objetivo, avaliação de risco, autoeficácia e barreiras para avaliação de risco de tromboembolismo venoso, o qual foi elaborado e refinado por enfermeiros e médicos com expertise acadêmica e clínica. Os dados foram analisados por estatística descritiva (frequências absolutas e relativas). Resultados Dos 81 enfermeiros, 53,3% percebiam seu conhecimento sobre avaliação de risco de tromboembolismo venoso como "bom", porém 33,1% em média responderam corretamente a questões objetivas sobre a doença; 44,4% realizavam avaliação de risco em apenas alguns pacientes. A barreira mais comum para avaliação do risco foi falta de protocolo (65,4%), seguida de falta de tempo (29,6%). Em relação à autoeficácia, somente 13% a 24,3% se sentem seguros a maior parte do tempo em prevenir e orientar pacientes quanto à prevenção de tromboembolismo venoso. Conclusão Há discrepância entre o conhecimento percebido e objetivo sobre tromboembolismo venoso e a avaliação de risco é insuficiente. Os enfermeiros têm baixa autoeficácia quanto à avaliação de risco. A falta de protocolo é percebida como barreira importante para essa avaliação. Esses resultados podem subsidiar o planejamento individual de educação permanente focada na prevenção da doença.

Resumen Objetivo Comparar el conocimiento autopercibido y objetivo de enfermeros sobre tromboembolismo venoso e identificar las prácticas y barreras percibidas para evaluar el riesgo y la autoeficacia de cuidados preventivos para la enfermedad. Métodos Estudio descriptivo transversal realizado con enfermeros asistenciales destinados a unidades en sectores de cuidados a pacientes adultos en un hospital universitario de la ciudad de São Paulo. Los enfermeros respondieron un instrumento sobre conocimientos percibidos y objetivos, evaluación de riesgos, autoeficacia y barreras para evaluar el riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso, que fue elaborado y refinado por enfermeros y médicos con expertise académica y clínica. Los datos fueron analizados por estadística descriptiva (frecuencias absolutas y relativas). Resultados De los 81 enfermeros, el 53,3% percibió que sus conocimientos sobre evaluación de riesgos de tromboembolismo venoso eran "buenos", pero un promedio de 33,1% respondió correctamente las preguntas objetivas sobre la enfermedad y el 44,4% realizaba evaluación de riesgos solo en algunos pacientes. La barrera más común para evaluar los riesgos fue la falta de protocolo (65,4%), seguida de la falta de tiempo (29,6%). Respecto a la autoeficacia, solamente entre el 13% y el 24,3% se siente seguro la mayor parte del tiempo para prevenir y orientar pacientes sobre la prevención de tromboembolismo venoso. Conclusión Hay discrepancias entre el conocimiento percibido y objetivo sobre tromboembolismo venoso y la evaluación de riesgos es insuficiente. Los enfermeros tienen una autoeficacia baja respecto a la evaluación de riesgos. La falta de un protocolo se percibe como barrera importante para esta evaluación. Estos resultados pueden contribuir a la planificación individual de educación permanente centrada en la prevención de la enfermedad.

Abstract Objectives To compare nurses' self-perceived and objective knowledge of venous thromboembolism, and to identify their risk assessment practices and perceived barriers, and self-efficacy in delivering care to prevent venous thromboembolism. Methods A cross-sectional, descriptive study including bedside nurses working in adult units at a teaching hospital in the city of São Paulo. Nurses answered a questionnaire on self-perceived and objective knowledge, risk assessment, self-efficacy, and barriers to venous thromboembolism risk assessment, which was developed and refined by nurses and physicians with academic and clinical expertise. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (absolute and relative frequencies). Results Out of 81 nurses, 53.3% perceived their own knowledge of venous thromboembolism risk assessment as good, however, only an average of 33.1% of nurses answered objective questions about the disease correctly; and 44.4% performed risk assessment for only a few patients. The most common barrier for risk assessment was the lack of protocol (65.4%), followed by the lack of time (29.6%). Regarding self-efficacy, only 13% to 24.3% were sure most of the time that they could prevent venous thromboembolism and educate patients for prevention. Conclusion A gap between self-perceived and objective knowledge of venous thromboembolism was identified, and risk assessment was considered insufficient. Nurses had low risk assessment self-efficacy. The lack of a protocol is perceived as a significant barrier for assessment. These results may support individual planning of permanent education focusing on disease prevention.

Understanding Factors Associated with Quality of Life in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism.

INTRODUCTION: Quality of life (QoL) deficits have been noted among patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) but understanding of the drivers of that poorer QoL is limited. The objective of this study was to examine associations between a variety of factors and QoL in patients with VTE. METHODS: Adult patients who had experienced at least one VTE episode within the past 2 years completed an online survey between May and July 2016 with responses to a variety of questions designed to ascertain QoL scores, Optum Short Form-12, and potential factors associated with these scores. RESULTS: Most of the 907 patients were female (56.7%) and Caucasian (88.6%). Physical and mental QoL scores below the general population average were present in 76.0 and 56.7% of patients, respectively. Multiple regression modeling revealed several factors associated with below average physical QoL scores including unemployment (odds ratio [OR] 3.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.76-8.05), gastrointestinal bleeding (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.28-5.01), high depression scores (OR 4.02, 95% CI 1.88-8.58), or difficulty accessing VTE care (OR 4.24, 95% CI 1.77-10.17). Factors associated with below average mental QoL scores included experiencing VTE within the last month (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.58-9.41), unemployment (OR 2.83, 95% CI 1.30-6.16), or high depression (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.60-9.28) and/or anxiety (OR 9.17, 95% CI 4.81-17.47) scores. CONCLUSION: Most patients with recently diagnosed VTE reported below average QoL. Many of the factors associated with below average QoL are modifiable, indicating that patients with VTE could potentially benefit from interventions aimed at improving QoL.

Association of Acute Venous Thromboembolism With In-Hospital Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.

Background While venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is a strong recommendation after most surgeries, it is controversial in cardiac surgeries such as coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), because of perceived low VTE incidence and increased bleeding risk. Prior studies may not have been adequately powered to study outcomes of VTE in this population. We sought to investigate the postoperative incidence and outcomes of CABG patients using a large national inpatient database. Methods and Results We utilized the 2013 to 2014 National Inpatient Sample to identify all patients >18 years of age who underwent CABG (without concomitant valvular procedures), and had VTE during the hospital stay. We then compared clinically relevant outcomes in patients with and without VTE. We identified 331 950 CABG procedures. Of these, 1.3% (n=4205) had VTE. Patients with VTE were more likely to be older (mean 67.2±10.4 years versus 65.2±10.4 years, P<0.001). VTE was associated with higher incidence of inpatient mortality (6.8% versus 1.7%; adjusted odds ratio 1.92 [95% CI 1.40-2.65]; P<0.001) and complications. VTE was also associated with higher cost (mean±SE $81 995±$923 versus $48 909±$55) and longer length of stay (mean±SE 17.06±0.16 days versus 8.52±0.01 days). Conclusions Our analysis of >330 000 CABG procedures suggests that while postoperative VTE after CABG is rare, it is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Randomized controlled trials are needed to identify optimal strategies for VTE prophylaxis in these patients.

Rate and impact of venous thromboembolism in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 2003-2013.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) and coronary artery disease are major health issues that cause substantial morbidity and mortality. New data have emerged suggesting that these two conditions could have a close relationship. Thus, we sought to determine the trends in annual rate of VTE occurrence in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and measure its impact on in-hospital mortality, bleeding complications, and cost and length of hospitalization. We queried the 2003-2013 Nationwide Inpatient Sample databases to identify adults with primary diagnosis of STEMI. VTE events were then allocated. Inpatient outcomes of patients with VTE were compared to those without VTE. Out of 2,495,757 hospitalizations for STEMI, VTE was diagnosed in 25,149 (1%) hospitalizations. Patients who experienced VTE were older (mean age: 67.5 vs 64.8, p < 0.01) and had a higher proportion of black patients (10.1% vs 7.7%, p < 0.001) and females (40.1% vs 35%, p < 0.001) compared to patients without VTE. There was an increasing trend in the rate of VTE during the study period (2003: 0.8% vs 2013: 1.0%, p < 0.001). Patients with VTE had a prolonged hospitalization (median: 9 vs 3 days, p < 0.001), increased cost, higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (OR: 2.13, p < 0.001), intracranial hemorrhage (OR: 2.14, p < 0.001), blood transfusions (OR: 1.94, p < 0.001), and mortality (OR: 1.39, p < 0.001). The rate of VTE occurrence in patients with STEMI in our study was 10 per 1000 admissions. VTE was associated with more bleeding complications, longer hospital stays, higher costs, and mortality. These findings suggest that a more aggressive approach for VTE prophylaxis may be warranted in this population.

Assessment and management of venous thrombo-embolism risk during pregnancy and the puerperium (SAVE): The South African cohort.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Pregnancy and the puerperium are hypercoagulable states and increase the risk of VTE. There is a paucity of South African (SA) data related to use of thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy and the puerperium. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate local practice of VTE risk stratification among SA pregnant women and senior doctors' attitudes to VTE prophylaxis. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study of conveniently sampled sites in the private and public health sectors. Patients with confirmed pregnancy and an underlying medical condition were enrolled after giving informed consent. Assessments were made based on the participating doctors' questionnaires and case report forms. In essence, this was a local evaluation of a specific group of patients by a specific group of doctors. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty patients were enrolled at six sites. In the participating doctors' opinion, 126/220 women assessed (57.2%) were at risk of VTE during pregnancy and the postpartum period (information was missing for 1 woman during the postpartum period). Of the women at risk of VTE, 23/126 (18.3%) were at high risk, 59/126 (46.8%) at moderate risk and 44/126 (34.9%) at low risk. Of the women identified as at risk of VTE, 104/127 (81.9%) received some form of VTE prophylaxis; 94/127 (74.0%) were at risk during pregnancy and 32/126 (25.4%) during the postpartum period. Of those who received pharmacological treatment, 15/15 received low-molecular-weight heparin during pregnancy and before delivery and 87/100 during the puerperium. Thirty-four patients received thromboprophylaxis for only 5 - 10 days after caesarean delivery, and 2 received mechanical thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Doctors participating in the study were generally aware of VTE risk during pregnancy and the puerperium. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was the most commonly used intervention to reduce VTE risk. Mechanical thromboprophylaxis was underutilised. Adherence to VTE guidelines, specifically in terms of duration of thromboprophylaxis and its utilisation during pregnancy, was suboptimal.