Retrieval of an inferior vena cava Greenfield filter 34 years after insertion.

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are engineered medical devices deployed in the IVC primarily to prevent a pulmonary embolism from occurring. In this article, we present a case of an IVC filter that was successfully retrieved from a patient after being in place for 34 years. The patient presented to hospital for trauma in which subsequent imaging showed tines of an IVC filter protruding outside of the vessel with one of the tines penetrating the duodenal wall. The filter was successfully removed with no complications. This report adds to the existing literature by yielding an example of an adverse risk that can be associated with the placement of IVC filters. In addition, to the authors' best knowledge, this is the longest reported length of time that an IVC filter has stayed in a patient before being removed, thus adding another intriguing detail to the case.

When is it safe to start thromboprophylaxis after splenic angioembolization?

BACKGROUND: Thromboprophylaxis after blunt splenic trauma is complicated by the risk of bleeding, but the risk after angioembolization is unknown. We hypothesized that earlier thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with increased bleeding complications without mitigating venous thromboembolism events. METHODS: All blunt trauma patients who underwent splenic angioembolization within 24 hours of arrival were identified from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program datasets from 2017 to 2019. Cases with <24-hour length of stay, other serious injuries, and surgery before angioembolization were excluded. Venous thromboembolism was defined as deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Bleeding complications were defined as splenic surgery, additional embolization, or blood transfusion after thromboprophylaxis initiation. Data were compared with χ2 analysis and multivariate logistic regression at P < .05. RESULTS: In 1,102 patients, 84% had American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade III to V splenic injuries, and 73% received thromboprophylaxis. Splenic surgery after angioembolization was more common in those with thromboprophylaxis initiation within the first 24 hours (5.7% vs 1.7%, P = .007), whereas those with the initiation of thromboprophylaxis after 72 hours were more likely to have a pulmonary embolism (2.3% vs 0.2%, P = .001). Overall, venous thromboembolism increased considerably when thromboprophylaxis was initiated after day 3. In multivariate analysis, time to thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with bleeding (odds ratio 0.74 [95% confidence interval 0.58-0.94]) and venous thromboembolism complications (odds ratio 1.5 [95% confidence interval 1.20-1.81]). CONCLUSION: This national study evaluates bleeding and thromboembolic risk to elucidate the specific timing of thromboprophylaxis after splenic angioembolization. Initiation of thromboprophylaxis between 24 and 72 hours achieves the safest balance in minimizing bleeding and venous thromboembolism risk, with 48 hours particularly serving as the ideal time for protocolized administration.

[Prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolic complications in orthopedic patients]. / Kompleksnaya profilaktika i lechenie venoznykh tromboembolicheskikh oslozhnenii u patsientov ortopedicheskogo profilya.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the comprehensive program for prevention of thromboembolic complications in orthopedic patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We have analyzed thromboembolic complications in orthopedic patients after surgeries on large joints over the past 5 years (2018-2022). CONCLUSION: A comprehensive approach to prevention and treatment of thromboembolic complications including ultrasound, early surgical prevention of pulmonary embolism can significantly improve postoperative outcomes after joint replacement surgery. Vacuum aspiration retrograde thrombectomy is effective, feasible and safe for acute ilio-femoral venous thrombosis reducing hospital-stay (p=0.0124) and restoring vein patency. Widespread thromboembolic complications, especially for pulmonary embolism in 2022, are likely due to a new coronavirus infection and require careful screening of patients with risk factors with appropriate preventive antithrombotic therapy.

Evaluating pharmacological THRomboprophylaxis in Individuals undergoing superficial endoVEnous treatment across NHS and private clinics in the UK: a multi-centre, assessor-blind, randomised controlled trial-THRIVE trial.

INTRODUCTION: Endovenous therapy is the first choice management for symptomatic varicose veins in NICE guidelines, with 56-70 000 procedures performed annually in the UK. Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a known complication of endovenous therapy, occurring at a rate of up to 3.4%. Despite 73% of UK practitioners administering pharmacological thromboprophylaxis to reduce VTE, no high-quality evidence supporting this practice exists. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis may have clinical and cost benefit in preventing VTE; however, further evidence is needed. This study aims to establish whether when endovenous therapy is undertaken: a single dose or course of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alters the risk of VTE; pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is associated with an increased rate of bleeding events; pharmacological prophylaxis is cost effective. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multi-centre, assessor-blind, randomised controlled trial (RCT) will recruit 6660 participants from 40 NHS and private sites across the UK. Participants will be randomised to intervention (single dose or extended course of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis plus compression) or control (compression alone). Participants will undergo a lower limb venous duplex ultrasound scan at 21-28 days post-procedure to identify asymptomatic DVT. The duplex scan will be conducted locally by blinded assessors. Participants will be contacted remotely for follow-up at 7 days and 90 days post-procedure. The primary outcome is imaging-confirmed lower limb DVT with or without symptoms or PE with symptoms within 90 days of treatment. The main analysis will be according to the intention-to-treat principle and will compare the rates of VTE at 90 days, using a repeated measures analysis of variance, adjusting for any pre-specified strongly prognostic baseline covariates using a mixed effects logistic regression. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by Brent Research Ethics Committee (22/LO/0261). Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN18501431.

Dissecting the rationale for thromboprophylaxis in challenging surgical cases.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a leading preventable cause of death in surgical patients, and rates of fatal PE are increasing. Individual assessment, to balance the risks of thrombosis and bleeding, is the key to providing appropriate prophylaxis. The risk assessment process includes use of evidence-based guidelines, literature published since the latest guidelines, large registries, and risk scoring systems together with clinical experience and judgment. Risk assessment is a dynamic process and needs to be updated both during the hospital stay and just prior to discharge since clinical events may change the level of risk. The final assessment may identify patients who require ongoing anticoagulant prophylaxis after discharge. The Caprini risk score is widely used in surgical patients and is a composite of the number of risk factors and their relative weights. The Caprini risk score set point for risk levels requiring anticoagulant prophylaxis varies depending on the type of surgical procedure, surgical population, and number of risk factors. Mandatory implementation of evidence-based care pathways is helpful in lowering PE-related mortality. This review presents several challenging cases, emphasizing the importance of employing all available assessment tools, including dynamic assessment of risk during hospitalization. Finally, the limitations of evidence-based guidelines in complex scenarios and the need to employ all available tools to properly protect very high-risk patients are emphasized.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) are at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). The administration of mechanical and pharmacological VTE prophylaxis after sICH is important but challenging. The safety and efficacy of the optimal anticoagulant dose, timing, and type of VTE chemoprophylaxis in cases of sICH are still unclear, and clinicians are concerned that it may lead to cerebral hematoma expansion, which is associated with poor prognosis. Through this literature review, we aim to summarize the latest guidelines, recommendations, and clinical research progress to support evidence-based treatment strategies. REVIEW SUMMARY: It has been proven that intermittent pneumatic compression can effectively reduce the risk of VTE and should be used at the time of hospital admission, whereas gradient compression stockings or lack of prophylaxis in sICH cases are not recommended by current guidelines. Studies regarding pharmacological VTE prophylaxis in patients with ICH were reviewed and summarized. Prophylactic anticoagulation for VTE in patients with ICH seems to be safe and was not associated with cerebral hematoma expansion. Meanwhile, the prophylactic efficacy of anticoagulation for pulmonary embolism seems to be more obvious than that of deep vein thrombosis in patients with ICH. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should pay attention to the prevention and management of VTE after sICH. Intermittent pneumatic compression should be applied to patients with sICH on the day of hospital admission. After documentation of bleeding cessation, early initiation of pharmacological VTE prophylaxis (24 h to 48 h from sICH onset) seems to be safe and effective in pulmonary embolism prophylaxis.

An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Impact of Graduated Compression Stockings in Addition to Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Surgical Inpatients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in surgical inpatients with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis and additional graduated compression stockings (GCSs) versus pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone. BACKGROUND: Surgical inpatients have elevated VTE risk; recent studies cast doubt on whether GCS confers additional protection against VTE, compared with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone. METHODS: The review followed "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" guidelines using a registered protocol (CRD42017062655). The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched up to November 2022. Randomized trials reporting VTE rate after surgical procedures, utilizing pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, with or without GCS, were included. The rates of deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, and VTE-related mortality were pooled through fixed and random effects. RESULTS: In a head-to-head meta-analysis, the risk of DVT for GCS and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.54-1.36) versus for pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone (2 studies, 70 events, 2653 participants). The risk of DVT in pooled trial arms for GCS and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.23-1.25) versus pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone (33 trial arms, 1228 events, 14,108 participants). The risk of pulmonary embolism for GCS and pharmacological prophylaxis versus pharmacological prophylaxis alone was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.0-30.0) (27 trial arms, 32 events, 11,472 participants). There were no between-group differences in VTE-related mortality (27 trial arms, 3 events, 12,982 participants). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from head-to-head meta-analysis and pooled trial arms demonstrates no additional benefit for GCS in preventing VTE and VTE-related mortality. GCS confer a risk of skin complications and an economic burden; current evidence does not support their use for surgical inpatients.

Predictors of retrieval and long-term mortality in patients treated with inferior vena cava filters.

OBJECTIVE: Inferior vena cava filters (VCFs) are a therapeutic resource for the treatment of patients with thromboembolic disease who have a contraindication to full-dose anticoagulation. In the present study, we report the retrieval rate and long-term mortality of patients receiving optional inferior VCFs and identify the predictors for retrieval and all-cause mortality during follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 739 consecutive recipients of optional inferior VCFs from January 2002 to December 2021 in two hospitals. Different clinical characteristics and procedure-related variables were included in the analysis. The all-cause mortality rate and retrieval rate and the predictive factors were evaluated using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of the 739 patients, 393 (53%) were women. The mean patient age was 69 ± 15 years. Of the patients, 67% presented with pulmonary thromboembolism and 43% with deep vein thrombosis (DVT). A contraindication to anticoagulation was present for nearly 90% of the patients, mainly (47%) related to the surgical procedure. In addition, 44% of the patients had active cancer. Follow-up data were available for 94% of the patients, with an average follow-up time of 6.08 ± 5.83 years. Long-term mortality was 53%. Cancer (odds ratio [OR], 3.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.22-5.83), age (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.08-1.42), and DVT (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.08-1.42) were identified as independent predictors of mortality. The retrieval rate at follow-up was 33%. The predictors for retrieval included the indication of the filter related to a surgical procedure (OR, 4.85; 95% CI, 2.54-9.59), the absence of cancer (OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.45-5.75), and younger age (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: High long-term mortality was observed. The predictors of mortality were cancer, older age, and DVT. One third of the filters implanted were retrieved. The predictors for retrieval were a contraindication to surgery-related anticoagulation, the absence of cancer, and younger age.

Contemporary Use of Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filters in Patients With Severe Traumatic Injuries and High Thromboembolic Event Risk.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between prophylactic inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) implantation and in-hospital deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and mortality among adults with intracranial, pelvic or lower extremity, and spinal cord injuries. METHODS: Patients 18 years and older with severe intracranial, pelvic or lower extremity, or spinal cord injuries captured by the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2010-2019) were identified. IVCFs implanted ≤72 hours after hospital presentation and before performance of lower extremity ultrasonography were defined as prophylactic. Patients were stratified by pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis status. Logistic regression models estimated prophylactic inferior vena cava (IVC) filtration's effect on selected outcomes and identified attributes associated with prophylactic IVCF implantation. RESULTS: Of 544,739 included patients, 1.3% (n = 7,247) underwent prophylactic IVCF implantation. Among patients who received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis, prophylactic IVC filtration compared with expectant management was positively associated with DVT (odds ratio [OR], 4.30; P < .001) and PE (OR, 4.30; P < .001) but not associated with mortality (OR, 0.92; P = .43). Among patients who received no pharmacologic prophylaxis, prophylactic IVC filtration was positively associated with DVT (OR, 4.63; P < .001) and PE (OR, 5.02; P < .001) but negatively associated with mortality (OR, 0.43; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic IVC filtration was associated with increased likelihood of VTE among all adults with severe intracranial, pelvic or lower extremity, and spinal cord injuries. In patients who received no pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis, prophylactic IVC filtration was associated with decreased likelihood of in-hospital mortality.

Expanding Indications of Nonvitamin K Oral Anticoagulants Beyond Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: A Review of Emerging Clinical Evidence.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) have emerged as a new therapy for patients who need and can tolerate oral anticoagulation. DOACs were initially approved for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and treatment for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Ease of administration, no requirement of bridging with other anticoagulants, and less frequent dosing have made DOACs preferable choice for anticoagulation. Studies are showing promising results regarding use of DOACs beyond the common indications. Studies have been done to show the potential benefit of DOACs in valvular atrial fibrillation, heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, and peripheral arterial disease. Data have shown safety as well as comparable bleeding incidences with DOACs compared to vitamin K antagonist anticoagulants. Naturally interest is growing to see the use of DOACs apart from the NVAF, DVT, or PE. Authors have highlighted various study results to show the potential beneficial role of DOACs in the above-mentioned situations.

[Anticoagulant treatment in pulmonary embolism : how to initiate and how to pursue ?] / Anticoagulation pour une embolie pulmonaire. Comment l'introduire et la poursuivre?

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in the absence of properly prescribed anticoagulant treatment. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are currently the anticoagulant treatment of first choice. The quality of anticoagulation in the acute phase of PE is a major determinant of patients' prognosis. The dose regimens for the initiation phase must therefore be rigorously respected to ensure the efficacy of the treatment. For the maintenance phase, the reduced doses used in atrial fibrillation are not applicable in venous thromboembolism (VTE) except for edoxaban. Finally, for long-term secondary prevention in patients at risk of VTE recurrence, reduced dose DOACs are currently a very interesting option in terms of benefit-risk balance for the majority of patients.

L'embolie pulmonaire (EP) est associée à une morbimortalité significative en l'absence de traitement anticoagulant bien conduit. Les anticoagulants oraux directs (ACOD) sont actuellement le traitement anticoagulant de 1er choix. La qualité de l'anticoagulation en phase aiguë de l'EP est un facteur déterminant pour le pronostic du patient, les schémas posologiques d'introduction doivent donc être rigoureusement respectés pour assurer la sécurité du traitement. Pour la phase de maintien, les posologies réduites utilisées dans la fibrillation auriculaire ne sont pas valables pour la maladie thromboembolique veineuse (MTEV) hormis pour l'édoxaban. Enfin, pour la prévention secondaire au long cours chez les patients à risque de récidive de MTEV, les ACOD à dose réduite sont actuellement une option très intéressante en termes de balance bénéfice-risque pour une majorité de patients.

[Perioperative Management of Deep Vein Thrombosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism].

Preoperative evaluation of deep vein thrombosis( DVT), which is a known risk factor for the development of pulmonary embolism( PE), is important prior to performing thoracic surgery. The incidence of DVT after thoracic surgery is estimated to be 4% and the incidence of PE 0.6%. Lung cancer may be responsible for the highest incidence of thrombotic events associated with cancer. Longer operative time, intraoperative bleeding, extended surgical injury, pneumonectomy, and incomplete resection are all correlated to higher chance of acute PE after thoracic surgery. Risk-assessment models for DVT or PE can be utilized in thoracic surgery, and prophylaxis pre and post operation is highly recommended. Estimation of D-dimer levels is a valid preoperative screening strategy to evaluate the risk of DVT, and ultrasonographic examination should be performed in patients whose D-dimer levels are more than 1.0 µg/ ml. Computed tomographic pulmonary angiography is the gold standard in diagnosis of acute PE. Postoperative PE needs to be diagnosed and treated promptly as delay may be fatal. Anticoagulants and thrombolytic therapy have shown a great success in treatment of acute PE. Surgical approach for acute PE has also shown to be a lifesaving in some cases, and percutaneous cardiopulmonary support may be useful for patients with circulatory collapse or cardiopulmonary arrest.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism in right heart-sided electrophysiological procedures: results of an European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

Limited data are available regarding venous thromboembolism (VTE), specifically deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), following right-sided ablations and electrophysiological (EP) studies. Compared to left-sided procedures, no guidelines on antithrombotic management strategies for the prevention of DVT and PE are available. The main purpose of the present European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) survey is to report the current management of right-sided EP procedures, focusing on anticoagulation and prevention of VTE. An online survey was conducted using the EHRA infrastructure. A total of 244 participants answered a 19-items questionnaire on the periprocedural management of EP studies and right-sided catheter ablations. The right femoral vein is the most common access for EP studies and right-sided procedures. An ultrasound-guided approach is employed by more than 2/3 of respondents. Intravenous heparin is not commonly given by the majority of participants. About 1/3 of participants (34%) routinely prescribe VTE prophylaxis during (mostly aspirin and low molecular weight heparin) and 1/4 of respondents (25%) commonly prescribe VTE prophylaxis after discharge (mostly aspirin). Of note, respectively 13% and 9% of participants observed at least one DVT and one PE related to right-sided ablation or EP study within the last year in their center. The present survey shows that only a minority of operators routinely gives intraprocedural intravenous heparin and prescribes VTE prophylaxis after right-sided EP procedures. Compared to left-sided procedures like atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, there are no consistent systematic antithrombotic management strategies.

D-Dimers in diagnosis and prevention of venous thrombosis: recent advances and their practical implications.

D­Dimers derive from degradation of cross­linked fibrin by plasmin, and thus their level is a marker of coagulation and fibrinolytic system activation. Guidelines recommend that D­dimers are determined if the pretest probability (PTP) is low or intermediate, to exclude venous thromboembolism (VTE), either deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, and to avoid imaging tests. If the PTP is high or D­dimer level is above the suggested thresholds, imaging is recommended. D­Dimer assays offer high sensitivity and low specificity, as D­dimer levels can be above the threshold in several other conditions than thrombosis, and they increase with age. As a result, there have been several proposals to improve the diagnostic accuracy of D­dimer levels by adjusting the cutoffs according to patient characteristics, such as age, PTP, pregnancy, renal function, or cancer. D­Dimer levels can also predict clinical severity of COVID­19, and escalated anticoagulation based on D­dimer levels can be associated with a lower risk of mortality in patients with severe COVID­19. Finally, D­dimer levels have been incorporated in prediction models for recurrent VTE to help identify patients who may benefit from prolonged anticoagulation.

[Implant of embolic protection filters in duplicated vena cava]. / Implante de filtros de protección embólica en vena cava inferior duplicada.

We present the case of a patient with venous thromboembolic disease and contraindication to anticoagulation, where the incidental finding of a duplication of the inferior vena cava was made. This observation determined the need to implant two embolic protection filters. Although this vascular anomaly is rarely present, it is important to keep this possibility in mind to ensure that proper protection is provided when inferior vena cava filters are implanted.

Se presenta el caso de un paciente con enfermedad tromboembólica venosa y contraindicación de anticoagulación en el cual se halló incidentalmente una duplicación de vena cava inferior, situación que determinó la necesidad del implante de dos filtros de protección embólica. Si bien esta anomalía vascular es de escasa presentación, es importante tener presente esta posibilidad para asegurarse de brindar una correcta protección a la hora del implante de filtros de vena cava inferior.

The efficacy and safety of aspirin in preventing venous thrombosis in major orthopedic surgery: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Major orthopedic surgery, including hip and knee replacement and lower extremity trauma fractures surgery, is associated with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), especially proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE), and is linked with high morbidity and mortality rates. Chemical anticoagulation is routinely used to prevent VTE, with previous meta-analyses reporting on the efficacy and safety of aspirin and other anticoagulants, however, opinions are divided. In the past 2 years, several large randomized controlled trials have been published, therefore, we reanalyzed aspirin efficacy and safety when compared with other anticoagulants in preventing VTE in major orthopedic surgery. METHODS: Using PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases, we conducted a RCT search in August 2023. The main outcomes included VTE, proximal DVT or PE. Additional outcomes included bleeding events, wound complications, wound infections, blood transfusions, and death events. RESULTS: In total, 17 eligible articles, involving 29,522 patients (15,253 aspirin vs 14,269 other anticoagulant cases), were included. Primary outcomes showed that VTE incidence was more high in the aspirin group when compared with other anticoagulants (risk ratio [RR] = 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18-1.77, P = .0004) and proximal in the aspirin group the DVT and/or PE incidence was significantly higher in the aspirin group when compared with other anticoagulants (RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.02-1.39, P = .03). No significant secondary outcome differences were identified in the aspirin group when compared with other anticoagulants (bleeding events [RR] = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.63-1.10, P = .20); wound complications (RR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.20-1.04, P = .06); wound infection (RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.85-1.38, P = .53); blood transfusion events (RR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.84-1.19, P = 1.00) and death events (RR = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.78-1.57, P = .55). CONCLUSIONS: Our updated meta-analysis showed that aspirin was inferior to when compared with other anticoagulants in VTE-related orthopedic major surgery, including proximal DVT and/or PE, and was more likely to form VTE. No differences between groups were identified for bleeding, wound complications, wound infections, transfusion, or death events.

Should we add antiplatelet agents to current deep venous thrombosis treatments? A Cochrane Review summary with commentary.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is an important complication in rehabilitation practice despite preventive measures. The management can be complicated because patients may have co-existing cardiovascular comorbidities. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of antiplatelet agents in addition to current best medical practice (BMP) compared to current BMP (with or without placebo) for the treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). METHODS: A summary of the Cochrane Review by Flumignan et al. (2022), with comments from a rehabilitation perspective. RESULTS: The review included six studies with 1625 eligible participants, with data up to 37.2 months of follow-up. When used after standard initial treatment with anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents such as aspirin in addition to BMP, may reduce recurrence of DVT or pulmonary embolism, when compared to BMP plus placebo in a chronic DVT setting and there may be a lower risk for post-thrombotic syndrome in patients with acute DVT. There is no clear difference in side effects, major bleeding, or pulmonary embolism (PE) with the use of antiplatelet agents. CONCLUSION: Adding antiplatelet agents to standard anticoagulation treatment in patients with VTE could provide benefit without increasing risks in selected patient groups. However, high quality studies with a long-term follow up are needed, including patients in rehabilitation settings.

Anticoagulation therapy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Thromboembolic events are common in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 infection may be related to a prothrombotic state. Several clinical trials evaluating different anticoagulation strategies were developed. Thus, we proposed conducting a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of therapeutic anticoagulation with heparins in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Epistemonikos for studies published until December 22, 2022. Nine studies compared prophylactic/intermediate anticoagulation versus therapeutic anticoagulation with heparins were included. Four efficacy and one safety endpoints were analyzed: all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events, pulmonary embolism, need of intensive care unit or non-invasive ventilation, and major bleeding. Compared with prophylactic/intermediate anticoagulation, therapeutic anticoagulation with heparins was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality and need of intensive care unit or non-invasive ventilation in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, but showed a reduction in the number of thromboembolic events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.71, I2 = 0 %) and pulmonary embolisms (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24-0.57, I2 = 0 %), besides an increase in major bleeding (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.05-2.64, I2 = 0 %). This meta-analysis did not show a reduction in all-cause mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received anticoagulation with heparin at a therapeutic dose compared to those who received a prophylactic/intermediate dose, as well as no significant differences were found in the need of intensive care unit admission or use of non-invasive ventilation. There was, however, a reduction in thromboembolic events, pulmonary embolism, and increased bleeding (Tab. 1, Fig. 5, Ref. 31). Keywords: COVID-19, anticoagulation, heparins, meta-analysis.

The effectiveness of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis interventions in trauma patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major complication of trauma. Currently, there are few studies summarising the evidence for prophylaxis in trauma settings. This review provides evidence for the use of VTE prophylactic interventions in trauma patients to produce evidence-based guidelines. METHODS: A PRISMA-compliant review was conducted from Sep 2021 to June 2023, using Embase, Medline and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria were: randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) in English published after 2000 of adult trauma patients comparing VTE prophylaxis interventions, with a sample size higher than 20. The network analysis was conducted using RStudio. The results of the pairwise comparisons were presented in the form of a league table. The quality of evidence and heterogeneity sensitivity were assessed. The primary outcome focused on venous thromboembolism (VTE), and examined deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) as separate entities. The secondary outcomes included assessments of bleeding and mortality. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021266393. RESULTS: Of the 7,948 search results, 23 studies with a total of 21,312 participants fulfilled screening criteria, which included orthopaedic, spine, solid organ, brain, spinal cord, and multi-region trauma. Of the eight papers comparing chemical prophylaxis medications in patients with hip or lower limb injuries, fondaparinux and enoxaparin were found to be significantly superior to placebo in respect of prevention of DVT, with no increased risk of bleeding. Regarding mechanical prophylaxis, meta-analysis of two studies of inferior vena cava filters failed to provide significant benefits to major trauma patients. CONCLUSION: Enoxaparin and fondaparinux are safe and effective options for VTE prevention in trauma patients, with fondaparinux being a cheaper and easier administration option between the two. Inconclusive results were found in mechanical prophylaxis, requiring more larger-scale RCTs.

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.