Use Of Thromboprophylaxis Research Articles

Incidence of venous thromboembolic disease and risk of bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies: A retrospective study

ObjectiveOur objectives were to describe the use of thromboprophylaxis and the incidence of VTE/bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies (HM). DesignRetrospective cohort study (2014–2022). SettingMedic-Surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in a tertiary care academic center. PatientsAdult patients admitted to ICU with a concomitant diagnosis of a hematological malignancy. InterventionsNone. Main variables of interestWe analyzed demographic data, use of thromboprophylaxis and secondary outcomes that included incidence of VTE (venous thromboembolism), bleeding, mortality, severity scores and organ support. We applied a multivariable logistic regression model to examine the risk of thrombosis in the ICU. ResultsWe included 862 ICU admissions (813 unique patients). Thromboprophylaxis was given during 65% of admissions (LMWH 14%, UFH 8%, and SCDs 43%); in 21% it was contraindicated due to thrombocytopenia; 14% of cases lacked documentation on prophylaxis. There were 38 unique incident cases of VTE (27 DVT, 11 PE), constituting 4.4% of ICU episodes. Most of VTE cases happened in patients with various degrees of thrombocytopenia. In the multivariable analysis, SOFA score on the first ICU day was independently associated (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76−0.96) with the risk of VTE. Bleeding occurred in 7.2% (minor) and 14.4% (major) of episodes; most frequent sites being CNS, abdomen/GI and pulmonary. ConclusionsIn this cohort of critically ill patients with HM, there was considerable variability in the utilization of DVT prophylaxis, with predominant use of SCDs. The incidence of VTE was 4.4% and major bleeding 14%. Clinical Trial RegistrationNCT05396157. Venous Thromboembolism in Hematologic Malignancy and Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Patients: a Retrospective Study (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis Effectiveness in Low-Risk Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: There is a paucity of evidence and controversies regarding prophylaxis strategies in low-risk patients undergoing knee arthroscopy. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aspirin and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in an arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction for low-risk patients. Methods: We performed a preoperational evaluation a week before surgery for any sign of pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT). For this purpose, we used single limited compression Doppler ultrasonography (CUS) of the lower extremities. Rehabilitation started before the time of the surgery to improve the range of motion (ROM) and quadriceps muscle function. A team of 3 orthopedists performed the procedures. The same surgical technique and graft were used with spinal anesthesia, and operation time was recorded. Results: The mean age of participants was 31.4 ± 5.6 years, with 93 individuals (67%) being men and 23% women. No cases of DVT or PE were observed. Three cases in the LMWH group and one case in the aspirin group experienced minor surgical site bleeding. One case of hemarthrosis with normal ultrasonography occurred in the LMWH group. Regarding safety and effectiveness, there was no statistically significant difference between the parallel arms. Conclusion: The use of LMWH or aspirin after simple arthroscopic ACL reconstruction in low-risk patients showed no difference in effectiveness. Hence, the routine use of thromboprophylaxis in this setting is questionable although adverse events are rare

Prevalence and risk factors of symptomatic venous thromboembolism in distal femur fractures.

There is a paucity of published research on symptomatic venous thromboembolism (sVTE) after distal femur fractures (DFFs). This study aimed to explore the prevalence and risk factors of sVTE in DFFs. We identified a total of 131 patients who underwent DFF surgeries without routine pharmacological thromboprophylaxis between October 2007 and November 2016. Cases of sVTE included symptomatic pulmonary embolism (sPE) and symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (sDVT). Patients with sVTE were compared to those without, and differences in demographics and fracture-related characteristics were explored. Multivariate logistic regression was used to eliminate confounding factors. Of the 131 patients, 20 (15.3%) had sVTE, of whom 16 (12.2%) had sDVT and six (4.6%) had sPE (two patients had both sPE and sDVT). Notably, 17 (85.0%) sVTE patients were aged ≥60 years, while only 62 (55.9%) non-sVTE patients were aged ≥60 years (P = 0.014). Fourteen (82.4%) patients with sVTE had body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2, while 49 (53.3%) patients without sVTE had BMI ≥25 kg/m2 (P = 0.032). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that age ≥60 years (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 5.05; P = 0.040) and BMI ≥25 kg/m2 (adjusted OR 3.92; P = 0.045) were independently associated with a higher risk of sVTE after DFF. The prevalence of sVTE in DFFs is high at 15.3%. Advanced age (≥60 years) and being overweight (BMI ≥25 kg/m2) were two independent risk factors for sVTE in DFFs. The use of routine pharmacological thromboprophylaxis should be considered as a preventative measure.

Trends in the Diagnosis of Pediatric Venous Thromboembolism and Arterial Ischemic Stroke during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Administrative Database Study

To investigate trends in the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial ischemic stroke (AIS), and examine the use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis during the COVID-19 pandemic. This retrospective cohort study used the Pediatric Health Information Systems database to investigate patients admitted to a participating hospital between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021. International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition codes were used to identify VTE, AIS, and COVID-19. Pharmacy billing codes were used to investigate pharmacological thromboprophylaxis use. 1 759 701 unique patients underwent 2 234 135 inpatient admissions. Rate of VTE increased from 84 cases per 10 000 admissions in 2018-2019 to 108 cases per 10 000 admissions in 2020-2021, representing a 28.6% increase (P<.001). In contrast, the rate of AIS remained stable through the study period. When compared with 2018-2019, children diagnosed with VTE during 2020-2021 had longer hospitalizations and were more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit. When analysis was limited to 2020-2021, a diagnosis code of COVID-19 was associated with a 1.35-fold (95% CI: 1.24-1.45) increase in the odds of VTE diagnosis, but not AIS. Use of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis increased from 1.5% of hospitalizations in 2018-2019 to 3.0% of hospitalizations in 2020-2021 (P<.001). When evaluating thromboprophylaxis during 2020-2021, a diagnosis code for COVID-19 was associated with an 11-fold (95% CI: 10.86-11.49; P<.001) increase in the utilization of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. This study found an increase in the rate of VTE among hospitalized children during the pandemic. A diagnosis of COVID-19 was associated with a modest increase in odds of VTE diagnosis, which occurred despite increased use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis.

Challenging management dogma where evidence is non-existent, weak, or outdated: part II.

Many dogmas influence daily clinical practice, and critical care medicine is no exception. We previously highlighted the weak, questionable, and often contrary evidence base underpinning four established medical managements-loop diuretics for acute heart failure, routine use of heparin thromboprophylaxis, rate of sodium correction for hyponatremia, and 'every hour counts' for treating bacterial meningitis. We now provide four further examples in this "Dogma II" piece (a week's course of antibiotics, diabetic ketoacidosis algorithms, sodium bicarbonate to improve ventricular contractility during severe metabolic acidosis, and phosphate replacement for hypophosphatemia) where routine practice warrants re-appraisal.

Multiple myeloma: retrospective assessment of routine thromboprophylaxis and utility of thrombotic risk scores

BackgroundThe high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in multiple myeloma (MM) warrants primary thromboprophylaxis for most patients. Myeloma-specific thrombotic risk scores (TRSs), such as IMPEDE-VTE, SAVED, and PRISM, were developed to improve risk assessment and guide antithrombotic strategies. Their performance is variable and has not yet been tested in Latin America. ObjectivesWe aimed to assess the use of primary thromboprophylaxis, the incidence of VTE and bleeding events, and the effectiveness of TRSs in patients with newly diagnosed MM. MethodsThis was a retrospective, single-center study. Cumulative VTE rates and TRS performance were analyzed using survival and receiver operating characteristic curves. ResultsThe study included 250 newly diagnosed MM patients; the vast majority (98.6%) received aspirin as thromboprophylaxis. VTE occurred in 8% within the initial 6 months, increasing to 14.8% over a median follow-up of 19 months. High rates of major bleeding (4.8%) and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (4.4%) events were documented. A minimal proportion (0.8%, 0.5%, and 1.2%) of patients were classified as low risk by IMPEDE-VTE, PRISM, and SAVED scores, respectively. Only IMPEDE-VTE exhibited a trend for distinguishing between intermediate-risk (7.14%) and high-risk (13.2%) groups (P = .09). PRISM and SAVED scores showed limited utility. VTE did not impact survival. ConclusionAspirin as primary thromboprophylaxis carries an unacceptable risk of VTE and bleeding in patients at intermediate or high thrombotic risk. The IMPEDE-VTE score performed best, although without reaching statistical significance. We confirm that VTE does not portend poor overall survival in MM.

Understanding the use of thromboprophylaxis for patients with lower limb immobilisation

Understanding the use of thromboprophylaxis for patients with lower limb immobilisation

Examining postpartum anticoagulation practices: An international survey of healthcare providers

BackgroundThe risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is 15 to 35-fold higher in the postpartum period compared to non-pregnant individuals. Clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of postpartum thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for 6 weeks in individuals at high risk of developing VTE. However, a marked reduction in the risk of VTE risk occurs beyond the third week of the postpartum period. ObjectiveWe sought to characterize practice patterns of clinicians who manage postpartum individuals at high risk of VTE. MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study using a self-administered electronic questionnaire. The survey explored the use of postpartum thromboprophylaxis in high-risk individuals. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey responses. ResultsOf the 113 participants that responded to the initial invitation, 78 completed the survey (Europe (53.9 %); North America (23.2 %); Australia and New Zealand (19.0 %)). For individuals with a prior unprovoked or provoked deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, cerebral vein thrombosis and splanchnic vein thrombosis, 97.4 %, 93.5 %, 91.0 % and 88.5 % of the respondents recommended six weeks of postpartum thromboprophylaxis using LMWH, respectively. The recommendation for 6 weeks of thromboprophylaxis in patients with sickle cell disease and obstetric APS was comparatively lower (70.5 and 78.2 % respectively). Respondents with higher practice volumes and more years of experience in clinical practice were more likely to recommend a shorter duration of thromboprophylaxis. ConclusionOur study highlights the variability in clinician recommendations and the acceptability of treatment durations for postpartum thromboprophylaxis in high-risk conditions. Prospective studies are needed to determine optimal duration and establish evidence-based management.

Preferences of pregnant women for postpartum thromboprophylaxis: the bicentric PREFER-PostPartum study

BackgroundClinical guidelines for postpartum thromboprophylaxis differ due to its uncertain effect and varying preferences of experts. Women’s preferences for postpartum thromboprophylaxis are unknown, although they may inform practices and future research. ObjectivesOur aim was to elicit the pregnant women’s preferences for postpartum thromboprophylaxis according to different risks of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding. MethodsIn 2 Swiss and French maternity hospitals, we conducted structured interviews of pregnant or postpartum women. Participants were instructed on pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, postpartum hemorrhage, and subcutaneous injections of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). First, we randomized women to either standard gamble or time trade-off (2 different validated methods) to estimate the utilities (quality of life, from 0 to 1) of these health states. Second, we elicited the preference for the use of short-term postpartum thromboprophylaxis with LMWH vs none across different risks of postpartum VTE and bleeding through direct-choice exercises. ResultsAmong 122 participants, median (IQR) health state utilities were 0.725 (0.30-0.925) for pulmonary embolism, 0.75 (0.40-0.97) for postpartum hemorrhage, 0.85 (0.60-0.97) for deep vein thrombosis, and 0.96 (0.96-0.999) for LMWH injections. The median risk of postpartum VTE for preference of the use of postpartum thromboprophylaxis over no treatment was 0.1% (IQR, 0.01%-0.50%) without LMWH-associated bleeding risk and 0.2% (IQR, 0.1%-5%) with a 1% bleeding risk. ConclusionEuropean pregnant women appear to have a high willingness for 10-day postpartum thromboprophylaxis, preferred over no treatment even for low risks of postpartum VTE. This perspective from patients supports the urgent need for a randomized trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of postpartum thromboprophylaxis.

Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Therapy and Open Issues.

Immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) is a life-threatening thrombotic microangiopathy characterized by microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, and ischemic end-organ injury due to microvascular platelet-rich thrombi. iTTP pathophysiology is based on a severe ADAMTS13 deficiency, the specific von Willebrand factor (vWF)-cleaving protease, due to anti-ADAMTS13 autoantibodies. Early diagnosis and treatment reduce the mortality. Frontline therapy includes daily plasma exchange (PEX) with fresh frozen plasma replacement and immunosuppression with corticosteroids. Caplacizumab has recently been added to frontline therapy. Caplacizumab is a nanobody that binds to the A1 domain of vWF, blocking the interaction of ultra-large vWF multimers with the platelet and thereby preventing the formation of platelet-rich thrombi. Caplacizumab reduces mortality due to ischemic events, refractoriness, and exacerbations after PEX discontinuation. Until now, the criteria for response to treatment mainly took into account the normalization of platelet count and discontinuation of PEX; with the use of caplacizumab leading to rapid normalization of platelet count, it has been necessary to redefine the response criteria, taking into account also the underlying autoimmune disease. Monitoring of ADAMTS13 activity is important to identify cases with a low value of activity (<10IU/L), requiring the optimization of immunosuppressive therapy with the addition of Rituximab. Rituximab is effective in patients with refractory disease or relapsing disease. Currently, the use of Rituximab has expanded, both in frontline treatment and during follow-up, as a pre-emptive approach. Some patients do not achieve ADAMTS13 remission following the acute phase despite steroids and rituximab treatment, requiring an individualized immunosuppressive approach to prevent clinical relapse. In iTTP, there is an increased risk of venous thrombotic events (VTEs) as well as arterial thrombotic events, and most occur after platelet normalization. Until now, there has been no consensus on the use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in patients on caplacizumab because the drug is known to increase bleeding risk.

A prospective study on risk assessment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in general surgery patients.

To evaluate the patients at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) based on Caprini VTE risk assessment scale and the effect of implementation of this scale on the use of thromboprophylaxis. A prospective study was conducted, including patients who underwent major elective surgical procedures. Demographic details were noted, and VTE prophylaxis offered if needed. According to the VTE risk assessment scale, patients were categorised into very low-, low-, moderate-, and high-risk categories. The data were analysed statistically. A total of 500 patients (women = 259; men = 241) were enrolled in this study. Of them, eight women and nine men developed VTE (P = 0.691). The maximum number of patients who developed VTE belonged to 61-70 years group (n = 7). According to VTE risk assessment, 61 patients were categorised as low-risk, 217 patients as moderate-risk, and 222 patients were categorised as high-risk. A significant (P < 0.0005) correlation was found between body mass index (BMI) and VTE development. In obese patients with BMI >25, 14 patients developed VTE. Out of total, 329 patients received prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis. Of 284 patients who received pharmacologic prophylaxis, only three developed VTE (P = 0.002). Of 145 patients who received mechanical prophylaxis, 75 had high risk and none of them developed VTE. Four patients had mortality, and a significant (P = 0.022) correlation was found between mortality and VTE development. According to Caprini risk assessment scale, the prophylaxis for VTE was effective in patients undergoing major elective general surgery, resulting in significant lowering of morbidity and mortality.

Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in Rehabilitation: A Review and Practice Suggestions.

Venous thromboembolism is a frequent complication of acute hospital care, and this extends to inpatient rehabilitation. The timely use of appropriate thromboprophylaxis in patients who are at risk is a strong, evidence-based patient safety priority that has reduced clinically important venous thromboembolism, associated mortality and costs of care. While there has been extensive research on optimal approaches to venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in acute care, there is a paucity of high-quality evidence specific to patients in the rehabilitation setting, and there are no clinical practice guidelines that make recommendations for (or against) thromboprophylaxis across the broad spectrum of rehabilitation patients. Herein, we provide an evidence-informed review of the topic with practice suggestions. We conducted a series of literature searches to assess the risks of venous thromboembolism and its prevention related to inpatient rehabilitation as well as in major rehabilitation subgroups. Mobilization alone does not eliminate the risk of venous thromboembolism after another thrombotic insult. Low molecular weight heparins and direct oral anticoagulants are the principal current modalities of thromboprophylaxis. Based on the literature, we make suggestions for venous thromboembolism prevention and include an approach for consideration by rehabilitation units that can be aligned with local practice.

Incidence of venous thromboembolic disease and risk of bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies: A retrospective study

ObjectiveOur objectives were to describe the use of thromboprophylaxis and the incidence of VTE/bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies (HM). DesignRetrospective cohort study (2014–2022). SettingMedic-Surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in a tertiary care academic center. PatientsAdult patients admitted to ICU with a concomitant diagnosis of a hematological malignancy. InterventionsNone. Main variables of interestWe analyzed demographic data, use of thromboprophylaxis and secondary outcomes that included incidence of VTE (venous thromboembolism), bleeding, mortality, severity scores and organ support. We applied a multivariable logistic regression model to examine the risk of thrombosis in the ICU. ResultsWe included 862 ICU admissions (813 unique patients). Thromboprophylaxis was given during 65% of admissions (LMWH 14%, UFH 8%, and SCDs 43%); in 21% it was contraindicated due to thrombocytopenia; 14% of cases lacked documentation on prophylaxis. There were 38 unique incident cases of VTE (27 DVT, 11 PE), constituting 4.4% of ICU episodes. Most of VTE cases happened in patients with various degrees of thrombocytopenia. In the multivariable analysis, SOFA score on the first ICU day was independently associated (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76−0.96) with the risk of VTE. Bleeding occurred in 7.2% (minor) and 14.4% (major) of episodes; most frequent sites being CNS, abdomen/GI and pulmonary. ConclusionsIn this cohort of critically ill patients with HM, there was considerable variability in the utilization of DVT prophylaxis, with predominant use of SCDs. The incidence of VTE was 4.4% and major bleeding 14%. Clinical Trial RegistrationNCT05396157. Venous Thromboembolism in Hematologic Malignancy and Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Patients: a Retrospective Study (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

Thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy for prevention of adverse complications in patients with inherited thrombophilia: a literature review

Compared with non-pregnant women, pregnancy alone carries a three- to fivefold higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Despite the increasing use of low-molecular-weight heparin in identified high-risk patients, pulmonary embolism is still the leading cause of maternal mortality. However, evidence for optimal use of thromboprophylaxis is scarce. Thrombophilia (hereditary or acquired) is thought to predispose to both VTE and is also associated with complications of pregnancy, such as recurrent miscarriages and preeclampsia. This review discusses the current evidence for optimal thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy by focusing primarily on VTE prevention strategies, the potential to prevent recurrent complications during pregnancy with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), aspirin, and Nattokinase in pregnant women with congenital thrombophilia.

Venous thromboembolism among Asian populations with localized colorectal cancer undergoing curative resection: is pharmacological thromboprophylaxis required? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

We compared the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among Asian populations with localized colorectal cancer undergoing curative resection with and without the use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (PTP). A comprehensive literature search was undertaken to identify relevant studies published from January 1, 1980 to February 28, 2022. The inclusion criteria were patients who underwent primary tumor resection for localized nonmetastatic colorectal cancer; an Asian population or studies conducted in an Asian country; randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, or cohort studies; and the incidence of symptomatic VTE, deep vein thrombosis, and/or pulmonary embolism as the primary study outcomes. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. This study was registered in PROSPERO on October 11, 2020 (No. CRD42020206793). Seven studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 5 observational cohort studies) were included, encompassing 5,302 patients. The overall incidence of VTE was 1.4%. The use of PTP did not significantly reduce overall VTE incidence: 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-3.1%) versus 1.9% (95% CI, 0.3%-4.4%; P = 0.55). Similarly, PTP was not associated with significantly lower rates of symptomatic VTE, proximal deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism. The benefit of PTP in reducing VTE incidence among Asian patients undergoing curative resection for localized colorectal cancer has not been clearly established. The decision to administer PTP should be evaluated on a case-bycase basis and with consideration of associated bleeding risks.

Risk Assessment Models for Venous Thromboembolism in Medical Inpatients

Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for medical inpatients at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Risk assessment models (RAMs) have been developed to stratify VTE risk, but a prospective head-to-head comparison of validated RAMs is lacking. To prospectively validate an easy-to-use RAM, the simplified Geneva score, and compare its prognostic performance with previously validated RAMs. This prospective cohort study was conducted from June 18, 2020, to January 4, 2022, with a 90-day follow-up. A total of 4205 consecutive adults admitted to the general internal medicine departments of 3 Swiss university hospitals for hospitalization for more than 24 hours due to acute illness were screened for eligibility; 1352 without therapeutic anticoagulation were included. At admission, items of 4 RAMs (ie, the simplified and original Geneva score, the Padua score, and the IMPROVE [International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism] score) were collected. Patients were stratified into high and low VTE risk groups according to each RAM. Symptomatic VTE within 90 days. Of 1352 medical inpatients (median age, 67 years [IQR, 54-77 years]; 762 men [55.4%]), 28 (2.1%) experienced VTE. Based on the simplified Geneva score, 854 patients (63.2%) were classified as high risk, with a 90-day VTE risk of 2.6% (n = 22; 95% CI, 1.7%-3.9%), and 498 patients (36.8%) were classified as low risk, with a 90-day VTE risk of 1.2% (n = 6; 95% CI, 0.6%-2.6%). Sensitivity of the simplified Geneva score was 78.6% (95% CI, 60.5%-89.8%) and specificity was 37.2% (95% CI, 34.6%-39.8%); the positive likelihood ratio of the simplified Geneva score was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.03-1.52) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.28-1.18). In head-to-head comparisons, sensitivity was highest for the original Geneva score (82.1%; 95% CI, 64.4%-92.1%), while specificity was highest for the IMPROVE score (70.4%; 95% CI, 67.9%-72.8%). After adjusting the VTE risk for thromboprophylaxis use and site, there was no significant difference between the high-risk and low-risk groups based on the simplified Geneva score (subhazard ratio, 2.04 [95% CI, 0.83-5.05]; P = .12) and other RAMs. Discriminative performance was poor for all RAMs, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranging from 53.8% (95% CI, 51.1%-56.5%) for the original Geneva score to 58.1% (95% CI, 55.4%-60.7%) for the simplified Geneva score. This head-to-head comparison of validated RAMs found suboptimal accuracy and prognostic performance of the simplified Geneva score and other RAMs to predict hospital-acquired VTE in medical inpatients. Clinical usefulness of existing RAMs is questionable, highlighting the need for more accurate VTE prediction strategies.

In-hospital thromboprophylaxis variation and the risk of venous thromboembolism after lung cancer surgery: a nationwide cohort study.

Venous thromboembolic event (VTE) is a severe complication in patients with lung cancer undergoing thoracic surgery. Nevertheless, because of insufficient evidence, there are no clear guidelines, and VTE prophylaxis practices vary widely. This nationwide cohort study was a comparative study investigating VTE risk in surgical departments that routinely administered in-hospital thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin compared to those that did not. We identified all patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent surgery in Denmark during 2010-2021. Thoracic surgery was exclusively performed in the 4 university hospitals. Three hospitals implemented in-hospital thromboprophylaxis as standard care since 2000, while the fourth adopted this practice in September 2016. VTE events were assessed at 6-month follow-up according to hospital and study period, using an inverse probability of treatment weighting approach. We identified 9615 patients. During 6-month follow-up, a total of 190 VTE events were observed, resulting in a weighted rate of 4.5 events per 100 person-years and an absolute risk of 2.2%. There was no clear trend according to hospital site or use of in-hospital thromboprophylaxis with a 2.2% risk in the hospital not using thromboprophylaxis compared to 1.7-3.1% in those that did. Use of in-hospital thromboprophylaxis did not affect the risk of VTE after surgery for NSCLC, suggesting that relying solely on in-hospital thromboprophylaxis may be insufficient to mitigate VTE risk in these patients. Further research is warranted to investigate the potential benefits of extended thromboprophylaxis in reducing VTE risk in selected NSCLC surgical patients.

Primary prevention of venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients: recent advances and practical implications.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in ambulatory cancer patients receiving anticancer therapies. Many patient-, cancer-, and treatment‑related factors along with specific biomarkers can be associated with an increased risk of VTE in patients with cancer. Risk assessment models, such as the Khorana score, serve as valuable tools to aid in the identification of patients with cancer who are at high risk of VTE. Two randomized controlled trials have evaluated the efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis with low‑dose direct oral anticoagulants, apixaban and rivaroxaban, to reduce the risk of VTE in ambulatory patients with cancer who are at intermediate to high risk of VTE identified by the Khorana score. This narrative review summarizes the literature on the risk factors and risk assessment process for VTE, and the use of primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients. We also outline important practical considerations for initiating primary thromboprophylaxis in this population.

Venous thromboembolism in patients with acute myeloid leukemia: development of a predictive model.

Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are at increased risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). However, thromboprophylaxis is largely underused. This study aimed to determine possible VTE development risk factors and to develop a novel predictive model. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with newly diagnosed AML. We used univariate and multivariable logistic regression to estimate binary outcomes and identify potential predictors. Based on our final model, a dynamic nomogram was constructed with the goal of facilitating VTE probability calculation. Out of 626 eligible patients with AML, 72 (11.5%) developed VTE during 6 months of follow-up. Six parameters were independent predictors: male sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.077-2.065), prior history of thrombotic events (OR 2.27, 95% CI: 1.4-4.96), international normalized ratio (OR 0.21, 95% CI: 0.05-0.95), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53-0.94), and intensive therapy (OR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.07-3.91). The C statistics for the model was 0.68. The model was adequately calibrated and internally validated. The decision-curve analysis suggested the use of thromboprophylaxis in patients with VTE risks between 8 and 20%. We developed a novel and convenient tool that may assist clinicians in identifying patients whose VTE risk is high enough to warrant thromboprophylaxis.

Hormonal contraceptive use after a first venous thrombotic event and the risk of recurrence in premenopausal women

BackgroundExtensive evidence is available on hormonal contraceptive (HC) use and the risk of a first venous thromboembolism (VTE) event. Despite recommendations to discontinue combined HC (CHC) use, some women continue or start its use after a first VTE. ObjectivesWe aimed to evaluate the VTE recurrence risk associated with HC use in premenopausal women. MethodsPremenopausal women with a first VTE included in the Multiple Environmental and Genetic Assessment of Venous Thrombosis study between 1999 and 2004 were followed for a recurrence until 2010. Data on HC use were available through linkage to the Dutch Foundation for Pharmaceutical Statistics. The risk of recurrence was assessed 1) during anticoagulant therapy and 2) after cessation of anticoagulant therapy. Time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs adjusted for age and body mass index at baseline and thromboprophylaxis use during follow-up. ResultsSix hundred fifty women were uniquely linked and followed for a total of 3538 person-years (median, 6.1 years), during which 57 VTE recurrences occurred. Five occurred (8.8%) during anticoagulation treatment, with no clear risk difference for CHC use vs nonuse (HR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.1-8.2). After anticoagulation cessation, CHC use was associated with a 2.4-fold higher risk of recurrence (HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.2-5.0) compared with nonuse. Recurrence risk for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device use was similar to that for nonuse (HR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.3-3.1). ConclusionCHC use after a first VTE is safe during anticoagulant use but substantially increases the risk of a recurrent VTE event in absence of anticoagulant use. This study adds to the evidence regarding the use of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device as a safe alternative.