logo logo
Venous thromboembolism in colorectal surgery: Incidence, risk factors, and prophylaxis. Emoto Shigenobu,Nozawa Hiroaki,Kawai Kazushige,Hata Keisuke,Tanaka Toshiaki,Shuno Yasutaka,Nishikawa Takeshi,Sasaki Kazuhito,Kaneko Manabu,Hiyoshi Masaya,Murono Koji,Ishihara Soichiro Asian journal of surgery Colorectal surgery is associated with a high risk of perioperative venous thromboembolism (VTE), and this risk is especially high following colorectal cancer resection and surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. Previous analyses of large databases have reported the incidence of postoperative VTE in this population to be approximately 1.1%-2.5%. Therefore, to minimize this risk, patients should be offered appropriate prophylaxis, which may involve a combination of mechanical and pharmacologic prophylaxis with low-dose unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin as recommended by several guidelines. Prior to initiation of treatment, appropriate risk stratification should be performed according to the patients' basic and disease-related as well as procedure-related risk factors, and post-operative factors. Furthermore, a risk-benefit calculation that takes into account patients' VTE and bleeding risk should be performed prior to starting pharmacologic prophylaxis and to help determine the duration of treatment. 10.1016/j.asjsur.2018.12.013
Venous thromboembolism: Recent advancement and future perspective. Yamashita Yugo,Morimoto Takeshi,Kimura Takeshi Journal of cardiology Clinicians have been more and more often encountering patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), including pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis, leading to the increased importance of VTE in daily clinical practice. VTE is becoming a common issue in Asian countries including Japan. The management strategies of VTE have changed dramatically in the past decade including the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). In addition, there have been several landmark clinical trials assessing acute treatment strategies including thrombolysis and inferior vena cava (IVC) filter. The current VTE guidelines do not recommend the routine use of thrombolysis or IVC filters based on recent evidence; Nevertheless, the prevalence of thrombolysis and IVC filter use in Japan was strikingly high. The novel profiles of DOACs with rapid onset of action and potential benefit of a lower risk for bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonist could make home treatment feasible and is safer even with extended anticoagulation therapy. One of the most clinically relevant issues for VTE treatment is optimal duration of anticoagulation for the secondary prevention of VTE. Considering recent evidence, optimal duration of anticoagulation should be determined based on the risk for recurrence as well as the risk for bleeding in an individual patient. Despite the recent advances for VTE management, there are still a number of uncertain issues that challenge clinicians in daily clinical practice, such as cancer-associated VTE and minor VTE including subsegmental pulmonary embolism and distal deep vein thrombosis, warranting future research. Several clinical trials are now ongoing for these issues, globally as well as in Japan. The current review is aimed to overview the recent advances in VTE management, describe the current status including some domestic issues in Japan, and discuss the future perspective of VTE. 10.1016/j.jjcc.2021.08.026
Should we follow the 9th ACCP guidelines for VTE prevention in surgical patients? Arcelus Juan I,Villar Jesus M,Muñoz Nuria Thrombosis research The 9th edition of the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines on antithrombotic therapy and prevention, includes relevant changes compared to previous versions. In the 9th ACCP, leadership of most chapters was given to methodologists who were familiar with the GRADE methodology. All topic panelists underwent a selection process paying particular attention to their financial and intellectual conflicts of interests. In the 9th ACCP guidelines, evidence has been explicitly presented in many evidence profiles and summary of evidence tables. In order to get a more balanced trade-off between desirable and undesirable effects of the alternative prevention and therapeutic interventions, there has been an increased emphasis on clinically relevant events, as opposed to previous surrogate asymptomatic outcomes. In addition, there has been a systematic review and survey on patient values and preferences for thrombotic and bleeding outcomes. As a result of the above changes, the strength of most recommendations has been downgraded compared to previous editions. The main changes regarding prevention on nonorthopedic surgical patients include the adoption of two risk assessment models. The only recommendation that has been upgraded is to extend prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) for four weeks after abdominal or pelvic cancer surgery. A controversial modification in orthopedic patients is recommendation in favor of the use of aspirin after hip or knee arthroplasty. New oral anticoagulants are recommended, but LMWH are suggested as the preferred option. Extending pharmacological prophylaxis for up to 35days rather than 10-14days is now suggested for patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery. 10.1016/j.thromres.2012.08.260
Prevention of venous thromboembolism after surgery. Michota Franklin A Cleveland Clinic journal of medicine Most surgical patients who require hospitalization are at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and should receive VTE prophylaxis, usually including pharmacologic prophylaxis. Nevertheless, rates of appropriate perioperative thromboprophylaxis remain stubbornly low, though an expansion in quality-improvement efforts has led to widespread hospital implementation of prophylaxis strategies in recent years. This article reviews important principles and recent developments in perioperative VTE prophylaxis, with a focus on key recommendations and changes in the 2008 update of the American College Chest Physicians' (ACCP) evidence-based guidelines on antithrombotic therapy. 10.3949/ccjm.76.s4.08
Prevention of venous thromboembolism: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Geerts William H,Pineo Graham F,Heit John A,Bergqvist David,Lassen Michael R,Colwell Clifford W,Ray Joel G Chest This article discusses the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and is part of the Seventh American College of Chest Physicians Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy: Evidence-Based Guidelines. Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do, or do not, outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patients' values may lead to different choices (for a full understanding of the grading see Guyatt et al, CHEST 2004; 126:179S-187S). Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following. We recommend against the use of aspirin alone as thromboprophylaxis for any patient group (Grade 1A). For moderate-risk general surgery patients, we recommend prophylaxis with low-dose unfractionated heparin (LDUH) (5,000 U bid) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) [< or = 3,400 U once daily] (both Grade 1A). For higher risk general surgery patients, we recommend thromboprophylaxis with LDUH (5,000 U tid) or LMWH (> 3,400 U daily) [both Grade 1A]. For high-risk general surgery patients with multiple risk factors, we recommend combining pharmacologic methods (LDUH three times daily or LMWH, > 3,400 U daily) with the use of graduated compression stockings and/or intermittent pneumatic compression devices (Grade 1C+). We recommend that thromboprophylaxis be used in all patients undergoing major gynecologic surgery (Grade 1A) or major, open urologic procedures, and we recommend prophylaxis with LDUH two times or three times daily (Grade 1A). For patients undergoing elective total hip or knee arthroplasty, we recommend one of the following three anticoagulant agents: LMWH, fondaparinux, or adjusted-dose vitamin K antagonist (VKA) [international normalized ratio (INR) target, 2.5; range, 2.0 to 3.0] (all Grade 1A). For patients undergoing hip fracture surgery (HFS), we recommend the routine use of fondaparinux (Grade 1A), LMWH (Grade 1C+), VKA (target INR, 2.5; range, 2.0 to 3.0) [Grade 2B], or LDUH (Grade 1B). We recommend that patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty, or HFS receive thromboprophylaxis for at least 10 days (Grade 1A). We recommend that all trauma patients with at least one risk factor for VTE receive thromboprophylaxis (Grade 1A). In acutely ill medical patients who have been admitted to the hospital with congestive heart failure or severe respiratory disease, or who are confined to bed and have one or more additional risk factors, we recommend prophylaxis with LDUH (Grade 1A) or LMWH (Grade 1A). We recommend, on admission to the intensive care unit, all patients be assessed for their risk of VTE. Accordingly, most patients should receive thromboprophylaxis (Grade 1A). 10.1378/chest.126.3_suppl.338S
Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for the general surgical patient: where do we stand? Petralia Gloria A,Kakkar Ajay K Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in surgical patients, with the potential for long-term disability or fatal outcome. The rationale behind routine use of thromboprophylaxis can be summarized in three points: (1) VTE is frequent in certain surgical populations, (2) VTE may be fatal, (3) thromboprophylaxis is highly effective and safe. In addition to these clinical benefits it has the potential for lowering overall treatment costs by preventing diagnostic procedures and delayed discharge or readmission due to thromboembolism. Surgical patients tend to have more than one risk factor for VTE, and in view of the fact that the effect of that risk is cumulative, it is important to stratify the risk to tailor an adequate prophylaxis strategy. There is consensus that heparins are both effective and safe in preventing VTE in surgical patients. Evidence-based local strategies should be available locally to clinicians and adhered to in order to maximize outcomes. Guidelines are intended to assist surgeons in making decisions in regard to DVT prophylaxis when performing surgical procedures. 10.1055/s-2008-1047566
Prophylaxis for deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in the surgical patient. Merli G J Clinical cornerstone The fifth American College of Chest Physicians Consensus Conference on Antithrombotic Therapy provides the most up-to-date guidelines for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in the surgical patient (1). These recommendations have become a major guideline for clinicians managing patients in the perioperative period. Despite these recommendations, there remains a concern for balancing the risk of major postoperative bleeding with the benefit of preventing thrombosis. In an attempt to resolve this issue, clinicians have requested clear-cut guidelines for identification of high-risk groups for whom prophylaxis must be used. This article will review the etiology, risk-factor stratification, regimens of prophylaxis, and recommendations for prevention of postoperative DVT and PE. 10.1016/s1098-3597(00)90010-3
International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH BACKGROUND: Guidelines addressing the management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients are heterogeneous and their implementation has been suboptimal worldwide. OBJECTIVES:To establish a common international consensus addressing practical, clinically relevant questions in this setting. METHODS:An international consensus working group of experts was set up to develop guidelines according to an evidence-based medicine approach, using the GRADE system. RESULTS:For the initial treatment of established VTE: low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is recommended [1B]; fondaparinux and unfractionated heparin (UFH) can be also used [2D]; thrombolysis may only be considered on a case-by-case basis [Best clinical practice (Guidance)]; vena cava filters (VCF) may be considered if contraindication to anticoagulation or pulmonary embolism recurrence under optimal anticoagulation; periodic reassessment of contraindications to anticoagulation is recommended and anticoagulation should be resumed when safe; VCF are not recommended for primary VTE prophylaxis in cancer patients [Guidance]. For the early maintenance (10 days to 3 months) and long-term (beyond 3 months) treatment of established VTE, LMWH for a minimum of 3 months is preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKA) [1A]; idraparinux is not recommended [2C]; after 3-6 months, LMWH or VKA continuation should be based on individual evaluation of the benefit-risk ratio, tolerability, patient preference and cancer activity [Guidance]. For the treatment of VTE recurrence in cancer patients under anticoagulation, three options can be considered: (i) switch from VKA to LMWH when treated with VKA; (ii) increase in LMWH dose when treated with LMWH, and (iii) VCF insertion [Guidance]. For the prophylaxis of postoperative VTE in surgical cancer patients, use of LMWH o.d. or low dose of UFH t.i.d. is recommended; pharmacological prophylaxis should be started 12-2 h preoperatively and continued for at least 7-10 days; there are no data allowing conclusion that one type of LMWH is superior to another [1A]; there is no evidence to support fondaparinux as an alternative to LMWH [2C]; use of the highest prophylactic dose of LMWH is recommended [1A]; extended prophylaxis (4 weeks) after major laparotomy may be indicated in cancer patients with a high risk of VTE and low risk of bleeding [2B]; the use of LMWH for VTE prevention in cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery may be recommended as for laparotomy [Guidance]; mechanical methods are not recommended as monotherapy except when pharmacological methods are contraindicated [2C]. For the prophylaxis of VTE in hospitalized medical patients with cancer and reduced mobility, we recommend prophylaxis with LMWH, UFH or fondaparinux [1B]; for children and adults with acute lymphocytic leukemia treated with l-asparaginase, depending on local policy and patient characteristics, prophylaxis may be considered in some patients [Guidance]; in patients receiving chemotherapy, prophylaxis is not recommended routinely [1B]; primary pharmacological prophylaxis of VTE may be indicated in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic [1B] or lung [2B] cancer treated with chemotherapy and having a low risk of bleeding; in patients treated with thalidomide or lenalidomide combined with steroids and/or chemotherapy, VTE prophylaxis is recommended; in this setting, VKA at low or therapeutic doses, LMWH at prophylactic doses and low-dose aspirin have shown similar effects; however, the efficacy of these regimens remains unclear [2C]. Special situations include brain tumors, severe renal failure (CrCl<30 mL min(-1) ), thrombocytopenia and pregnancy. Guidances are provided in these contexts. CONCLUSIONS:Dissemination and implementation of good clinical practice for the management of VTE, the second cause of death in cancer patients, is a major public health priority. 10.1111/jth.12070
Novel oral anticoagulants in plastic surgery. Munson C F,Reid A J Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have emerged as a good alternative to warfarin in the prevention of stroke for patients with atrial fibrillation. NOAC use is increasing rapidly; therefore, greater understanding of their use in the perioperative period is important for optimal care. Studies and reviews that reported on the use of NOACs were identified, with particular focus on the perioperative period. PubMed was searched for relevant articles published between January 2000 and August 2015. The inevitable rise in the use of NOACs such as rivaroxaban (Xarelto™), apixaban (Eliquis™), edoxaban (Lixiana™) and dabigatran (Pradaxa™) may present a simplified approach to perioperative anticoagulant management due to fewer drug interactions, rapidity of onset of action and relatively short half-lives. Coagulation status, however, cannot reliably be monitored and no antidotes are currently available. When planning for discontinuation of NOACs, special consideration of renal function is required. Advice regarding the management of bleeding complications is provided for consideration in emergency surgery. In extreme circumstances, haemodialysis may be considered for bleeding with the use of dabigatran. NOACs will increasingly affect operative planning in plastic surgery. In order to reduce the incidence of complications associated with anticoagulation, the management of NOACs in the perioperative period requires knowledge of the time of last dose, renal function and the bleeding risk of the planned procedure. Consideration of these factors will allow appropriate interpretation of the current guidelines. 10.1016/j.bjps.2016.02.011