-
North American Spine Society Journal Mar 2024Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a potentially devastating complication after surgery. Spine surgery is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a potentially devastating complication after surgery. Spine surgery is associated with an increased risk of postoperative bleeding, such as spinal epidural hematomas (SEH), which complicates the use of anticoagulation. Despite this dilemma, there is a lack of consensus around perioperative VTE prophylaxis. This systematic review investigates the relationship between chemoprophylaxis and the incidence rates of VTE and SEH in the elective spine surgical population.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify studies published after 2,000 that compared VTE chemoprophylaxis use in elective spine surgery. Studies involving patients aged < 18 years or with known trauma, cancer, or spinal cord injuries were excluded. Pooled incidence rates of VTE and SEH were calculated for all eligible studies, and meta-analyses were performed to assess the relationship between chemoprophylaxis and the incidences of VTE and SEH.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies met our eligibility criteria, comprising a total of 220,932 patients. The overall pooled incidence of VTE was 3.2%, including 3.3% for DVT and 0.4% for PE. A comparison of VTE incidence between patients that did and did not receive chemoprophylaxis was not statistically significant (OR 0.97, p=.95, 95% CI 0.43-2.19). The overall pooled incidence of SEH was 0.4%, and there was also no significant difference between patients that did and did not receive chemoprophylaxis (OR 1.57, p=.06, 95% CI 0.99-2.50).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of perioperative chemoprophylaxis may not significantly alter rates of VTE or SEH in the elective spine surgery population. This review highlights the need for additional randomized controlled trials to better define the risks and benefits of specific chemoprophylactic protocols in various subpopulations of elective spine surgery.
PubMed: 38204918
DOI: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2023.100295 -
Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Jan 2024Patients with cancer are at significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), due both to the impact of malignant disease itself and to the impact of certain... (Review)
Review
Patients with cancer are at significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), due both to the impact of malignant disease itself and to the impact of certain anticancer drugs on haemostasis. This is true both for first episode venous thromboembolism and recurrence. The diagnosis and management of VTE recurrence in patients with cancer poses particular challenges, and these are reviewed in the present article, based on a systematic review of the relevant scientific literature published over the last decade. Furthermore, it is uncertain whether diagnostic algorithms for venous thromboembolism, validated principally in untreated non-cancer patients, are also valid in anticoagulated cancer patients: the available data suggests that clinical decision rules and D-dimer testing perform less well in this clinical setting. In patients with cancer, computed tomography pulmonary angiography and venous ultrasound appear to be the most reliable diagnostic tools for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis respectively. Options for treatment of venous thromboembolism include low molecular weight heparins (at a therapeutic dose or an increased dose), fondaparinux or oral direct factor Xa inhibitors. The choice of treatment should take into account the nature (pulmonary embolism or VTE) and severity of the recurrent event, the associated bleeding risk, the current anticoagulant treatment (type, dose, adherence and possible drug-drug interactions) and cancer progression.
Topics: Humans; Venous Thromboembolism; Anticoagulants; Pulmonary Embolism; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Neoplasms; Recurrence
PubMed: 38065753
DOI: 10.1016/j.acvd.2023.11.006 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery. Venous and... Jan 2024Data on complications after upper extremity vein thrombosis (UEVT) are limited and heterogeneous. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Data on complications after upper extremity vein thrombosis (UEVT) are limited and heterogeneous.
METHODS
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the pooled proportions of venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, bleeding, and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients with UEVT. A systematic literature review was conducted of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from January 2000 to April 2023 in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. All studies included patients with UEVT and were published in English. Meta-analyses of VTE recurrence, bleeding, and of PTS after UEVT were performed to compute pooled estimates and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses of cancer-associated UEVT and catheter-associated venous thrombosis were conducted. Patients with Paget-Schroetter syndrome or effort thrombosis were excluded.
RESULTS
A total of 55 studies with 15,694 patients were included. The pooled proportions for VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and PTS were 4.8% (95% CI, 3.8%-6.2%), 3.0% (95% CI, 2.2%-4.0%), and 23.8% (95% CI, 17.0%-32.3%), respectively. The pooled proportion of VTE recurrence was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.6%) for patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), 1.7% (95% CI, 0.8%-3.7%) for patients treated with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.5%-11.8%) for vitamin K antagonists (VKAs; P = .36). The pooled proportion was 6.3% (95% CI, 4.3%-9.1%) for cancer patients compared with 3.1% (95% CI, 2.1%-4.6%) for patients without cancer (P = .01). The pooled proportion of major bleeding for patients treated with DOACs, LMWH, and VKAs, was 2.1% (95% CI, 0.9%-5.1%), 3.2% (95% CI, 1.4%-7.2%), and 3.4% (95% CI, 1.4%-8.4%), respectively (P = .72). The pooled proportion of PTS for patients treated with DOACs, LMWH, and VKAs was 11.8% (95% CI, 6.5%-20.6%), 27.9% (95% CI, 20.9%-36.2%), and 24.5% (95% CI, 17.6%-33.1%), respectively (P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS
The results from this study suggest that UEVT is associated with significant rates of PTS and VTE recurrence. Treatment with DOACs might be associated with lower PTS rates than treatment with other anticoagulants.
Topics: Humans; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Venous Thromboembolism; Incidence; Vitamin K; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Postthrombotic Syndrome; Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis; Neoplasms; Upper Extremity
PubMed: 37717788
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2023.09.002 -
BMJ Open Apr 2024A subset of patients with superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) experiences clot propagation towards deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Predictive factors of clot propagation in patients with superficial venous thrombosis towards deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
A subset of patients with superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) experiences clot propagation towards deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim of this systematic review is to identify all clinically relevant cross-sectional and prognostic factors for predicting thrombotic complications in patients with SVT.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched until 3 March 2023.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Original research studies with patients with SVT, DVT and/or PE as the outcome and presenting cross-sectional or prognostic predictive factors.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS
The CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling (CHARMS) checklist for prognostic factor studies was used for systematic extraction of study characteristics. Per identified predictive factor, relevant estimates of univariable and multivariable predictor-outcome associations were extracted, such as ORs and HRs. Estimates of association for the most frequently reported predictors were summarised in forest plots, and meta-analyses with heterogeneity were presented. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used for risk of bias assessment and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) for assessing the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included (n=10 111 patients). The most reported predictive factors were high age, male sex, history of venous thromboembolism (VTE), absence of varicose veins and cancer. Pooled effect estimates were heterogenous and ranged from OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.75 to 5.59) for the cross-sectional predictor cancer to OR 0.92 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.53) for the prognostic predictor high age. The level of evidence was rated very low to low. Most studies were scored high or moderate risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the pooled estimates of the predictors high age, male sex, history of VTE, cancer and absence of varicose veins showed predictive potential in isolation, variability in study designs, lack of multivariable adjustment and high risk of bias prevent firm conclusions. High-quality, multivariable studies are necessary to be able to identify individual SVT risk profiles.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021262819.
Topics: Humans; Male; Venous Thromboembolism; Cross-Sectional Studies; Risk Factors; Venous Thrombosis; Pulmonary Embolism; Neoplasms; Varicose Veins; Anticoagulants
PubMed: 38626964
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074818 -
Obesity Surgery Oct 2023Portomesenteric vein thrombosis (PMVT) is a rare but potentially fatal complication of sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The rising prevalence of SG has led to a surge in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Portomesenteric vein thrombosis (PMVT) is a rare but potentially fatal complication of sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The rising prevalence of SG has led to a surge in the occurrence of PMVT, while the associated risk factors have not been fully elucidated. This study aims to determine the incidence and risk factors of PMVT in patients undergoing SG.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE databases. Proportion and regression meta-analyses were conducted.
RESULTS
In a total of 76 studies including 101,914 patients undergoing SG, we identified 357 patients with PMVT. Mean follow-up was 14.4 (SD: 16.3) months. The incidence of PMVT was found to be 0.50% (95%CI: 0.40-0.61%). The majority of the population presented with abdominal pain (91.8%) at an average of 22.4 days postoperatively and PMVT was mainly diagnosed with computed tomography (CT) (96.0%). Hematologic abnormalities predisposing to thrombophilia were identified in 34.9% of the population. Advanced age (p=0.02) and low center volume (p <0.0001) were significantly associated with PMVT, while gender, BMI, hematologic abnormality, prior history of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, type of prophylactic anticoagulation, and duration of prophylactic anticoagulation were not associated with the incidence of PMVT in meta-regression analyses. Treatment included therapeutic anticoagulation in 93.4% and the mortality rate was 4/357 (1.1%).
CONCLUSION
PMVT is a rare complication of sleeve gastrectomy with an incidence rate <1% that is associated with low center volume and advanced age but is not affected by the duration or type of thromboprophylaxis administered postoperatively.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; Obesity, Morbid; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis; Gastrectomy; Portal Vein; Retrospective Studies; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37523131
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-023-06714-z -
Annals of Hematology May 2024Rivaroxaban is a new direct oral anticoagulant, and the same dose is recommended for older and young patients. However, recent real-world studies show that older... (Review)
Review
Rivaroxaban is a new direct oral anticoagulant, and the same dose is recommended for older and young patients. However, recent real-world studies show that older patients may need dose adjustment to prevent major bleeding. At present, the evidence for dose adjustment in older patients is extremely limited with only a few reports on older atrial fibrillation patients. The aim of this study was to review the morbidity data of adverse events and bleeding events across all indications for older and young patients treated with the same dose of rivaroxaban to provide some support for dosage adjustment in older patients. The PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1, 2005, and October 10, 2023. The primary outcomes were the morbidity of bleeding events and efficacy-related adverse events. Summary estimates were calculated using a random effects model. Eighteen RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis. The overall morbidity of primary efficacy endpoints was higher in older patients compared to the young patients (3.37% vs. 2.60%, χ = 5.24, p = 0.022). Similarly, a higher morbidity of bleeding was observed in older patients compared to the young patients (4.42% vs. 6.03%, χ = 13.22, p < 0.001). Among all indications, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism and atrial fibrillation were associated with the highest incidence of bleeding in older patients, suggesting that these patients may be most need dose adjustment. Patients older than 75 years may require extra attention to prevent bleeding. The same dose of rivaroxaban resulted in higher bleeding morbidity and morbidity of efficacy-related adverse events in older patients compared to the young patients. An individualized dose adjustment may be preferred for older patients rather than a fixed dose that fits all.
PubMed: 38710878
DOI: 10.1007/s00277-024-05767-z -
The Journal of Innovations in Cardiac... Jul 2023High-power, short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency (RF) ablation is expected to be more effective and safer than low-power, long-duration (LPLD) RF ablation in treating... (Review)
Review
Comparative Efficacy and Safety Profiles of High-power, Short-duration and Low-power, Long-duration Radiofrequency Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
High-power, short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency (RF) ablation is expected to be more effective and safer than low-power, long-duration (LPLD) RF ablation in treating atrial fibrillation (AF). Given the limited data available, the findings are controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated whether the clinical effects of HPSD outweigh those of LPLD. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar databases identified studies comparing HPSD to LPLD ablation. All the analyses used the random-effects model. This analysis included 21 studies with a total of 4,169 patients. Pooled analyses revealed that HPSD was associated with a lower recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATAs) at 1 year (relative risk [RR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.78; = .00001; = 0%). Furthermore, the HPSD approach reduced the risk of AF recurrence (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.40-1.01; = .06; = 86%). The HPSD approach was associated with a lower risk of esophageal thermal injury (ETI) (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-1.04; = .09; = 73%). The HPSD strategy increased first-pass pulmonary vein (PV) isolation (PVI) and decreased acute PV reconnection (PVR), both of which were predominantly manifested in bilateral and left PVs. HPSD facilitated a reduction in procedural time, number of lesions created during PVI, and fluoroscopy time. The HPSD method reduces ETI, PVR, and recurrent AF. The HPSD approach also reduced the procedural time, number of lesions created during PVI, fluoroscopy time, and post-ablation AF relapse in 1 year, improving patient outcomes and safety.
PubMed: 37492695
DOI: 10.19102/icrm.2023.14072 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Sep 2023Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is a frequent procedure used in concomitant cardiac surgery. However, uncertainty still exists concerning the optimal extent of lesion... (Review)
Review
Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is a frequent procedure used in concomitant cardiac surgery. However, uncertainty still exists concerning the optimal extent of lesion sets. Hence, the objective of this study was to assess the results of various ablation techniques, aiming to offer a reference for clinical decision making. This review is listed in the prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) under ID CRD42023412785. A comprehensive search was conducted across eight databases (Scopus, Google Scholar, EBSCOHost, PubMed, Medline, Wiley, ProQuest, and Embase) up to 18 April 2023. Studies were critically appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 for randomized control trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale adapted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for cohort studies. Forest plots of pooled effect estimates and surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) were used for the analysis. Our analysis included 39 studies and a total of 7207 patients. Both bi-atrial ablation (BAA) and left atrial ablation (LAA) showed similar efficacy in restoring sinus rhythm (SR; BAA (77.9%) > LAA (76.2%) > pulmonary vein isolation (PVI; 66.5%); LAA: OR = 1.08 (CI 0.94-1.23); PVI: OR = 1.36 (CI 1.08-1.70)). However, BAA had higher pacemaker implantation (LAA: OR = 0.51 (CI 0.37-0.71); PVI: OR = 0.52 (CI 0.31-0.86)) and reoperation rates (LAA: OR = 0.71 (CI 0.28-1.45); PVI: OR = 0.31 (CI 0.1-0.64)). PVI had the lowest efficacy in restoring SR and a similar complication rate to LAA, but had the shortest procedure time (Cross-clamp (Xc): PVI (93.38) > LAA (37.36) > BAA (13.89)); Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB): PVI (93.93) > LAA (56.04) > BAA (0.03)). We suggest that LAA is the best surgical technique for AF ablation due to its comparable effectiveness in restoring SR, its lower rate of pacemaker requirement, and its lower reoperation rate compared to BAA. Furthermore, LAA ranks as the second-fastest procedure after PVI, with a similar CPB time.
PubMed: 37685784
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12175716 -
BMC Cancer Oct 2023Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common postoperative complication in patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer (GC). Although VTE incidence may vary among... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common postoperative complication in patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer (GC). Although VTE incidence may vary among cancers, guidelines rarely stratify preventive methods for postoperative VTE by cancer type. The risk of VTE in patients undergoing surgery for GC remains unclear.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to determine the risk of VTE after GC surgery and discuss the clinical value of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in these cases. Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published from their inception to September 2022.
RESULTS
Overall, 13 studies (111,936 patients) were included. The overall 1-month incidence of VTE, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE) after GC surgery was 1.8% (95% CI, 0.8-3.1%; I²=98.5%), 1.2% (95% CI, 0.5-2.1%; I²=96.1%), and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1-1.1%; I²=96.3%), respectively. The prevalence of postoperative VTE was comparable between Asian and Western populations (1.8% vs. 1.8%; P > 0.05). Compared with mechanical prophylaxis alone, mechanical plus pharmacological prophylaxis was associated with a significantly lower 1-month rate of postoperative VTE and DVT (0.6% vs. 2.9% and 0.6% vs. 2.8%, respectively; all P < 0.05), but not PE (P > 0.05). The 1-month postoperative incidence of VTE was not significantly different between laparoscopic and open surgery (1.8% vs. 4.3%, P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Patients undergoing GC surgery do not have a high risk of VTE. The incidence of VTE after GC surgery is not significantly different between Eastern and Western patients. Mechanical plus pharmacological prophylaxis is more effective than mechanical prophylaxis alone in postoperative VTE prevention. The VTE risk is comparable between open and laparoscopic surgery for GC.
Topics: Humans; Venous Thromboembolism; Anticoagulants; Stomach Neoplasms; Pulmonary Embolism; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37789268
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11424-x -
Current Cardiology Reports Nov 2023Studies have suggested the superiority of high-power compared to standard-power radiofrequency ablation ablation (RFCA). This study aimed to assess the efficacy and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Studies have suggested the superiority of high-power compared to standard-power radiofrequency ablation ablation (RFCA). This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of high-power compared to standard-power RFCA guided by ablation index (AI) or lesion index (LSI).
RECENT FINDINGS
A systematic review and meta-analysis study comparing IGHP and IGLP approaches for AF ablation was conducted. The relevant published studies comparing IGHP and IGSP methods for RFCA in AF patients until October 2022 were collected from Cochrane, ProQuest, PubMed, and ScienceDirect. A total of 2579 AF patients from 11 studies were included, 1682 received IGHP RFCA, and 897 received IGSP RFCA. To achieve successful pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), the IGHP RFCA group had a significantly shorter procedure time than the IGHP RFCA group (mean difference (MD) -19.91 min; 95% CI -25.23 to -14.59 min; p < 0.01), radiofrequency (RF) application time (MD -10.92 min; 95% CI -14.70 to -7.13 min; p < 0.01), and fewer number of lesions (MD -10.90; 95% CI -18.77 to -3.02; p < 0.01) than the IGSP RFCA. First-pass PVI was significantly greater in the IGHP RFCA group than in the IGSP RFCA group (risk ratio (RR) 1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.28; p < 0.01). The IGHP RFCA is an effective and efficient strategy for AF ablation. The superiority of IGHP RFCA includes the shorter procedure time, shorter RF application time, fewer number of lesions for complete PVI, and more excellent first-pass PVI.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Treatment Outcome; Catheter Ablation; Pulmonary Veins; Recurrence
PubMed: 37874469
DOI: 10.1007/s11886-023-01968-6