-
Radiology Feb 2021Background The association of pulmonary embolism (PE) with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear, and the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Background The association of pulmonary embolism (PE) with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear, and the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer tests for PE is unknown. Purpose To conduct meta-analysis of the study-level incidence of PE and DVT and to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer tests for PE from multicenter individual patient data. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search identified studies evaluating the incidence of PE or DVT in patients with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, to June 15, 2020. These outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model and were further evaluated using metaregression analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer tests for PE was estimated on the basis of individual patient data using the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Results Twenty-seven studies with 3342 patients with COVID-19 were included in the analysis. The pooled incidence rates of PE and DVT were 16.5% (95% CI: 11.6, 22.9; = 0.93) and 14.8% (95% CI: 8.5, 24.5; = 0.94), respectively. PE was more frequently found in patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (24.7% [95% CI: 18.6, 32.1] vs 10.5% [95% CI: 5.1, 20.2] in those not admitted to the ICU) and in studies with universal screening using CT pulmonary angiography. DVT was present in 42.4% of patients with PE. D-dimer tests had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.737 for PE, and D-dimer levels of 500 and 1000 μg/L showed high sensitivity (96% and 91%, respectively) but low specificity (10% and 24%, respectively). Conclusion Pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) occurred in 16.5% and 14.8% of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), respectively, and more than half of patients with PE lacked DVT. The cutoffs of D-dimer levels used to exclude PE in preexisting guidelines seem applicable to patients with COVID-19. © RSNA, 2020 See also the editorial by Woodard in this issue.
Topics: Humans; Computed Tomography Angiography; COVID-19; Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products; Pulmonary Embolism; SARS-CoV-2; Venous Thrombosis; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 33320063
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020203557 -
Immunity, Inflammation and Disease Mar 2023Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about cardiovascular complications following the mRNA vaccination. This study provides an in-depth account of various cardiovascular adverse events reported after the mRNA vaccines' first or second dose including pericarditis/myopericarditis, myocarditis, hypotension, hypertension, arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, stroke, myocardial infarction/STEMI, intracranial hemorrhage, thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis, cerebral venous thrombosis, arterial or venous thrombotic events, portal vein thrombosis, coronary thrombosis, microvascular small bowel thrombosis), and pulmonary embolism.
METHODS
A systematic review of original studies reporting confirmed cardiovascular manifestations post-mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was performed. Following the PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases (PubMed, PMC NCBI, and Cochrane Library) were searched until January 2022. Baseline characteristics of patients and disease outcomes were extracted from relevant studies.
RESULTS
A total of 81 articles analyzed confirmed cardiovascular complications post-COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in 17,636 individuals and reported 284 deaths with any mRNA vaccine. Of 17,636 cardiovascular events with any mRNA vaccine, 17,192 were observed with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine, 444 events with mRNA-1273 (Moderna). Thrombosis was frequently reported with any mRNA vaccine (n = 13,936), followed by stroke (n = 758), myocarditis (n = 511), myocardial infarction (n = 377), pulmonary embolism (n = 301), and arrhythmia (n = 254). Stratifying the results by vaccine type showed that thrombosis (80.8%) was common in the BNT162b2 cohort, while stroke (39.9%) was common with mRNA-1273 for any dose. The time between the vaccination dosage and the first symptom onset averaged 5.6 and 4.8 days with the mRNA-1273 vaccine and BNT162b2, respectively. The mRNA-1273 cohort reported 56 deaths compared to the 228 with BNT162b2, while the rest were discharged or transferred to the ICU.
CONCLUSION
Available literature includes more studies with the BNT162b2 vaccine than mRNA-1273. Future studies must report mortality and adverse cardiovascular events by vaccine types.
Topics: Humans; 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273; BNT162 Vaccine; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Myocardial Infarction; Myocarditis; Pulmonary Embolism; Stroke; Thrombocytopenia; Thrombosis
PubMed: 36988252
DOI: 10.1002/iid3.807 -
PloS One 2015Anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists is the current standard of care (SOC) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of the Novel Oral Anticoagulants Apixaban, Dabigatran, Edoxaban, and Rivaroxaban in the Initial and Long-Term Treatment and Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists is the current standard of care (SOC) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment and prevention. Although novel oral anti-coagulants (NOACs) have been compared with SOC in this indication, no head-to-head randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared NOACs. A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs for the initial and long-term treatment of VTE.
METHODS
Electronic databases (accessed July 2014) were systematically searched to identify RCTs evaluating apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus SOC. Eligible patients included adults with an objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE) or both. A fixed-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted for outcomes of interest, and results were presented as relative risks (RR) and 95% credible intervals (Crl).
RESULTS
Six Phase III RCTs met criteria for inclusion: apixaban (one RCT; n = 5,395); rivaroxaban (two RCTs; n = 3,423/4,832); dabigatran (two RCTs; n = 2,539/2,568); edoxaban (one RCT; n = 8,240). There were no statistically significant differences between the NOACs with regard to the risk of 'VTE and VTE-related death. Apixaban treatment was associated with the most favourable safety profile of the NOACs, showing a statistically significantly reduced risk of 'major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleed' compared with rivaroxaban (0.47 [0.36, 0.61]), dabigatran (0.69 [0.51, 0.94]), and edoxaban (0.54 [0.41, 0.69]). Dabigatran was also associated with a significantly lower risk of 'major or CRNM bleed' compared with rivaroxaban (0.68 [0.53, 0.87]) and edoxaban (0.77 [0.60, 0.99]).
CONCLUSIONS
Indirect comparisons showed statistically similar reductions in the risk of 'VTE or VTE-related death for all NOACs. In contrast, reductions in 'major or CRNM bleed' for initial/long-term treatment were significantly better with apixaban compared with all other NOACs, and with dabigatran compared with rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Results from the current analysis indicate that the NOACs offer clinical benefit over conventional therapy while highlighting relative differences in their bleeding profile.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Dabigatran; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Thiazoles; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 26716830
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144856 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2013Trauma is a leading causes of death and disability in young people. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a principal cause of death. Trauma patients are at high risk of deep... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Trauma is a leading causes of death and disability in young people. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a principal cause of death. Trauma patients are at high risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The incidence varies according to the method used to measure the DVT and the location of the thrombosis. Due to prolonged rest and coagulation abnormalities, trauma patients are at increased risk of thrombus formation. Thromboprohylaxis, either mechanical or pharmacological, may decrease mortality and morbidity in trauma patients who survive beyond the first day in hospital, by decreasing the risk of VTE in this population.A previous systematic review did not find evidence of effectiveness for either pharmacological or mechanical interventions. However, this systematic review was conducted 10 years ago and most of the included studies were of poor quality. Since then new trials have been conducted. Although current guidelines recommend the use of thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients, there has not been a comprehensive and updated systematic review since the one published.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients on mortality and incidence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. To compare the effects of different thromboprophylaxis interventions and their effects according to the type of trauma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register (searched April 30 2009), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2009, issue 2 (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (Ovid) 1950 to April (week 3) 2009, EMBASE (Ovid) 1980 to (week 17) April 2009, PubMed (searched 29 April 2009), ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) (1970 to April 2009), ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (1990 to April 2009).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled clinical trials involving people of any age with major trauma defined by one or more of the following criteria: physiological: penetrating or blunt trauma with more than two organs and unstable vital signs, anatomical: people with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) higher than 9, mechanism: people who are involved in a 'high energy' event with a risk for severe injury despite stable or normal vital signs. We excluded trials that only recruited outpatients, trials that recruited people with hip fractures only, or people with acute spinal injuries.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Four authors, in pairs (LB and CM, EF and RC), independently examined the titles and the abstracts, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of the trials and analysed the data. PP resolved any disagreement between the authors.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixteen studies were included (n=3005). Four trials compared the effect of any type (mechanical and/or pharmacological) of prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis. Prophylaxis reduced the risk of DVT in people with trauma (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.84). Mechanical prophylaxis reduced the risk of DVT (RR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.73). Pharmacological prophylaxis was more effective than mechanical methods at reducing the risk of DVT (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.95). LMWH appeared to reduce the risk of DVT compared to UH (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.94). People who received both mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis had a lower risk of DVT (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.60)
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not find evidence that thromboprophylaxis reduces mortality or PE in any of the comparisons assessed. However, we found some evidence that thromboprophylaxis prevents DVT. Although the strength of the evidence was not high, taking into account existing information from other related conditions such as surgery, we recommend the use of any DVT prophylactic method for people with severe trauma.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Compression Bandages; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Pulmonary Embolism; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 23543562
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008303.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Stroke is the third leading cause of early death worldwide. Most ischaemic strokes are caused by a blood clot blocking an artery in the brain. Patient outcomes might be... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Stroke is the third leading cause of early death worldwide. Most ischaemic strokes are caused by a blood clot blocking an artery in the brain. Patient outcomes might be improved if they are offered anticoagulants that reduce their risk of developing new blood clots and do not increase the risk of bleeding. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1995, with updates in 2004, 2008, and 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of early anticoagulation (within the first 14 days of onset) for people with acute presumed or confirmed ischaemic stroke. Our hypotheses were that, compared with a policy of avoiding their use, early anticoagulation would be associated with: • reduced risk of death or dependence in activities of daily living a few months after stroke onset; • reduced risk of early recurrent ischaemic stroke; • increased risk of symptomatic intracranial and extracranial haemorrhage; and • reduced risk of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (August 2021); the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2021, Issue 7), in the Cochrane Library (searched 5 August 2021); MEDLINE (2014 to 5 August 2021); and Embase (2014 to 5 August 2021). In addition, we searched ongoing trials registries and reference lists of relevant papers. For previous versions of this review, we searched the register of the Antithrombotic Trialists' (ATT) Collaboration, consulted MedStrategy (1995), and contacted relevant drug companies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing early anticoagulant therapy (started within two weeks of stroke onset) with control in people with acute presumed or confirmed ischaemic stroke.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using RoB1 and GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 28 trials involving 24,025 participants. Quality of the trials varied considerably. We considered some studies to be at unclear or high risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, or reporting bias. Anticoagulants tested were standard unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins, heparinoids, oral anticoagulants, and thrombin inhibitors. Over 90% of the evidence is related to effects of anticoagulant therapy initiated within the first 48 hours of onset. No evidence suggests that early anticoagulation reduced the odds of death or dependence at the end of follow-up (odds ratio (OR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.03; 12 RCTs, 22,428 participants; high-certainty evidence). Similarly, we found no evidence suggesting that anticoagulant therapy started within the first 14 days of stroke onset reduced the odds of death from all causes (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.09; 22 RCTs, 22,602 participants; low-certainty evidence) during the treatment period. Although early anticoagulant therapy was associated with fewer recurrent ischaemic strokes (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.88; 12 RCTs, 21,665 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), it was also associated with an increase in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.90 to 3.21; 20 RCTs, 23,221 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Similarly, early anticoagulation reduced the frequency of symptomatic pulmonary emboli (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.81; 14 RCTs, 22,544 participants; high-certainty evidence), but this benefit was offset by an increase in extracranial haemorrhage (OR 2.99, 95% CI 2.24 to 3.99; 18 RCTs, 22,255 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Since the last version of this review, four new relevant studies have been published, and conclusions remain consistent. People who have early anticoagulant therapy after acute ischaemic stroke do not demonstrate any net short- or long-term benefit. Treatment with anticoagulants reduced recurrent stroke, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism but increased bleeding risk. Data do not support the routine use of any of the currently available anticoagulants for acute ischaemic stroke.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Anticoagulants; Brain Ischemia; Heparin; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Stroke; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 34676532
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000024.pub5 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery. Venous and... Nov 2022Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE, including pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]) is a preventable cause of hospital death. The Caprini... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE, including pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]) is a preventable cause of hospital death. The Caprini risk assessment model (RAM) is one of the most commonly used tools to assess VTE risk. The RAM is operationalized in clinical practice by grouping several risk scores into VTE risk categories that drive decisions on prophylaxis. A correlation between increasing Caprini scores and rising VTE risk is well-established. We assessed whether the increasing VTE risk categories assigned on the basis of recommended score ranges also correlate with increasing VTE risk.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of articles that used the Caprini RAM to assign VTE risk categories and that reported corresponding VTE rates. A Medline and EMBASE search retrieved 895 articles, of which 57 fulfilled inclusion criteria.
RESULTS
Forty-eight (84%) of the articles were cohort studies, 7 (12%) were case-control studies, and 2 (4%) were cross-sectional studies. The populations varied from postsurgical to medical patients. There was variability in the number of VTE risk categories assigned by individual studies (6 used 5 risk categories, 37 used 4, 11 used 3, and 3 used 2), and in the cutoff scores defining the risk categories (scores from 0 alone to 0-10 for the low-risk category; from ≥5 to ≥10 for high risk). The VTE rates reported for similar risk categories also varied across studies (0%-12.3% in the low-risk category; 0%-40% for high risk). The Caprini RAM is designed to assess composite VTE risk; however, two studies reported PE or DVT rates alone, and many of the other studies did not specify the types of DVTs analyzed. The Caprini RAM predicts VTE at 30 days after assessment; however, only 17 studies measured outcomes at 30 days; the remaining studies had either shorter or longer follow-ups (0-180 days).
CONCLUSIONS
The usefulness of the Caprini RAM is limited by heterogeneity in its implementation across centers. The score-derived VTE risk categorization has significant variability in the number of risk categories being used, the cutpoints used to define the risk categories, the outcome being measured, and the follow-up duration. This factor leads to similar risk categories being associated with different VTE rates, which impacts the clinical and research implications of the results. To enhance generalizability, there is a need for studies that validate the RAM in a broad population of medical and surgical patients, identify standardized risk categories, define risk of DVT and PE as distinct end points, and measure outcomes at standardized follow-up time points.
Topics: Humans; Pulmonary Embolism; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 35926802
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2022.05.003 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2013Intravenous tranexamic acid reduces bleeding in surgery, however, its effect on the risk of thromboembolic events is uncertain and an increased risk remains a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Intravenous tranexamic acid reduces bleeding in surgery, however, its effect on the risk of thromboembolic events is uncertain and an increased risk remains a theoretical concern. Because there is less systemic absorption following topical administration, the direct application of tranexamic acid to the bleeding surface has the potential to reduce bleeding with minimal systemic effects.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of the topical administration of tranexamic acid in the control of bleeding.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library; Ovid MEDLINE®, Ovid MEDLINE® In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE® Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE®; Embase Classic + Embase (OvidSP); PubMed and ISI Web of Science (including Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Science Citation Index (SCI-EXPANDED & CPCI-S)). We also searched online trials registers to identify ongoing or unpublished trials. The search was run on the 31st May 2013.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing topical tranexamic acid with no topical tranexamic acid or placebo in bleeding patients.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors examined the titles and abstracts of citations from the electronic databases for eligibility. Two authors extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias for each trial. Outcome measures of interest were blood loss, mortality, thromboembolic events (myocardial infarction, stroke, deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and receipt of a blood transfusion.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 29 trials involving 2612 participants. Twenty-eight trials involved patients undergoing surgery and one trial involved patients with epistaxis (nosebleed). Tranexamic acid (TXA) reduced blood loss by 29% (pooled ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.72; P < 0.0001). There was uncertainty regarding the effect on death (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.34; P = 0.11), myocardial infarction (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.08; P = 0.33), stroke (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.96; P = 0.49), deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.57; P = 0.38) and pulmonary embolism (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.09 to 3.15; P = 0.48). TXA reduced the risk of receiving a blood transfusion by a relative 45% (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.46; P < 0.0001). There was substantial statistical heterogeneity between trials for the blood loss and blood transfusion outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is reliable evidence that topical application of tranexamic acid reduces bleeding and blood transfusion in surgical patients, however the effect on the risk of thromboembolic events is uncertain. The effects of topical tranexamic acid in patients with bleeding from non-surgical causes has yet to be reliably assessed. Further high-quality trials are warranted to resolve these uncertainties before topical tranexamic acid can be recommended for routine use.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Blood Loss, Surgical; Epistaxis; Hemorrhage; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tranexamic Acid
PubMed: 23881695
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010562.pub2 -
JAMA Internal Medicine Mar 2020Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) receive venous thromboembolism (VTE) pharmacoprophylaxis. It is unclear which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Aspirin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Total Hip and Knee Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
IMPORTANCE
Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) receive venous thromboembolism (VTE) pharmacoprophylaxis. It is unclear which anticoagulant is preferable. Observational data suggest aspirin provides effective VTE prophylaxis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness and safety of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis after THR and TKR.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with no language restrictions, from inception to September 19, 2019, using MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and bibliographic searches. The computer-based searches combined terms and combinations of keywords related to the population (eg, hip replacement, knee replacement, hip arthroplasty, and knee arthroplasty), drug intervention (eg, aspirin, heparin, clexane, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin), and outcome (eg, venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and bleeding) in humans.
STUDY SELECTION
This study included RCTs assessing the effectiveness and safety of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis compared with other anticoagulants in adults undergoing THR and TKR. The RCTs with a placebo control group were excluded. The searches and study selection were independently performed.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This study followed PRISMA recommendations and used the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Data were screened and extracted independently by both reviewers. Study-specific relative risks (RRs) were aggregated using random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was any postoperative VTE (asymptomatic or symptomatic). Secondary outcomes were adverse events associated with therapy, including bleeding.
RESULTS
Of 437 identified articles, 13 RCTs were included (6060 participants; 3466 [57.2%] women; mean age, 63.0 years). The RR of VTE after THR and TKR was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.78-1.62) for aspirin compared with other anticoagulants. Comparable findings were observed for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.72-1.51) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.68-1.48). The risk of adverse events, including major bleeding, wound hematoma, and wound infection, was not statistically significantly different in patients receiving aspirin vs other anticoagulants. When analyzing THRs and TKRs separately, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of VTE, DVT, and PE between aspirin and other anticoagulants. Aspirin had a VTE risk not statistically significantly different from low-molecular-weight heparin (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.37-1.56) or rivaroxaban (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.56-4.12). The quality of the evidence ranged from low to high.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In terms of clinical effectiveness and safety profile, aspirin did not differ statistically significantly from other anticoagulants used for VTE prophylaxis after THR and TKR. Future trials should focus on noninferiority analysis of aspirin compared with alternative anticoagulants and cost-effectiveness.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Aspirin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 32011647
DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.6108 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jan 2023Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia associated with high morbidity and mortality. AF treatment is guided by a patient-provider risk-benefit... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia associated with high morbidity and mortality. AF treatment is guided by a patient-provider risk-benefit discussion regarding drug versus ablation or combination. Thermal ablation has a high rate of adverse events compared to pulsed field ablation (PFA). In this systematic review, we aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of PFA.
METHODS
The electronic search for relevant articles in English was completed in PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane library, Scopus, and Embase databases till July 2022. The screening was completed via the use of Covidence software. The risk of bias assessment and data extraction from the included studies was performed, and the narrative synthesis was performed accordingly.
RESULTS
A total of six studies were selected for review and 1897 patients receiving PFA were involved in these studies. Our review was focused on pulmonary vein isolation success, major adverse events, and arrhythmia recurrence. Successful pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was completed in 100% of cases except in two studies. In one of them, six out of seven patients (86%) in the epicardial cohort had successful PVI. In the MANIFEST-PF survey, the acute PVI success rate was 99.9%. The major complications were rare and included pericardial tamponade, vascular complications requiring surgery, and stroke. The atrial arrhythmia recurrence was higher in the thermal group than in the PFA group (39% vs. 11%).
CONCLUSIONS
The success rate of PVI by PFA is high, and major adverse events are low. PFA is found to decrease the recurrence of atrial arrhythmia compared to thermal ablation. Substantial randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to validate the efficacy and safety of PFA over conventional methods.
PubMed: 36675649
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12020719