Incidence Rate of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) and Utilization of a VTE Prophylaxis Orderset Module In Hospitalized Patients With Leukemia

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. S184-S185
Author(s):  
Alessandra Ferrajoli ◽  
Yvette DeJesus ◽  
Lee Cheng ◽  
Maria Alma Rodriguez
2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 107602961882328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alpesh Amin ◽  
W. Richey Neuman ◽  
Melissa Lingohr-Smith ◽  
Brandy Menges ◽  
Jay Lin

The objectives of this study were to examine venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis patterns and risk for VTE events during hospitalization and in the outpatient continuum of care among patients hospitalized for acute illnesses in the United States with stratification by different age groups and renal disease status. Acutely ill hospitalized patients were identified from the MarketScan databases (January 1, 2012-June 30, 2015) and grouped by age (<65, 65-74, ≥75 years old) and whether or not they had a baseline diagnosis of renal disease, separately. Of acutely ill hospitalized patients, 60.1% (n = 10 748) were <65 years old, 15.7% (n = 2803) were 65 to 74 years old, and 24.3% (n = 4344) were ≥75 years old; 32.9% (n = 5892) had baseline renal disease. Among the study cohorts, the majority of patients received no VTE prophylaxis regardless of age or baseline renal status (52.1%-63.6%). Rates of VTE during hospitalization and in the 6 months postdischarge were 4.7%, 4.6%, and 4.5% for patients <65, 65 to 74, and ≥75 years old, respectively, and 6.3% and 3.8% for patients with and without baseline renal disease. The risk for VTE was elevated for 30 to 40 days after index admission regardless of age and renal disease status.


2021 ◽  
pp. 26-40
Author(s):  
A. B. Sugraliyev ◽  
Sh. S. Aktayeva ◽  
Sh. B. Zhangelova ◽  
S. A. Shiller ◽  
Zh. M. Kussymzhanova ◽  
...  

Introduction. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major public health issue that is frequently underestimated. The primary objective of this multicenter study was to identify patients at risk for VTE, and to define the rate of patients receiving appropriate prophylaxis in the regions of Kazakhstan.Materials and methods. Standardized case report forms were filled by trained medical doctors on one predefined day in selected hospitals. Data were analyzed by independent biostatistician. Risk of VTE was categorized according to Caprini score which was recommended by 2004 American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines.Results. 432 patients from 4 regions of Kazakhstan; 169 (39.10%) medical patients and 263 (60.9%) surgical patients were eligible for the study. Patients were at low (10%), moderate (19.2%), high (33.6%) and very high risk (37.3%) for VTE. The main risk factors (RF) of VTE among hospitalized patients were heart failure (HF), obesity, prolonged bed rest, and the presence of acute non-infective inflammation. From total number of hospitalized patients with RF with indications to VTE prophylaxis, 58.1% of patients received pharmacological prophylaxis and only 24.6% of them received VTE prophylaxis according ACCP. On the other hand, 23.5% patients with the risk of VTE but who were not eligible for it received pharmacological prophylaxis.Conclusion. These results indicate the existence of inconsistency between eligibility for VTE prophylaxis on one hand and its application in practice (p < 0.001). Risk factors for VTE and eligibility for VTE prophylaxis are common, but VTE prophylaxis and guidelines application are low.


Thrombosis ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hasan M. Al-Dorzi ◽  
Hani M. Tamim ◽  
Abdulaziz S. Aldawood ◽  
Yaseen M. Arabi

Objectives. We compared venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis practices and incidence in critically ill cirrhotic versus noncirrhotic patients and evaluated cirrhosis as a VTE risk factor. Methods. A cohort of 798 critically ill patients followed for the development of clinically detected VTE were categorized according to the diagnosis of cirrhosis. VTE prophylaxis practices and incidence were compared. Results. Seventy-five (9.4%) patients had cirrhosis with significantly higher INR (2.2 ± 0.9 versus 1.3 ± 0.6, P<0.0001), lower platelet counts (115,000 ± 90,000 versus 258,000 ± 155,000/μL, P<0.0001), and higher creatinine compared to noncirrhotic patients. Among cirrhotics, 31 patients received only mechanical prophylaxis, 24 received pharmacologic prophylaxis, and 20 did not have any prophylaxis. Cirrhotic patients were less likely to receive pharmacologic prophylaxis (odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.04–0.14). VTE occurred in only two (2.7%) cirrhotic patients compared to 7.6% in noncirrhotic patients (P=0.11). The incidence rate was 2.2 events per 1000 patient-ICU days for cirrhotic patients and 3.6 events per 1000 patient-ICU days for noncirrhotics (incidence rate ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.15–2.52). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, cirrhosis was not associated with VTE risk (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.10–1.67). Conclusions. In critically ill cirrhotic patients, VTE incidence did not statistically differ from that in noncirrhotic patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Imad Hajj ◽  
Mahmoud AL-Masri ◽  
Kaldoun Bashaireh ◽  
Mohammed Bani Hani ◽  
Shadi Hamouri ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There is a growing body of evidence showing substantial underuse of appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients at risk. In the present study, our goal was to assess the current practices in the use rate of VTE prophylaxis among hospitalized patients in Jordan and Lebanon. Methods A cross-sectional, multicenter, observational study was conducted on 40 centers across Lebanon and Jordan. We included patients who were admitted to the participating hospitals for the treatment of a serious medical or surgical illness. The patients’ records were screened for the fulfillment of inclusion/exclusion criteria during a single assessment visit. The proportion of medical and surgical patients who were at risk of VTE and the thrombo-prophylactic measures employed by physicians for these patients were assessed according to the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP 2016) guidelines. Results The present study included 704 patients (400 from Jordan and 304 from Lebanon) with a mean age of 54.9 ± 17.5 years. Almost 59% of the patients received prophylaxis treatment in form of pharmacological anticoagulant prophylaxis and/or mechanical prophylaxis. Low molecular weight heparin was the most commonly used anticoagulant for VTE prophylaxis in 366 out of the total 704 (51.9%) patients in the analysis cohort. Two hundred and sixteen patients (52, 95% confidence interval [47.1–56.9%]) received appropriate prophylactic agents out of 415 patients who were eligible for prophylaxis according to the ACCP 2016 guidelines. On the other hand, 199 (72.1, 95% confidence interval [66.4–77.3%) patients received prophylaxis out of 276 ineligible patients. The rate of compliance to guidelines showed wide variations according to the type of hospital, specialty, and the patients’ age. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only age was a significant predictor of appropriate VTE prophylaxis (odds ratio [OR] 1.05, P < 0.001). Conclusion The rates of the appropriate use of VTE prophylaxis are low in Lebanon and Jordan. There is a lack of compliance to guidelines for VTE prophylaxis use for hospitalized patients in both countries.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 1729-1729
Author(s):  
Erica A. Peterson ◽  
Hayley Merkeley ◽  
Elena Cavazzi ◽  
Leena Chen ◽  
Agnes Y.Y. Lee

Abstract Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in patients with underlying cancer. This risk is higher during hospitalization for acute medical conditions. Consequently, routine thromboprophylaxis is recommended in hospitalized cancer patients. A retrospective review of admissions to the Leukemia/Bone Marrow Transplant (LBMT) unit at our institution between January and June 2010 demonstrated that VTE prophylaxis was prescribed in only 6.6% of admissions. In March 2012, a mandatory VTE risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis protocol was introduced in the LBMT unit as part of a hospital-wide policy to improve thromboprophylaxis compliance for all hospitalized patients. Objectives The primary goal is to assess the impact of the VTE thromboprophylaxis protocol on the use of thromboprophylaxis in the LBMT unit. Secondary aims of this study are to evaluate the incidence of VTE (including catheter-related thrombosis [CRT]) and bleeding after the introduction of the protocol. Methods A retrospective chart review of all admissions to the Vancouver General Hospital LBMT unit between March 1, 2012 and February 28, 2013 was performed (intervention cohort [IC]). Only the first admission for each patient during the study period was included in the analysis. Data were extracted from electronic medical records using standardized forms. The primary outcome, rate of VTE prophylaxis, was compared to historical data from January 2010 to June 2010 (historical cohort [HC]). Results 361 patients were included in the IC and 166 patients were included in the HC. All baseline patient characteristics, thrombotic risk factors and bleeding risk factors were similar between the cohorts with the exception of the presence of thrombocytopenia (82.0% IC vs. 68.7% HC, p=0.001) (Table 1 ). At least one dose of thromboprophylaxis was prescribed in 14.0% of admissions in the IC vs. 6.6% of admissions in the HC. This increase was statistically significant (p=0.01). Despite the low prophylaxis prevalence, VTE was uncommon, occurring in only 1.9% patients in the IC (pulmonary embolism [PE] in 5 patients, CRT in 1 patient and left ventricular thrombus in 1 patient) vs. 2.4% patients in the HC (deep vein thrombosis +/- PE in 3 patients, CRT and PE in 1 patient) (p=0.7). In contrast, bleeding complications were frequent (even in the absence of anticoagulants), with 13.3% of patients in the IC and 19.3% of patients in the HC experiencing at least one bleeding episode (p=0.08). 22 patients (6.1%) in the IC and 8 patients (4.8%) in the HC died during the study period. While fatal bleeding events occurred in 2 patients in each cohort in the absence of anticoagulation, no deaths due to VTE were observed. Conclusions After introduction of a standardized protocol, VTE prophylaxis rate in hospitalized LBMT patients significantly increased by over 2-fold but remains low. No changes in bleeding and VTE rates were observed despite the increase in prophylaxis compliance. Although thrombocytopenia is likely the prime reason for withholding prophylaxis, further review is ongoing to elucidate the reasons why thromboprophylaxis was not prescribed in the majority of patients. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 554-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott G. Garland ◽  
Christina E. DeRemer ◽  
Steven M. Smith ◽  
John G. Gums

Objective: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of the factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor betrixaban for extended-duration prophylaxis of acute medically ill patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk factors. Data Sources: A MEDLINE/PubMed (January 1990 to October 2017) search was conducted using the following keywords: betrixaban, PRT054021, FXa inhibitor, novel oral anticoagulant, NOAC, direct oral anticoagulant, DOAC, and target specific oral anticoagulant, TSOAC. References of identified articles were searched by hand for additional relevant citations. Study Selection and Data Extraction: We included English-language articles evaluating betrixaban pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, or safety in human subjects for VTE prophylaxis. Data Synthesis: Betrixaban is a FXa inhibitor that decreases prothrombinase activity and thrombin generation. Betrixaban efficacy and safety has been compared with that of enoxaparin for prophylaxis of VTE in acutely ill medical patients. In the APEX trial and substudies, extended-duration betrixaban was superior in efficacy to standard-duration enoxaparin in patients at high risk for VTE, including those with elevated D-dimer levels (≥2× upper limit of normal) and of older age (≥75 years). Betrixaban is noninferior to enoxaparin in rates of major bleeding, but the former is associated with more clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events. Conclusion: Betrixaban is the first oral agent approved for extended-duration VTE prophylaxis in acutely ill hospitalized patients. Extended-duration thromboprophylaxis with betrixaban reduces the risk of VTE compared with standard-duration thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin but is associated with increased risk of bleeding.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 2946-2946 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael H. Kroll ◽  
Alessandra Ferrajoli ◽  
Lee Cheng ◽  
Jack L. Watkins ◽  
Maria Alma Rodriguez

Abstract Introduction The incidence of VTE in patients with leukemia is not known and the benefit of VTE prophylaxis in patients with leukemia has not been studied. For all hospitalized cancer patients the reported incidence of VTE has ranged from 0.6% to 18%. National guidelines and regulatory standards dictate that all patients be assessed for their risk of VTE and be treated accordingly. Beginning in August of 2011 our institution developed a VTE prophylaxis module that was integrated into hospital admission order sets. This module was aimed at standardizing the documentation of VTE risk assessment and ordering of VTE prophylaxis across all hospitalized patients, including patients with leukemia. We conducted this analysis to describe the utilization of the VTE prophylaxis order set module and the incidence rate of VTE events in hospitalized patients with leukemia. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of patients who were diagnosed with leukemia and were hospitalized at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2012 (1 year). All patients with hospital length of stay more than or equal to 3 days were included. The following information was collected for each Patient: type of leukemia, age, gender, VTE prophylaxis, and medication used for prophylaxis (unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)). Use of mechanical prophylaxis (graduated sequential compression devices, and compression stockings) and contraindications to pharmacologic prophylaxis were collected for patients in which the order set module was used. Diagnoses of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE) were objectively confirmed by venous Doppler ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) or ventilation perfusion (VQ) scan. The unit of analysis was hospitalizations. No statistical comparisons were made. Results Over the 1 year 2686 hospitalizations occurred among 905 patients. Females comprised 40% of patients, 37% were aged 65 years or older, 66% of the patients were white, with African-American representing 11% and Hispanics 16%. The distribution of leukemia diagnosis among patients was acute myeloid leukemia (AML) 52.2%, acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL) 22.4%, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) 12.9%, chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) 6.5%, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) 3.4% and other leukemias 2.4%. There were 103 VTE events among the 2686 hospitalizations for an overall incidence rate of 3.8%. DVT was the most common event (3.2%), while PE alone (0.9%) or DVT+ PE (0.2%) were rare. VTE events by leukemia type were AML 4.3%, ALL 2.8%, CLL 5.1%, CML 3.8%, CMML 3.9% and other leukemias 0.0%. The VTE prophylaxis order set module was utilized in 92.2% of admissions and from those mechanical prophylaxis was the most commonly ordered intervention, 1496 (55.7%), followed by no prophylactic intervention, 931 (34.6%), and 49 (1.8%) with both mechanical and pharmacologic prophylaxis. The VTE incidence by prophylaxis type was 4.0% for mechanical prophylaxis, 3.8% for no prophylaxis, and 6.1% for both mechanical and pharmacologic prophylaxis. There were 210 (7.8%) admissions in which the VTE prophylaxis module was not utilized and the incidence of VTE was 2.4%. Of these admissions 40 (19.0 %) were prescribed pharmacologic prophylaxis based on pharmacy dispensing records. Conclusion This observational study demonstrates that the overall incidence of VTE in hospitalized patients with leukemia is 4% overall, and occurs in both acute and chronic leukemias. The most common event is DVT alone, and PE events (with or without DVT) are very rare. Hence, the role of pharmacologic or other interventions in preventing DVT in leukemia patients is not clear. Future studies should prospectively evaluate risk factors that predict DVT, as well as measure the effectiveness of current strategies for VTE prophylaxis in patients with leukemia. Disclosures: Kroll: Aplagon Therapeutics: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rodriguez:Pfizer: Research Funding; Glaxo-smith Kline: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Ortho-Biotech: Research Funding.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 1394-1400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam S Faye ◽  
Kenneth W Hung ◽  
Kimberly Cheng ◽  
John W Blackett ◽  
Anna Sophia Mckenney ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Despite increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), pharmacologic prophylaxis rates remain low. We sought to understand the reasons for this by assessing factors associated with VTE prophylaxis in patients with IBD and the safety of its use. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study conducted among patients hospitalized between January 2013 and August 2018. The primary outcome was VTE prophylaxis, and exposures of interest included acute and chronic bleeding. Medical records were parsed electronically for covariables, and logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with VTE prophylaxis. Results There were 22,499 patients studied, including 474 (2%) with IBD. Patients with IBD were less likely to be placed on VTE prophylaxis (79% with IBD, 87% without IBD), particularly if hematochezia was present (57% with hematochezia, 86% without hematochezia). Among patients with IBD, admission to a medical service and hematochezia (adjusted odds ratio 0.27; 95% CI, 0.16–0.46) were among the strongest independent predictors of decreased VTE prophylaxis use. Neither hematochezia nor VTE prophylaxis was associated with increased blood transfusion rates or with a clinically significant decline in hemoglobin level during hospitalization. Conclusion Hospitalized patients are less likely to be placed on VTE prophylaxis if they have IBD, and hematochezia may drive this. Hematochezia appeared to be minor and was unaffected by VTE prophylaxis. Education related to the safety of VTE prophylaxis in the setting of minor hematochezia may be a high-yield way to increase VTE prophylaxis rates in patients with IBD.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document