scholarly journals Primary thromboprophylaxis for cancer patients with central venous catheters – a reappraisal of the evidence

2006 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
M S Cunningham ◽  
B White ◽  
D Hollywood ◽  
J O'Donnell
2000 ◽  
Vol 20 (03) ◽  
pp. 143-145
Author(s):  
H. D. Bruhn ◽  
F. Gieseler

SummaryCancer patients have additive risk factors for thrombosis especially if permanent central catheters (port systems) are used for the delivery of chemotherapy. In our hospital the rate of thrombotic complications is below 5% for cancer patients receiving chemotherapy via port systems. This is in contrast to clinical studies, which have shown that up to 60% of catheters acquire clots that obstruct more than 50% of the vascular lumen. It is reasonable to believe that complications arising from thrombotic catheter alterations, such as bacterial hosting or micro-emboli, are clinically underestimated. The identification of thrombotic alterations of permanent central venous catheters in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy is substantial for the estimation whether anticoagulation strategies should be used as prophylaxis.


2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (21) ◽  
pp. 3665-3667 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Carr ◽  
Ian Rabinowitz

PURPOSE: There is an established benefit of prophylactic warfarin in cancer patients with central venous catheters. This study assessed the compliance rate of prophylactic low-dose warfarin prescription in cancer patients with central venous catheters at a single institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Oncology patients with central venous catheters were identified by a retrospective chart review. Information retrieved included whether prophylactic warfarin had been prescribed and whether the patient had suffered a thrombotic or bleeding event. After the initial chart review, physicians were notified of the benefits of warfarin prophylaxis, and subsequently, a physician-independent mechanism of prescribing prophylactic warfarin was instituted. After each of these interventions, we retrospectively reviewed a further two cohorts of patients to assess compliance with warfarin prophylaxis. RESULTS: During the baseline study, only 10% of patients were prescribed prophylactic warfarin. After physician notification, the compliance rate increased to only 20% (P = .3). After instituting the physician-independent mechanism of prescribing prophylactic warfarin, the compliance rate increased to 95% (P < .001). The rate of catheter-related thrombosis was 11% for patients who were prescribed warfarin compared with 21% in those who were not anticoagulated (P = .2). CONCLUSION: At our institution, the rate of prescribing prophylactic warfarin was low in this patient population, and there was a reluctance of treating physicians to change their prescribing practice. Mechanisms exist to improve the rate of anticoagulant prophylaxis in this clinical setting. We recommend that institutions review their rate of compliance with prophylactic anticoagulation for patients with central venous catheters and solid tumors.


Anaesthesia ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 62 (8) ◽  
pp. 818-823 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. H. Hsu ◽  
S. S. Wang ◽  
D. V. Lu ◽  
K. I. Cheng ◽  
C. K. Wang ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Elie A Akl ◽  
Ganesh Kamath ◽  
Victor E D Yosuico ◽  
Seo Young Kim ◽  
Maddalena Barba ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 455-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya-Lou Pu ◽  
Zhuang-Shuang Li ◽  
Xiao-Xu Zhi ◽  
Yi-An Shi ◽  
Ai-Feng Meng ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.Y. Liu ◽  
L.J. Huang ◽  
W.S. Wang ◽  
T.L. Chen ◽  
C.C. Yen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document