scholarly journals Graduated compression stockings in hip fractures

2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (7) ◽  
pp. 463-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Alsawadi ◽  
M Loeffler
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Hip Fractures ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Reference List ◽  
Compression Stockings ◽  
Graduated Compression Stockings

INTRODUCTION Hip fractures are the most common cause of acute admissions to orthopaedics and in the UK approximately 70,000–75,000 hip fractures occur annually. Hip fractures carry a significant risk of developing a venous thromboembolism. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) estimated that the risk of developing a venous thromboembolism in patients with hip fractures who do not receive thromboprophylaxis is 43%. In their recent guidelines, NICE recommended that combined mechanical and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis should be offered to patients undergoing hip fracture surgery and mechanical prophylaxis should be commenced at admission. The aim of this review was to search for available evidence that could support using graduated compression stockings combined with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in hip fracture patients. METHODS NICE guidelines and the reference list of the guidance were reviewed and a thorough literature search was performed on main electronic databases (MEDLINE®, Embase™ and the Cochrane Library). RESULTS A literature search was unable to find sufficient evidence to support the use of graduated compression stockings combined with LMWH in hip fracture settings. The guidelines are critically reviewed and the available evidence discussed. CONCLUSIONS The evidence supporting these recommendations is very limited and there is considerable concern regarding the safety and efficacy of the mechanical devices used in thromboprophylaxis. Further studies are needed urgently before specific guidelines can be agreed confidently for patients with hip fractures.

scholarly journals Systematic review on the benefit of graduated compression stockings in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in low-risk surgical patients

2020 ◽  
pp. 026835552095859
Author(s):  
M Machin ◽  
HC Younan ◽  
S Smith ◽  
Safa Salim ◽  
AH Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Included Study ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Compression Stockings ◽  
Vte Prophylaxis ◽  
Eligible Article ◽  
Graduated Compression Stockings

Objectives The aim of this systematic review is to assess the performance of graduated compression stockings (GCS) in comparison to no venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in the prevention of hospital-acquired thrombosis in low-risk surgical patients undergoing short-stay procedures. Methods Aligning with PRISMA guidelines, online databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, Cochrane Library® and trial registries were searched. Eligible articles reported the VTE rate in low-risk surgical patients either receiving GCS or no VTE prophylaxis. Results Narrative synthesis was performed on a single eligible article. The included study arm consisted of participants undergoing knee arthroscopy with the use of GCS alone reporting a total of 29 VTE events (4.4%), 16 of which were asymptomatic DVTs (2.4%). Conclusion There is a complete lack of evidence to support the use of GCS in the prevention of HAT for low-risk surgical patients. An adequately powered trial is required to provide level-IA evidence to support this practice.

scholarly journals The association of fracture risk in atrial fibrillation patients and long-term anticoagulant therapy category: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PeerJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. e10683
Author(s):  
Jun Chen ◽  
Lingchun Lyu ◽  
Jiayi Shen ◽  
Chunlai Zeng ◽  
Cheng Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Fracture Risk ◽  
Hip Fractures ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Hip Fracture Risk ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective Our study aimed to assess the risk of all fractures and hip fractures in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who took non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to warfarin. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library and Clinical Trials.gov Website. Reviewed related researches up to January 31, 2020, to identify studies with more than 12 months of follow-up data. The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO Number: CRD42020156893). Results We included five RCT studies, and five observational studies that contained a total of 326,846 patients in our meta-analysis. Our meta-analysis showed that patients taken NOACs had no significant all fracture risk (RR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.81–1.01]) and hip fracture risk (RR = 0.92, 95% CI [0.82–1.03]) compared with those taken warfarin. Subanalysis showed that the risk of all fractures and hip fractures treated by NOACs were significant lower compared with warfarin in observational studies compared with RCT studies. Also, a subanalysis across the duration of anticoagulation showed the NOACs users have lower all fracture risk than warfarin users when the duration of anticoagulation ≤2 years (RR = 0.89, 95% CI [0.80–0.99]). Further analysis, significant lower all fracture risk in the rivaroxaban therapy (RR = 0.81; 95% CI [0.76–0.86]) compared with warfarin but no statistical significance in hip fracture. There were no significant difference of all fracture risk and hip fracture risk in dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban therapy compared with warfarin. Conclusion The meta-analysis demonstrated that NOACs associated with a significantly lower all fracture risk compared with warfarin when the duration of anticoagulation more than 2 years. Rivaroxaban users had lower risk of all fracture than warfarin users in AF patients. But there was no evidence to verify apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatranin could decrease all fracture and hip fracture risk compared with warfarin.

scholarly journals Graduated compression stockings as adjuvant to pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis in elective surgical patients (GAPS study): randomised controlled trial

BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m1309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Shalhoub ◽  
Rebecca Lawton ◽  
Jemma Hudson ◽  
Christopher Baker ◽  
Andrew Bradbury ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Compression Stockings ◽  
Graduated Compression Stockings ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractObjectivesTo investigate whether the use of graduated compression stockings (GCS) offers any adjuvant benefit when pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis is used for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing elective surgery.DesignOpen, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.SettingSeven National Health Service tertiary hospitals in the United Kingdom.Participants1905 elective surgical inpatients (≥18 years) assessed as being at moderate or high risk of venous thromboembolism were eligible and consented to participate.InterventionParticipants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis alone or LMWH pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis and GCS.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was imaging confirmed lower limb deep vein thrombosis with or without symptoms, or pulmonary embolism with symptoms within 90 days of surgery. Secondary outcome measures were quality of life, compliance with stockings and LMWH, lower limb complications related to GCS, bleeding complications, adverse reactions to LMWH, and all cause mortality.ResultsBetween May 2016 and January 2019, 1905 participants were randomised. 1858 were included in the intention to treat analysis (17 were identified as ineligible after randomisation and 30 did not undergo surgery). A primary outcome event occurred in 16 of 937 (1.7%) patients in the LMWH alone group compared with 13 of 921 (1.4%) in the LMWH and GCS group. The risk difference between the two groups was 0.30% (95% confidence interval −0.65% to 1.26%). Because the 95% confidence interval did not cross the non-inferiority margin of 3.5% (P<0.001 for non-inferiority), LMWH alone was confirmed to be non-inferior.ConclusionsFor patients who have elective surgery and are at moderate or high risk of venous thromboembolism, administration of pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis alone is non-inferior to a combination of pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis and GCS. These findings indicate that GCS might be unnecessary in most patients undergoing elective surgery.Trial registrationISRCTN13911492.

Does perioperative use of tranexamic acid in hip fracture patients increase the risk of venous thromboembolism and reduce the need for postoperative transfusions?

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (12) ◽  
pp. 378-382
Author(s):  
James Geddes ◽  
Greg McConaghie
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Tranexamic Acid ◽  
Hip Fractures ◽  
Hip Fracture Surgery ◽  
Postoperative Blood Transfusion ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Fracture Surgery ◽  
Postoperative Haemoglobin

Perioperative tranexamic acid use is a popular choice among many surgeons for reducing surgical blood loss and its sequelae. While there is evidence in the literature that tranexamic acid use is effective in reducing blood loss in surgery for patients with hip fractures, there is less information on whether it leads to thromboembolic complications. We undertook a retrospective study in patients with hip fractures at two local hospitals to investigate if there was an increased risk of venous thromboembolism in patients who received tranexamic acid, and whether it reduced perioperative blood loss and the need for transfusion. We found that tranexamic acid used in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery reduced the drop in postoperative haemoglobin and the need for postoperative blood transfusion but was not associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document