Contemporary approach to primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism regarding the impact of risk factors on anticoagulation therapy duration

Adequate thromboprophylaxis primarily requires timely detection of reversible and irreversible risk factors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and their categorization. It is important to note that the highest percentage of VTE episodes occur in non-surgical (medical) patients and that VTE develops in a large number of surgical patients upon hospital discharge; this emphasizes the need for adequate VTE prevention in inflammatory diseases, acute medical illness and other medical diseases as well as for prolonging and optimizing the anticoagulant regimen after surgical intervention in the primary VTE prophylaxis. As almost completely unrecognized and neglected major risk factors of VTE in clinical practice, we particularly point out the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure, especially in NYHA functional class III and IV patients with significantly reduced left heart ventricle. It is necessary to raise clinicians? awareness of a potential danger from wrongly and one-sidedly interpreted dyspnea and coughing signs in patients with COPD as typical symptoms of basic respiratory disease as well as from ascribing the signs of disease aggravation in heart failure patients exclusively to cardial status worsening, neglecting the possibility of having unrecognized and untreated pulmonary embolism at issue. Contemporary way of life enhances the development of new VTE risk factors such as traveler?s thrombosis, in particular during long-haul flights as well as in individuals sitting at a computer for prolonged periods (e-thrombosis). Determining and recognizing VTE risk factors, especially those formerly neglected nonsurgical ones and simultaneous presence of multiple risk factors within a given period is required for defining an adequate anticoagulant regimen in primary VTE prophylaxis for surgical and non-surgical (medical) patients.

Download Full-text

The International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE): Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Practices in Acutely Ill Medical Patients.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v104.11.1762.1762 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 104 (11) ◽

pp. 1762-1762 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Victor F. Tapson ◽

Herve Decousus ◽

Jean-Fran[ccedi]ois Bergmann ◽

Beng H. Chong ◽

James B. Froehlich ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Major Surgery ◽

Medical Illness ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Median Length ◽

Thromboembolism Prophylaxis ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Elastic Stockings

Abstract Background Despite consensus group recommendations indicating that medical patients should receive appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, prophylaxis practices remain poorly characterized. This analysis of IMPROVE, a prospective study of acutely ill medical patients, describes in-hospital prophylaxis practices prior to the publication of updated VTE prevention guidelines by the American College of Chest Physicians. Methods Patient recruitment began in July 2002. Patients ≥18 years old, and hospitalized for ≥3 days with an acute medical illness are enrolled consecutively. Exclusion criteria are: therapeutic antithrombotics/thrombolytics at admission; major surgery or trauma during 3 months prior to admission; and VTE treatment begun within 24 hours of admission. Results Data were from 4315 patients (32% from USA) enrolled up to 30 June 2004 in 37 hospitals in 11 countries (76% with 3-month follow-up data). Patients are 50% female, median (IQR) age 69 (50–80) years, median length of hospital stay 8 (5–14) days, median weight 68 (58–80) kg, and 40% were immobile for ≥3 days (median length of immobility 7 [4–14] days, including immobility immediately prior to admission). In-hospital VTE prophylaxis was received by 41% of patients (Table 1). Of patients with no risk factors (44%), one risk factor (40%), or ≥2 risk factors (16%), 25%, 49%, and 67% received prophylaxis, respectively. 12% of IMPROVE patients would have been eligible for inclusion in the MEDENOX study. Of these, only 52% received prophylaxis in hospital. Prophylaxis was provided to 6% of patients during the 3-month follow-up period, and continued in 11% of patients after discharge. Conclusions Only 41% of IMPROVE patients received VTE prophylaxis, with considerable variation in types and regimens of prophylaxis used. While MEDENOX showed the benefits of VTE prophylaxis (enoxaparin 40 mg) in acutely ill medical patients, only half of MEDENOX-eligible patients received prophylaxis. Table 1. Use of in-hospital VTE prophylaxis (N=4315) VTE prophylaxis Patients receiving VTE prophylaxis, % ROW, rest of world; *Excluding elastic stockings and aspirin ≥1 type of VTE prophylaxis* 41 LMWH - USA (Q12h, Qd) 7 (5, 1) LMWH- ROW (Q12h, Qd) 31 (29, 2) UFH - USA (Q12h, Q8h) 28 (15, 11) UFH - ROW (Q12h, Q8h) 6 (5, 0) Intermittent pneumatic compression (USA, ROW) 6 (19, 0) Aspirin (USA, ROW) 4 (7, 3) Elastic stockings (USA, ROW) 6 (3, 8)

Download Full-text

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Practices in Acutely Ill Medical Patients with Heart Failure (NYHA Class III or IV): Findings from IMPROVE.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v106.11.1869.1869 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 106 (11) ◽

pp. 1869-1869

Author(s):

Ricardo Pavanello ◽

James B. Froehlich ◽

Victor Tapson ◽

Jean-Francois Bergmann ◽

Mashio Nakamura ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Heart Failure ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Nyha Class ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Class Iii ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Heart Failure Patients ◽

Patients With Heart Failure ◽

The Usa ◽

Pharmacologic Prophylaxis

Abstract Background Acutely ill medical patients with heart failure have an increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and expert consensus guidelines recommend that they should receive VTE prophylaxis. However, little data is available on physician’s practices for providing prophylaxis to these patients. Our aim was to characterize VTE prophylaxis practices in acutely ill hospitalized medical patients with heart failure (NYHA class III or IV) enrolled in the International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE). Methods Patient recruitment began in July 2002. Patients aged ≥ 18 years and hospitalized for ≥ 3 days with an acute medical illness are enrolled consecutively. Exclusion criteria are: therapeutic antithrombotic agents or thrombolytics at admission, major surgery or trauma during 3 months prior to admission, and VTE treatment within 24 hours of admission. Results Of 6946 patients enrolled up to 31 March 2005 in 49 hospitals in 12 countries, 784 (11%) were heart failure patients. Compared with patients without heart failure, patients with heart failure were more likely to be in an ICU/CCU (13% vs 8%), immobile ≥ 4days (50% vs 30%), over 60 years old (85% vs 61%), perceived to be obese (20% vs 13%), or have respiratory failure (27% vs 17%; p<0.0001 for all). In total, only 51% of heart failure patients received pharmacologic prophylaxis and 61% received any type of prophylaxis. Pharmacologic prophylaxis type varied by region with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) used less often, and unfractionated heparin (UFH) used more often in the USA compared with other participating countries (see Table). Aspirin and warfarin were used as VTE prophylaxis in 6% and 3% of heart failure patients, respectively. Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) was used more often in the USA than in other countries (24% vs 0.2%). Conclusions Although acutely ill medical patients with heart failure are at risk of VTE and should receive prophylaxis, only 61% of these patients in IMPROVE actually received any type of prophylaxis. This reflects poor physician-awareness of the benefits of prophylaxis in this patient group and suggests that significant opportunity exists to improve physician practices. Table. VTE prophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients with heart failure VTE prophylaxis (% patients) USA Other participating countries LMWH 15 46 UFH 27 13 Aspirin 8 4 Warfarin 5 1 Any pharmacologic prophylaxis 43 56 IPC 24 0.2 Elastic stockings 6 7

Download Full-text

Factors at Admission That Are Predictive of Increased In-Hospital Bleeding in Acutely Ill Medical Patients: Findings from the International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE).

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v106.11.264.264 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 106 (11) ◽

pp. 264-264

Author(s):

Hervé Decousus ◽

Rainer B. Zotz ◽

Victor F. Tapson ◽

Beng H. Chong ◽

James B. Froehlich ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Univariate Analysis ◽

Medical Illness ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Risk Of Bleeding ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Clinically Significant

Abstract Background Although clinical studies have not shown a significant difference between the risk of bleeding in acutely ill medical patients receiving pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis and those receiving placebo, fear of bleeding may lead physicians to withhold pharmacologic prophylaxis for patients who should receive it. We therefore aimed to determine the incidence of, and risk factors for in-hospital bleeding in hospitalized acutely ill medical patients in IMPROVE, an international, observational registry. Methods Patients aged ≥18 years, hospitalized ≥3 days with an acute medical illness have been enrolled consecutively since July 2002. Exclusion criteria: therapeutic antithrombotics/thrombolytics at admission, major surgery or trauma during 3 months prior to admission, and VTE treatment within 24 hours of admission. Patients bleeding immediately before, or at admission were excluded from this analysis. Factors present at admission and associated with increased risk of in-hospital bleeding (defined as major or clinically significant nonmajor [Büller et al. N Engl J Med2003;349:1695–702]) were identified by univariate analysis (p<0.15) and included in a multiple logistic regression model (significant at p<0.05). The model was adjusted for patients’ length of stay in hospital. Results Data were from 5960 patients enrolled up to 31 March 2005 in 49 hospitals (12 countries). In-hospital bleeding occurred in 170 (2.9%) patients: 68 (1.1%) major and 102 (1.7%) clinically significant nonmajor bleeding. Independent risk factors for in-hospital bleeding are shown in the Table. In-hospital prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight and unfractionated heparin were not independently associated with an increased risk of bleeding when added to the analysis (p=0.51 and 0.38, respectively). In patients with 0, 1, 2 or ≥3 of these risk factors, the incidences of major in-hospital bleeding were 0.1%, 0.4%, 1.2% and 5.2%, respectively. Conclusions In this unselected patient population, the rate of major in-hospital bleeding was low (1.1%) and similar to that in the MEDENOX study (1.0%), a major clinical study of VTE prophylaxis. Factors that we identified will be valuable for predicting the risk of in-hospital bleeding in acutely ill medical patients. Table. Factors predictive of an increased risk of in-hospital bleeding in acutely ill medical patients Factor Odds ratio 95% confidence interval Active gastroduodenal ulcer 5.38 2.90–10.00 Bleeding disorder 4.54 2.02–10.19 Hepatic failure 3.34 1.80–6.19 Serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dL 2.29 1.63-3.21 Current cancer 2.08 1.43-3.03 Central venous catheter 2.00 1.31-3.05 ICU/CCU stay 1.92 1.23-3.02 Immobile ≥ 4 days 1.75 1.24-2.46 Ischemic heart disease 1.57 1.02-2.40

Download Full-text

Influence of Perceived Risk Factors for Bleeding on Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Practices in Acutely Ill Medical Patients: Findings from IMPROVE.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v106.11.917.917 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 106 (11) ◽

pp. 917-917

Author(s):

Manuel Monreal ◽

Rainer B. Zotz ◽

Hervé Decousus ◽

Beng H. Chong ◽

Geno Merli ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Platelet Count ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Hepatic Failure ◽

Perceived Risk ◽

Medical Illness ◽

Cumulative Number ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Pharmacologic Prophylaxis

Abstract Background Acutely ill medical patients at risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) should receive VTE prophylaxis. However, factors perceived by physicians to increase patients’ risk of bleeding may influence VTE prophylaxis practices. In this analysis from The International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE), we examined whether perceived risk factors for bleeding had a significant influence on physicians’ prescribing of in-hospital prophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients. Methods Patients aged ≥18 years and hospitalized ≥3 days with an acute medical illness have been enrolled consecutively since July 2002. Risk factors considered were: severe renal failure, known bleeding disorder, hemorrhagic stroke, thrombocytopenia, bacterial endocarditis, active gastroduodenal ulcer, NSAID use, hepatic failure, age, immobility and alcoholism. Factors associated with different prescription rates of prophylaxis compared with rates in patients without these factors were identified and included in a multiple logistic regression model (significance at p<0.05). Results Up to 31 March 2005, 6946 patients were enrolled in 49 hospitals in 12 countries. Pharmacologic prophylaxis was received by 42%, 25%, 16%, and 14% of patients with a platelet count at admission >100, 50–100, 20–50 and <20x109/L, respectively (p<0.0001), and 43%, 39%, 30% and 32% of patients with none, 1, 2 and 3 risk factors for bleeding (p<0.0001). Factors independently associated with a lower/higher prescription rate of heparin-based prophylaxis compared with the risk in patients without these factors are shown in the Table. Conclusions The likelihood that hospitalized acutely ill medical patients receive in-hospital pharmacologic prophylaxis decreases as their platelet count at admission decreases, or their cumulative number of perceived risk factors for bleeding increases. Further studies are needed to determine whether the changes in prophylaxis practices observed in this study are justified. Table. Factors Independently Associated with a Higher/lower Rate of Heparin-based VTE Prophylaxis Factor Odds Ratio 95% Confidence Interval Age (per 10-year increase) 1.19 1.66–1.22 Immobility (per 10-day increase) 1.03 1.02–1.05 Alcoholism 0.62 0.46–0.83 Thrombocytopenia 0.60 0.48–0.74 Active duodenal ulcer 0.36 0.26–0.52 Hepatic failure 0.34 0.21–0.54

Download Full-text

Disease burden and unmet needs for prevention of venous thromboembolism in medically ill patients in Europe show underutilisation of preventive therapies

Thrombosis and Haemostasis ◽

10.1160/th11-03-0168 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 106 (10) ◽

pp. 600-608 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Sharon Welner ◽

Maria Kubin ◽

Kerstin Folkerts ◽

Sylvia Haas ◽

Hanane Khoury

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Care Delivery ◽

Risk Groups ◽

Considerable Proportion ◽

Medical Illness ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Medically Ill ◽

Medical Inpatients ◽

Clear Identification

SummaryIt was the aim of this review to assess the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and current practice patterns for VTE prophylaxis among medical patients with acute illness in Europe. A literature search was conducted on the epidemiology and prophylaxis practices of VTE prevention among adult patients treated in-hospital for major medical conditions. A total of 21 studies with European information published between 1999 and April 2010 were retrieved. Among patients hospitalised for an acute medical illness, the incidence of VTE varied between 3.65% (symptomatic only over 10.9 days) and 14.9% (asymptomatic and symptomatic over 14 days). While clinical guidelines recommend pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis for patients admitted to hospital with an acute medical illness who are bedridden, clear identification of specific risk groups who would benefit from VTE prophylaxis is lacking. In the majority of studies retrieved, prophylaxis was under-used among medical inpatients; 21% to 62% of all patients admitted to the hospital for acute medical illnesses did not receive VTE prophylaxis. Furthermore, among patients who did receive prophylaxis, a considerable proportion received medication that was not in accord with guidelines due to short duration, suboptimal dose, or inappropriate type of prophylaxis. In most cases, the duration of VTE prophylaxis did not exceed hospital stay, the mean duration of which varied between 5 and 11 days. In conclusion, despite demonstrated efficacy and established guidelines supporting VTE prophylaxis, utilisation rates and treatment duration remain suboptimal, leaving medical patients at continued risk for VTE. Improved guideline adherence and effective care delivery among the medically ill are stressed.

Download Full-text

Impact of Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism on Postoperative Morbidity, Mortality, and Resource Utilization after Hepatectomy

The American Surgeon ◽

10.1177/000313481508101220 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 81 (12) ◽

pp. 1216-1223 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Timothy E. Newhook ◽

Damien J. Lapar ◽

Dustin M. Walters ◽

Shruti Gupta ◽

Joshua S. Jolissaint ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Fold Increase ◽

The United States ◽

Albumin Level ◽

Hospital Length ◽

Hospital Length Of Stay ◽

Resource Usage ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

The Impact

The impact of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hepatectomy on patient morbidity, mortality, and resource usage remains poorly defined. Better understanding of thromboembolic complications is needed to improve perioperative management and overall outcomes. About 3973 patients underwent hepatectomy within NSQIP between 2005 and 2008. Patient characteristics, operative features, and postoperative correlates of VTE were compared with identify risk factors for VTE and to assess its overall impact on postoperative outcomes. Overall incidence of postoperative VTE was 2.4 per cent. Risk factors for postoperative VTE included older age, male gender, compromised functional status, degree of intraoperative blood transfusion, preoperative albumin level (all P < 0.05), and extent of hepatectomy ( P = 0.004). Importantly, major postoperative complications, including acute renal failure, pneumonia, sepsis, septic shock, reintubation, prolonged ventilation, cardiac arrest, and reoperation were all associated with higher rates of VTE (all P < 0.05). Operative mortality was increased among patients with VTE (6.5% vs 2.4%, P = 0.03), and patients with VTE had a 2-fold increase in hospital length of stay (12.0 vs 6.0 days, P < 0.001). Postoperative VTE remains a significant source of morbidity, mortality, and increased resource usage after hepatectomy in the United States. Routine aggressive VTE prophylaxis measures are imperative to avoid development of VTE among patients requiring hepatectomy.

Download Full-text

Rates of Clinically Apparent Venous Thromboembolism and Death Resulting from Pulmonary Embolism among Unselected Hospitalized Acutely Ill Medical Patients Versus Rates Predicted from Clinical Studies.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v106.11.1620.1620 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 106 (11) ◽

pp. 1620-1620

Author(s):

Franco Piovella ◽

Frederick A. Anderson ◽

Hervé Decousus ◽

Gordon FitzGerald ◽

Jean-François Bergmann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Clinical Studies ◽

Study Data ◽

Medical Illness ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

Autopsy Series ◽

Unselected Sample ◽

Observational Cohort ◽

Hospital Deaths

Abstract Background Without evidence from autopsies, the majority of deaths resulting from pulmonary emboli (PE) are indistinguishable from deaths due to other cardiovascular diseases. This has led to a gap in perceptions between the benefits and risks of providing venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. In this study, we estimated the incidence of clinically apparent VTE in hospitalized acutely ill medical patients in The International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE), and compared this with the expected incidence derived from clinical studies that used autopsy or prospective venographic confirmation of clinically important VTE. Methods Beginning in July 2002, a consecutive, unselected sample of patients who were aged ≥18 years and hospitalized for ≥3 days with an acute medical illness, were enrolled in this observational cohort from 49 hospitals in 12 countries. Up to 31 March 2005, 6946 patients were enrolled. Results Based on autopsy series of all-cause in-hospital deaths reported in the literature, PE is associated with 10% of deaths, is the primary cause in 5%, and is clinically recognized as the primary cause in 1.5% of deaths. A review of clinical studies with mandatory venography resulted in predicted rates of 10% for all VTE and 1% for clinically recognized (confirmed) VTE. In IMPROVE, there were 4/291 (1.4%) deaths due to clinically recognized PE (vs. 4 predicted). There were 79 (1.1%) treated VTE events (vs. 69 predicted). Conclusions Observed rates of death due to PE and clinically recognized VTE in a real-world setting are consistent with predictions from clinical study data. Physicians should be aware of the significant gap that exists between clinically important and clinically evident VTE events. Reliance on the low rates of clinically recognized events to assess the seriousness of this disease can lead to a significant under-estimation of its impact on public health and a consequent failure to realize the proven benefits of VTE prophylaxis in hospitalized acutely ill medical patients.

Download Full-text

Risk assessment and prevention of venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients: Results of the regional multicenter study

Atherothrombosis Journal ◽

10.21518/2307-1109-2021-11-1-26-40 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 26-40

Author(s):

A. B. Sugraliyev ◽

Sh. S. Aktayeva ◽

Sh. B. Zhangelova ◽

S. A. Shiller ◽

Zh. M. Kussymzhanova ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Multicenter Study ◽

Bed Rest ◽

Primary Objective ◽

Hospitalized Patients ◽

Public Health Issue ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Pharmacological Prophylaxis ◽

Vte Prophylaxis

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.

Download Full-text

Baseline and Outcome Characteristics of Multiple Valve Surgery Compared with Single Valve Procedures in Mainland China: A Multicenter Experience

The Heart Surgery Forum ◽

10.1532/hsf.2369 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 22 (6) ◽

pp. E486-E493

Author(s):

Lei Jin ◽

Guan-xin Zhang ◽

Lin Han ◽

Chong Wang

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Heart Failure ◽

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽

Congestive Heart Failure ◽

Mainland China ◽

Valve Surgery ◽

Chronic Obstructive ◽

Class Iii ◽

Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽

Baseline Characteristics

Background: To compare baseline and outcome characteristics of multiple valve surgery with single-valve procedures in a multicenter patient population of mainland China. Methods: From January 2008 to December 2012, data from 14,322 consecutive patients older than 16 years who underwent heart valve surgery at five cardiac surgical centers (except pulmonary valve operations) were collected. The patients were divided into seven subgroups according to the type of valve procedures, and baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were contrasted between all seven combinations of single-valve and multiple-valve procedures involving aortic, mitral, and tricuspid valves. Two independent logistic regression analyses were performed and multivariable risk factors for mortality were compared, with emphasis on single-valve versus multiple-valve surgery. Results: Baseline characteristics for MUV procedures (n = 8945) shared many differences to those for single-valve procedures (n = 5377). Proportion of females, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cerebrovascular disease, renal impairment, congestive heart failure, NHYA class III-IV, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension, and decreased ejection fraction were more common in MUV subgroups, and smoker, hypertension, dyslipidemia, active infectious endocarditis, and coronary bypass graft was less frequent. In-hospital mortality was higher for MUV as compared with single-valve procedures (2.4% versus 1.6%, P = .007). Preoperative independent predictors for mortality of patients undergoing MUV procedures were age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, dialysis, congestive heart failure, cardiogenic shock, NYHA class III-IV, mitral stenosis, tricuspid regurgitation, mitral valve replacement, and concomitant CABG. However, risk factors for mortality were relatively different between single-valve and MUV procedures. Conclusion: Baseline characteristics and epidemiology were different between MUV and single-valve procedures. The in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications for MUV procedures remained considerably higher and determinants of mortality were relatively different across procedures types. These findings serve as a benchmark for further studies, as well as suggest a continued search for explanations of MUV outcomes.

Download Full-text

Identification of Medical Patients Who Should Receive Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v104.11.1786.1786 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 104 (11) ◽

pp. 1786-1786

Author(s):

Alexander T. Cohen ◽

Raza Alikhan ◽

Juan I. Arcelus ◽

Jean-François Bergmann ◽

Sylvia Haas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Respiratory Disease ◽

Strong Evidence ◽

Medical Patient ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Medical Patients ◽

Related Factors ◽

Vte Prophylaxis ◽

History Of

Abstract Introduction Despite various medical illnesses/conditions and patient-related factors known to increase venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in medical patients, there is no worldwide consensus regarding which of these patients should receive VTE prophylaxis. As a result, many medical patients remain at risk from this potentially fatal disease. Our objective was to develop a simple risk assessment model (RAM) that could be used at the bedside to identify medical patients who should receive prophylaxis. Methods Acute medical illnesses/conditions and risk factors were included in the RAM if there was strong evidence from prospective clinical studies to show that they significantly increase VTE risk in medical patients, or VTE prophylaxis was beneficial in these cases. If strong evidence was not available, the illness/condition or factor was only included if there was consensus from the authors that VTE prophylaxis is beneficial for these patients. Results Table 1 shows acute medical illnesses/conditions and factors associated with significant VTE risk that are included in the RAM. If a medical patient is >40 years old with an acute medical illness and reduced mobility and has one of the illnesses/conditions or factors shown in Table 1, the RAM recommends prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH: enoxaparin 40 mg o.d. or dalteparin 5000 IU o.d.) or unfractionated heparin (5000 IU q8h). LMWH is preferred due to a better safety profile. If pharmacologic prophylaxis is contraindicated, mechanical prophylaxis is recommended. Conclusion Acute medical illnesses/conditions and patient-related factors that increase the risk for VTE in medical patients have been identified and used to develop a novel RAM. The RAM is evidence-based wherever possible, and can be easily revised as new evidence becomes available. The RAM is simple in design, and can assist physicians to assess whether VTE prophylaxis is warranted in an individual medical patient. Table 1. Factors that increase the risk of VTE in medical patients Acute medical illnesses/conditions Risk factors *Note: The risk of hemorrhagic transformation should be assessed before giving VTE prophylaxis. Evidence-based: Acute MI, acute heart failure (NYHA III/IV), active cancer requiring therapy, severe infection/sepsis, respiratory disease (respiratory failure with/without mechanical ventilation, exacerbation of chronic respiratory disease), rheumatic disease (including acute arthritis of lower extremities, and vertebral compression), ischemic stroke*, paraplegia Consensus view only: Inflammatory disorder with immobility, inflammatory bowel disease Evidence-based: History of VTE, history of malignancy, concurrent acute infectious disease, age >75 years Consensus-based from strong evidence in other settings: Prolonged immobility, age >60 years, varicose veins, obesity, hormone therapy, pregnancy/postpartum, nephrotic syndrome, dehydration, thrombophilia, thrombocytosis

Download Full-text