scholarly journals Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Ambulatory Cancer Patients: Where Do We Stand?

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frits I. Mulder ◽  
Floris T. M. Bosch ◽  
Nick van Es
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Vascular Medicine ◽  
Assessment Scores ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Risk Of Bleeding ◽  
Deep Vein

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a frequent complication in ambulatory cancer patients. Despite the high risk, routine thromboprophylaxis is not recommended because of the high number needed to treat and the risk of bleeding. Two recent trials demonstrated that the number needed to treat can be reduced by selecting cancer patients at high risk for VTE with prediction scores, leading the latest guidelines to suggest such an approach in clinical practice. Yet, the interpretation of these trial results and the translation of the guideline recommendations to clinical practice may be less straightforward. In this clinically-oriented review, some of the controversies are addressed by focusing on the burden of VTE in cancer patients, discussing the performance of available risk assessment scores, and summarizing the findings of recent trials. This overview can help oncologists, hematologists, and vascular medicine specialists decide about thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients.

Duration of anticoagulant therapy for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 123 (12) ◽  
pp. 1794-1801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clive Kearon ◽  
Elie A. Akl
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Of Recurrence ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Risk Of Bleeding ◽  
Deep Vein

Abstract It takes about 3 months to complete “active treatment” of venous thromboembolism (VTE), with further treatment serving to prevent new episodes of thrombosis (“pure secondary prevention”). Consequently, VTE should generally be treated for either 3 months or indefinitely (exceptions will be described in the text). The decision to stop anticoagulants at 3 months or to treat indefinitely is dominated by the long-term risk of recurrence, and secondarily influenced by the risk of bleeding and by patient preference. VTE provoked by a reversible risk factor, or a first unprovoked isolated distal (calf) deep vein thrombosis (DVT), has a low risk of recurrence and is usually treated for 3 months. VTE associated with active cancer, or a second unprovoked VTE, has a high risk of recurrence and is usually treated indefinitely. The decision to stop anticoagulants at 3 months or to treat indefinitely is more finely balanced after a first unprovoked proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE). Indefinite anticoagulation is often chosen if there is a low risk of bleeding, whereas anticoagulation is usually stopped at 3 months if there is a high risk of bleeding. The decision to continue anticoagulation indefinitely after a first unprovoked proximal DVT or PE is strengthened if the patient is male, the index event was PE rather than DVT, and/or d-dimer testing is positive 1 month after stopping anticoagulant therapy.

scholarly journals Pharmaco-prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis for in-patients at risk, in a tertiary care hospital

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Sheetal John ◽  
Atiya R. Faruqui ◽  
Soumya Umesh
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Hospitalised Patients ◽  
Deep Vein

Background: There is limited data from India on Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) Prophylaxis. This study was done in hospitalised patients at high risk for DVT, to determine the patterns and rates of pharmacoprophylaxis, drugs used and their clinical outcomes.Methods: This prospective study screened patients for risk of DVT using the Padua risk assessment model. Padua score ≥4 were included and data on disease demographics, prophylaxis and outcomes of DVT at 12 weeks were collected. Factors affecting prophylaxis were assessed using multivariate logistic regression.Results: Out of 453 screened, 200 eligible patients were recruited. 48.5% were females; mean age was 54.6±16.6; 50.5% received some thromboprophylaxis, of which 24%, 35.5% and 9% received pharmacoprophylaxis, mechanoprophylaxis and a combination of both respectively. Low Molecular Weight Heparin was the most commonly used drug (77.1%). Adverse drug reactions reported were 24, none related to anticoagulant use. At 12 weeks, 18 (9%) patients gave history suggestive of DVT. 5 deaths were reported, but the cause could not be ascertained. Patients who had cardiac/ respiratory failure [OR =5.2 (95%CI - 1.13, 24.6), p = 0.03], acute MI or stroke [OR = 9.0 (3.5, 23.09), p <0.001], those admitted to medical specialties [OR = 3.4 -1.4, 7.9), p = 0.004] and to private wards [OR = 7.4 (3.13, 17.5), p <0.001] had significantly higher chances of receiving prophylaxis.Conclusions: Underutilisation of effective prophylaxis, despite high prevalence of DVT risk. Emphasis on routine risk assessment of hospitalized patients and administration of appropriate prophylaxis to those at high risk is required.

scholarly journals Assessment of Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) incidence among ambulatory cancer patients in Qatar: A retrospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 049-058
Author(s):  
Rehab Abdelwahab ◽  
Anas Hamad ◽  
Reham Negm ◽  
Nayel Al Tarawneh ◽  
Shereen Elazzazy
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Inpatient Setting ◽  
Additional Risk ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Ambulatory Patients ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
Deep Vein

Background: Thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory cancer patients is considered controversial. However, some guidelines suggest conducting VTE risk assessment using the Khorana risk assessment scoring model. This study aims to assess the incidence of Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and related cancer types, focusing on the incidence of DVT in ambulatory patients actively on chemotherapy, with Khorana risk score (KRS). Methods: The Doppler ultrasound reports over 12-month period were reviewed. A total of 205 patients were included in the study. Patients with DVT were screened for the relevant biomarkers in KRS model and any other additional risk factors. Furthermore, a comparison between ambulatory patients who developed DVT and those who did not, was carried on determining the KRS association with incidence. Results: The incidence of DVT in ambulatory cancer patients was higher than the inpatient setting (23% vs. 8%). Breast cancer was the most common malignancy associated with DVT (30%) followed by colon cancer (17%). Chemotherapy increased the incidence of DVT in ambulatory patients (29% vs. 13%). Patients with KRS of ≥2 were more likely to develop DVT (37.5%). Conclusion: This study highlights the importance of conducting a thorough DVT risk assessment for ambulatory cancer patients on chemotherapy and the need to look for KRS to reconsider additional risk factors.

Is Colour Doppler Ultrasound a Sensitive Screening Method in Diagnosing Deep Vein Thrombosis after Hip Surgery ?

1996 ◽  
Vol 75 (02) ◽  
pp. 242-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Magnusson ◽  
Bengt I Eriksson ◽  
Peter Kãlebo ◽  
Ramon Sivertsson
Keyword(s):  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Doppler Ultrasound ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Screening Method ◽  
Colour Doppler ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Colour Doppler Ultrasound ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Deep Vein

SummaryPatients undergoing orthopedic surgery are at high risk of developing deep vein thrombosis. One hundred and thirty-eight consecutive patients undergoing total hip replacement or hip fracture surgery were included in this study. They were surveilled with colour Doppler ultrasound (CDU) and bilateral ascending contrast phlebography. The prevalence of proximal and distal DVT in this study was 5.8% and 20.3% respectively.CDU has a satisfactory sensitivity in patients with symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, especially in the proximal region. These results could not be confirmed in the present study of asymptomatic patients. The sensitivity was 62.5% (95% confidence interval: C.I. 24-91%) and the specificity 99.6% (C.I. 98-100%) for proximal DVT; 53.6% (C.I. 34-73%) and 98% (C.I. 96-99%) respectively for distal thrombi. The overall sensitivity was 58.1% (C.I. 39-75%) and the specificity 98% (C.I. 96-99%). The positive predictive value was 83.3% (C.I. 36-99%) and 75% (C.I. 51-91%) for proximal and distal DVT respectively. The negative predictive value was 98.9% (C.I. 98-100%) and 94.9% (C.I. 92-98%) for proximal and distal DVT respectively. The results of this study showed that even with a highly specialised and experienced investigator the sensitivity of CDU was too low to make it suitable for screening purposes in a high risk surgical population.

scholarly journals A preliminary study of intensivist-performed DVT ultrasound screening in trauma ICU patients (APSIT Study)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lloyd Roberts ◽  
Tom Rozen ◽  
Deirdre Murphy ◽  
Adam Lawler ◽  
Mark Fitzgerald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Deep Vein

Abstract Background Multiple screening Duplex ultrasound scans (DUS) are performed in trauma patients at high risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the intensive care unit (ICU). Intensive care physician performed compression ultrasound (IP-CUS) has shown promise as a diagnostic test for DVT in a non-trauma setting. Whether IP-CUS can be used as a screening test in trauma patients is unknown. Our study aimed to assess the agreement between IP-CUS and vascular sonographer performed DUS for proximal lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (PLEDVT) screening in high-risk trauma patients in ICU. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted at the ICU of Alfred Hospital, a major trauma center in Melbourne, Australia, between Feb and Nov 2015. All adult major trauma patients admitted with high risk for DVT were eligible for inclusion. IP-CUS was performed immediately before or after DUS for PLEDVT screening. The paired studies were repeated twice weekly until the DVT diagnosis, death or ICU discharge. Written informed consent from the patient, or person responsible, or procedural authorisation, was obtained. The individuals performing the scans were blinded to the others’ results. The agreement analysis was performed using Cohen’s Kappa statistics and intraclass correlation coefficient for repeated binary measurements. Results During the study period, 117 patients had 193 pairs of scans, and 45 (39%) patients had more than one pair of scans. The median age (IQR) was 47 (28–68) years with 77% males, mean (SD) injury severity score 27.5 (9.53), and a median (IQR) ICU length of stay 7 (3.2–11.6) days. There were 16 cases (13.6%) of PLEDVT with an incidence rate of 2.6 (1.6–4.2) cases per 100 patient-days in ICU. The overall agreement was 96.7% (95% CI 94.15–99.33). The Cohen’s Kappa between the IP-CUS and DUS was 0.77 (95% CI 0.59–0.95), and the intraclass correlation coefficient for repeated binary measures was 0.75 (95% CI 0.67–0.81). Conclusions There is a substantial agreement between IP-CUS and DUS for PLEDVT screening in trauma patients in ICU with high risk for DVT. Large multicentre studies are needed to confirm this finding.

scholarly journals Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Korean Cancer Patients With Venous Thromboembolism: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 107602962097957
Author(s):  
Soo-Mee Bang ◽  
Jin-Hyoung Kang ◽  
Min Hee Hong ◽  
Jin-Seok Ahn ◽  
So Yeon Oh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Medical Chart Review ◽  
Deep Vein

This study assessed epidemiologic data and clinical outcomes, including venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence and bleeding events, in patients with cancer-associated VTE, and assessed factors associated with clinical outcomes. Data were extracted from retrospective medical-chart review of adult patients diagnosed with cancer-associated deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism who received anticoagulation treatment for ≥3 months. Patients were classified by: low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), and other anticoagulants. First VTE recurrence and bleeding events, and factors associated with their occurrence, were assessed during the initial 6 months of treatment. Overall, 623 patients (age: 63.7 ± 11.3 years, 49.3% male) were included (119, 132, and 372 patients in LMWH, DOACs and other anticoagulants groups, respectively). The cumulative 6-month incidence of VTE recurrence was 16.6% (total), 8.3% (LMWH), 16.7% (DOACs), and 20.7% (other); respective bleeding events were 22.5%, 11.0%, 12.3%, and 30.7%). VTE recurrence and bleeding rates differed only between LMWH and other anticoagulants (HR 2.4, 95% CI: 1.2-5.0 and 3.6, 1.9-6.8, respectively). These results highlight the importance of initial VTE treatment choice for preventing VTE recurrence and bleeding events. LMWH or DOACs for ≥3 months can be considered for effective VTE management in cancer patients.

Deep Vein Thrombosis Prophylaxis: Audit of Practice in General Surgical Patients in a Teaching Hospital

2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Agu ◽  
A. Handa ◽  
G Hamilton ◽  
D. M. Baker
Keyword(s):  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Teaching Hospital ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Thrombosis Prophylaxis ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Dvt Prophylaxis ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Deep Vein

Objective: To audit the prescription and implementation of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis in general surgical patients in a teaching hospital. Methods: All inpatients on three general surgical wards were audited for adequacy of prescription and implementation prophylaxis (audit A). A repeat audit 3 months later (audit B) closed the loop. The groups were compared using the chi-square test. Results: In audit A 50 patients participated. Prophylaxis was correctly prescribed in 36 (72%) and implemented in 30 (60%) patients. Eighteen patients at moderate or high risk (45%) received inadequate prophylaxis. Emergency admission, pre-operative stay and inadequate risk assignment were associated with poor implementation of protocol. In audit B 51 patients participated. Prescription was appropriate in 45 (88%) and implementation in 40 (78%) patients (p< 0.05). Eleven patients at moderate or high risk received inadequate prophylaxis. Seven of 11 high-risk patients in audit A (64%) received adequate prophylaxis, in contrast to all high-risk patients in audit B. The decision not to administer prophylaxis was deemed appropriate in 5 of 15 (30%) in audit A compared with 6 of 10 (60%) in audit B. Conclusion: Increased awareness, adequate risk assessment, updating of protocols and consistent reminders to staff and patients may improve implementation of DVT prophylaxis.

Predicting recurrences or major bleeding in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism

2008 ◽  
Vol 100 (09) ◽  
pp. 435-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier Trujillo-Santos ◽  
José Nieto ◽  
Gregorio Tiberio ◽  
Andrea Piccioli ◽  
Pierpaolo Micco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Recurrent Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Acute Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Deep Vein

SummaryCancer patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) have an increased incidence of recurrences and bleeding complications while on anticoagulant therapy. Methods RIETE is an ongoing registry of consecutive patients with acute VTE. We tried to identify which cancer patients are at a higher risk for recurrent pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or major bleeding. Up to May 2007, 3, 805 cancer patients had been enrolled in RIETE. During the first three months of follow-up after the acute, index VTE event, 90 (2.4%) patients developed recurrent PE, 100 (2.6%) recurrent DVT, 156 (4.1%) had major bleeding. Forty patients (44%) died of the recurrent PE,46 (29%) of bleeding. On multivariate analysis, patients aged <65 years (odds ratio [OR]: 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9–4.9), with PE at entry (OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2–3.1), or with <3 months from cancer diagnosis to VTE (OR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.2–3.2) had an increased incidence of recurrent PE. Those aged <65 years (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.0–2.4) or with <3 months from cancer diagnosis (OR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.5–3.6) had an increased incidence of recurrent DVT. Finally, patients with immobility (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.2–2.7), metastases (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1–2.3), recent bleeding (OR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.1–5.1), or with creatinine clearance <30 ml/ min (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.5–3.4), had an increased incidence of major bleeding. With some variables available at entry we may identify those cancer patients withVTE at a higher risk for recurrences or major bleeding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document