scholarly journals Bemiparin Versus Enoxaparin for Extended Thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 Patients at High Risk of Venous Thromboembolism

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmet Can TOPÇU ◽  
Ahmet Can TOPÇU ◽  
Nurdan PAPILA-TOPAL ◽  
Ayşe BATIREL
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk

scholarly journals Risk Factors and Prediction Models for Venous Thromboembolism in Ambulatory Patients with Lung Cancer

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 778
Author(s):  
Ann-Rong Yan ◽  
Indira Samarawickrema ◽  
Mark Naunton ◽  
Gregory M. Peterson ◽  
Desmond Yip ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Risk Models ◽  
Related Risk ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Ambulatory Patients

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant cause of mortality in patients with lung cancer. Despite the availability of a wide range of anticoagulants to help prevent thrombosis, thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients is a challenge due to its associated risk of haemorrhage. As a result, anticoagulation is only recommended in patients with a relatively high risk of VTE. Efforts have been made to develop predictive models for VTE risk assessment in cancer patients, but the availability of a reliable predictive model for ambulate patients with lung cancer is unclear. We have analysed the latest information on this topic, with a focus on the lung cancer-related risk factors for VTE, and risk prediction models developed and validated in this group of patients. The existing risk models, such as the Khorana score, the PROTECHT score and the CONKO score, have shown poor performance in external validations, failing to identify many high-risk individuals. Some of the newly developed and updated models may be promising, but their further validation is needed.

scholarly journals Forty-One-Year-Old Man with Pulmonary Embolism 5 Months After COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 117954842098665
Author(s):  
Muhanad Taha ◽  
Paul Nguyen ◽  
Aditi Sharma ◽  
Mazen Taha ◽  
Lobelia Samavati
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Case Summary ◽  
One Year

Background: Hypercoagulation is one of the striking features of COVID-19. Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are at high risk for venous thromboembolism. However, it is unknown if the risk for venous thromboembolism persists after discharge. Case Summary: We report a case with pulmonary embolism 5 months after COVID-19. No risk factors for venous thrombosis have been identified. Conclusion: In COVID-19 related hospitalization, large studies are needed to identify the risk of venous thromboembolism after discharge.

427 Patients Admitted With Acute Abdominal Conditions are at High Risk for Development of Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) but Often Fail to Receive Adequate Prophylaxis

2010 ◽  
Vol 138 (5) ◽  
pp. S-852
Author(s):  
Emily Pearsall ◽  
Ujash Sheth ◽  
Darlene Fenech ◽  
Marg McKenzie ◽  
J. Charles Victor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
To Receive

High risk of pregnancy-related venous thromboembolism in women with multiple thrombophilic defects

2007 ◽  
Vol 138 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nienke Folkeringa ◽  
Jan Leendert P. Brouwer ◽  
Fleurisca J. Korteweg ◽  
Nic J.G.M. Veeger ◽  
Jan Jaap H.M. Erwich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk

scholarly journals High Risk of Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism After Surgery for Spine Metastatic Bone Lesions

2019 ◽  
Vol 477 (7) ◽  
pp. 1674-1686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Q. Groot ◽  
Paul T. Ogink ◽  
Nuno Rei Paulino Pereira ◽  
Marco L. Ferrone ◽  
Mitchell B. Harris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Bone Lesions

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.

scholarly journals High Risk of Venous Thromboembolism After Surgery for Long Bone Metastases

2018 ◽  
Vol 476 (10) ◽  
pp. 2052-2061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Q. Groot ◽  
Paul T. Ogink ◽  
Stein J. Janssen ◽  
Nuno Rui Paulino Pereira ◽  
Santiago Lozano-Calderon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Long Bone

scholarly journals Successful Model for Guideline Implementation to Prevent Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in the Ambulatory Cancer Clinic

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e868-e874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris E. Holmes ◽  
Steven Ades ◽  
Susan Gilchrist ◽  
Daniel Douce ◽  
Karen Libby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Guideline Implementation ◽  
Vte Prophylaxis ◽  
Successful Model ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism Prevention ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk assessment in outpatients with cancer and pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in selected patients at high risk for VTE. Although validated risk stratification tools are available, < 10% of oncologists use a risk assessment tool, and rates of VTE prophylaxis in high-risk patients are low in practice. We hypothesized that implementation of a systems-based program that uses the electronic health record (EHR) and offers personalized VTE prophylaxis recommendations would increase VTE risk assessment rates in patients initiating outpatient chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in the Ambulatory Cancer Clinic (VTEPACC) was a multidisciplinary program implemented by nurses, oncologists, pharmacists, hematologists, advanced practice providers, and quality partners. We prospectively identified high-risk patients using the Khorana and Protecht scores (≥ 3 points) via an EHR-based risk assessment tool. Patients with a predicted high risk of VTE during treatment were offered a hematology consultation to consider VTE prophylaxis. Results of the consultation were communicated to the treating oncologist, and clinical outcomes were tracked. RESULTS: A total of 918 outpatients with cancer initiating cancer-directed therapy were evaluated. VTE monthly education rates increased from < 5% before VTEPACC to 81.6% (standard deviation [SD], 11.9; range, 63.6%-97.7%) during the implementation phase and 94.7% (SD, 4.9; range, 82.1%-100%) for the full 2-year postimplementation phase. In the postimplementation phase, 213 patients (23.2%) were identified as being at high risk for developing a VTE. Referrals to hematology were offered to 151 patients (71%), with 141 patients (93%) being assessed and 93.8% receiving VTE prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: VTEPACC is a successful model for guideline implementation to provide VTE risk assessment and prophylaxis to prevent cancer-associated thrombosis in outpatients. Methods applied can readily translate into practice and overcome the current implementation gaps between guidelines and clinical practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document