Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in the acute hospital care setting (ENDORSE study): a multinational cross-sectional study

Timing of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis initiation and complications in polytrauma patients with high-risk bleeding orthopedic interventions: A nationwide analysis

INTRODUCTION

There are no clear recommendations for the perioperative timing and initiation of venous thromboembolism pharmacologic prophylaxis (VTEp) among polytrauma patients undergoing high-risk bleeding orthopedic operative intervention, leading to variations in VTEp administration. Our study examined the association between the timing of VTEp and VTE complications in polytrauma patients undergoing high-risk operative orthopedic interventions nationwide.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of trauma patients 18 years or older who underwent high-risk bleeding operative orthopedic interventions for pelvic, hip, and femur fractures within 24 hours of admission at American College of Surgeons-verified trauma centers using the 2019-2020 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program databank. We excluded patients with a competing risk of nonorthopedic surgical bleeding. We assessed operative orthopedic polytrauma patients who received VTEp within 12 hours of orthopedic surgical intervention compared with VTEp received beyond 12 hours of intervention. The primary outcome assessed was overall VTE events. Secondary outcomes were orthopedic reinterventions within 72 hours after primary orthopedic surgery, deep venous thromboembolism, and pulmonary embolism rates.

RESULTS

The study included 2,229 patients who underwent high-risk orthopedic operative intervention. The median time to VTEp initiation was 30 hours (interquartile range, 18-44 hours). After adjustment for baseline patient, injury, and hospital characteristics, VTEp initiated more than 12 hours from primary orthopedic surgery was associated with increased odds of VTE (adjusted odds ratio, 2.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-3.77). Earlier initiation of prophylaxis was not associated with an increased risk for surgical reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-1.34).

CONCLUSION

Administering VTEp within 24 hours of admission and within 12 hours of major orthopedic surgery involving the femur, pelvis, or hip demonstrated an associated decreased risk of in-hospital VTE without an accompanying elevated risk of bleeding-related orthopedic reintervention. Clinicians should reconsider delays in initiating or withholding perioperative VTEp for stable polytrauma patients needing major orthopedic intervention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Machine learning natural language processing for identifying venous thromboembolism: systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of preventable in-hospital mortality. Monitoring VTE cases is limited by the challenges of manual medical record review and diagnosis code interpretation. Natural language processing (NLP) can automate the process. Rule-based NLP methods are effective but time consuming. Machine learning (ML)-NLP methods present a promising solution. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published before May 2023 that use ML-NLP to identify VTE diagnoses in the electronic health records. Four reviewers screened all manuscripts, excluding studies that only used a rule-based method. A meta-analysis evaluated the pooled performance of each study's best performing model that evaluated for pulmonary embolism and/or deep vein thrombosis. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) with confidence interval (CI) were calculated by DerSimonian and Laird method using a random-effects model. Study quality was assessed using an adapted TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) tool. Thirteen studies were included in the systematic review and 8 had data available for meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity was 0.931 (95% CI, 0.881-0.962), specificity 0.984 (95% CI, 0.967-0.992), PPV 0.910 (95% CI, 0.865-0.941) and NPV 0.985 (95% CI, 0.977-0.990). All studies met at least 13 of the 21 NLP-modified TRIPOD items, demonstrating fair quality. The highest performing models used vectorization rather than bag-of-words and deep-learning techniques such as convolutional neural networks. There was significant heterogeneity in the studies, and only 4 validated their model on an external data set. Further standardization of ML studies can help progress this novel technology toward real-world implementation.

Incidence of venous thromboembolic disease and risk of bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Our objectives were to describe the use of thromboprophylaxis and the incidence of VTE/bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies (HM).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study (2014-2022).

SETTING

Medic-Surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in a tertiary care academic center.

PATIENTS

Adult patients admitted to ICU with a concomitant diagnosis of a hematological malignancy.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

We analyzed demographic data, use of thromboprophylaxis and secondary outcomes that included incidence of VTE (venous thromboembolism), bleeding, mortality, severity scores and organ support. We applied a multivariable logistic regression model to examine the risk of thrombosis in the ICU.

RESULTS

We included 862 ICU admissions (813 unique patients). Thromboprophylaxis was given during 65% of admissions (LMWH 14%, UFH 8%, and SCDs 43%); in 21% it was contraindicated due to thrombocytopenia; 14% of cases lacked documentation on prophylaxis. There were 38 unique incident cases of VTE (27 DVT, 11 PE), constituting 4.4% of ICU episodes. Most of VTE cases happened in patients with various degrees of thrombocytopenia. In the multivariable analysis, SOFA score on the first ICU day was independently associated (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.96) with the risk of VTE. Bleeding occurred in 7.2% (minor) and 14.4% (major) of episodes; most frequent sites being CNS, abdomen/GI and pulmonary.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of critically ill patients with HM, there was considerable variability in the utilization of DVT prophylaxis, with predominant use of SCDs. The incidence of VTE was 4.4% and major bleeding 14%.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05396157. Venous Thromboembolism in Hematologic Malignancy and Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Patients: a Retrospective Study (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

The potential use of artificial intelligence for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and management: clinician and healthcare informatician perspectives

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the leading cause of preventable death in hospitalized patients. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) can support guidelines recommending an individualized approach to risk assessment and prophylaxis. We conducted electronic surveys asking clinician and healthcare informaticians about their perspectives on AI/ML for VTE prevention and management. Of 101 respondents to the informatician survey, most were 40 years or older, male, clinicians and data scientists, and had performed research on AI/ML. Of the 607 US-based respondents to the clinician survey, most were 40 years or younger, female, physicians, and had never used AI to inform clinical practice. Most informaticians agreed that AI/ML can be used to manage VTE (56.0%). Over one-third were concerned that clinicians would not use the technology (38.9%), but the majority of clinicians believed that AI/ML probably or definitely can help with VTE prevention (70.1%). The most common concern in both groups was a perceived lack of transparency (informaticians 54.4%; clinicians 25.4%). These two surveys revealed that key stakeholders are interested in AI/ML for VTE prevention and management, and identified potential barriers to address prior to implementation.

Risk Assessment Models for Venous Thromboembolism in Medical Inpatients

Importance

Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for medical inpatients at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Risk assessment models (RAMs) have been developed to stratify VTE risk, but a prospective head-to-head comparison of validated RAMs is lacking.

Objectives

To prospectively validate an easy-to-use RAM, the simplified Geneva score, and compare its prognostic performance with previously validated RAMs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective cohort study was conducted from June 18, 2020, to January 4, 2022, with a 90-day follow-up. A total of 4205 consecutive adults admitted to the general internal medicine departments of 3 Swiss university hospitals for hospitalization for more than 24 hours due to acute illness were screened for eligibility; 1352 without therapeutic anticoagulation were included.

Exposures

At admission, items of 4 RAMs (ie, the simplified and original Geneva score, the Padua score, and the IMPROVE [International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism] score) were collected. Patients were stratified into high and low VTE risk groups according to each RAM.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Symptomatic VTE within 90 days.

Results

Of 1352 medical inpatients (median age, 67 years [IQR, 54-77 years]; 762 men [55.4%]), 28 (2.1%) experienced VTE. Based on the simplified Geneva score, 854 patients (63.2%) were classified as high risk, with a 90-day VTE risk of 2.6% (n = 22; 95% CI, 1.7%-3.9%), and 498 patients (36.8%) were classified as low risk, with a 90-day VTE risk of 1.2% (n = 6; 95% CI, 0.6%-2.6%). Sensitivity of the simplified Geneva score was 78.6% (95% CI, 60.5%-89.8%) and specificity was 37.2% (95% CI, 34.6%-39.8%); the positive likelihood ratio of the simplified Geneva score was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.03-1.52) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.28-1.18). In head-to-head comparisons, sensitivity was highest for the original Geneva score (82.1%; 95% CI, 64.4%-92.1%), while specificity was highest for the IMPROVE score (70.4%; 95% CI, 67.9%-72.8%). After adjusting the VTE risk for thromboprophylaxis use and site, there was no significant difference between the high-risk and low-risk groups based on the simplified Geneva score (subhazard ratio, 2.04 [95% CI, 0.83-5.05]; P = .12) and other RAMs. Discriminative performance was poor for all RAMs, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranging from 53.8% (95% CI, 51.1%-56.5%) for the original Geneva score to 58.1% (95% CI, 55.4%-60.7%) for the simplified Geneva score.

Conclusions and Relevance

This head-to-head comparison of validated RAMs found suboptimal accuracy and prognostic performance of the simplified Geneva score and other RAMs to predict hospital-acquired VTE in medical inpatients. Clinical usefulness of existing RAMs is questionable, highlighting the need for more accurate VTE prediction strategies.

Increasing venous thromboembolism risk assessment through a whole hospital-based intervention: a pre-post service evaluation to demonstrate quality improvement

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a primary cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. VTE risk assessment is a crucial part of the VTE prevention guideline. However, VTE risk assessment was not consistently undertaken for admitted patients. The aim of this study was to identify whether a quality improvement project implemented to change documentation of VTE risk assessment for hospitalized patients impacted patient safety by decreasing the rate of VTE incidences. The study was set in a 600+ bed acute hospital that provides medical and surgical services for adult patients during the period October 2018-September 2020. The hospital adopted the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) 9th edition VTE prevention guidelines and followed the Modified Caprini risk assessment tool. Following the FOCUS-Plan-Do-Check-Act (FOCUS PDCA) improvement methodology, the improvement team implemented multicomponent interventions over a 3-month period, including conducting educational sessions, sharing VTE documentation compliance results, giving reminders during rounds, assigning a VTE liaison physician within each clinical specialty, and updating and communicating the hospital adopted VTE guidelines. A total of 17 612 patients were included, respectively, 8971 in pre-intervention and 8641 post-intervention period. Documentation of VTE risk assessment upon admission increased significantly in the post quality improvement intervention period (60% vs. 42%, relative increase of 30%, χ2 = 1.43, P < 0.001). The run chart trend analysis demonstrated significant improvement shift and improvement trend after quality improvement project implementation, and it was sustained for 15 months. There was no impact on patient safety with a slight not statistically significant decrease in the VTE incidences rate post intervention period (0.4% vs. 0.5%, relative decrease of 1%, χ2 = 0.82, P < 0.397). The quality improvement project intervention significantly increased the percentage of patients assessed for VTE risk in a hospital setting.

Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Medical Patients with Thrombocytopenia or with Platelet Dysfunction: The Last 10 Years

Current guideline recommendations for primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are based on randomized clinical trials that usually exclude subjects at a potentially high risk of bleeding complications. For this reason, no specific guideline is available for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with thrombocytopenia and/or platelet dysfunction. However, except in patients with absolute contraindications to anticoagulant drugs, antithrombotic prophylaxis should always be considered, for example, in hospitalized cancer patients with thrombocytopenia, especially in those with multiple VTE risk factors. Low platelet number, platelet dysfunction, and clotting abnormalities are also very common in patients with liver cirrhosis, but these patients have a high incidence of portal venous thrombosis, implying that cirrhotic coagulopathy does not fully protect against thrombosis. These patients may benefit from antithrombotic prophylaxis during hospitalization. Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 need prophylaxis, but frequently experience thrombocytopenia or coagulopathy. In patients with antiphospholipid antibodies, a high thrombotic risk is usually present, even in the presence of thrombocytopenia. VTE prophylaxis in high-risk conditions is thus suggested in these patients. At variance with severe thrombocytopenia (< 50,000/mm3), mild/moderate thrombocytopenia (≥ 50,000/mm3) should not interfere with VTE prevention decisions. In patients with severe thrombocytopenia, pharmacological prophylaxis should be considered on an individual basis. Aspirin is not as effective as heparins in lowering the risk of VTE. Studies in patients with ischemic stroke demonstrated that thromboprophylaxis with heparins is safe in these patients also during antiplatelet treatment. The use of direct oral anticoagulants in the prophylaxis of VTE in internal medicine patients has been recently evaluated, but no specific recommendation exists for patients with thrombocytopenia. The need for VTE prophylaxis in patients on chronic treatment with antiplatelet agents should be evaluated after assessing the individual risk of bleeding complications. Finally, the selection of patients who require post-discharge pharmacological prophylaxis remains debated. New molecules currently under development (such as the inhibitors of factor XI) may contribute to improve the risk/benefit ratio of VTE primary prevention in this setting of patients.

Venous Thromboembolism Risk and Adherence to Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients in Uruguay: First Nationwide Study

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious, frequent, and preventable medical complication in hospitalized patients. Although the efficacy of prophylaxis (pharmacological and/or mechanical) has been demonstrated, compliance with prophylaxis is poor at international and national levels.

AIM

To determine the indication and use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients in Uruguay.

METHODS

An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, multicentre study involving 31 nationwide healthcare facilities was conducted. Baseline characteristics associated with hospital admission, the percentage of the population with an indication for thromboprophylaxis, and the percentage of patients receiving pharmacological thromboprophylaxis were assessed. The VTE risk was determined using the Padua score for medical patients; the Caprini score for surgical patients; the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) guidelines for pregnant-postpartum patients.

RESULTS

1925 patients were included, representing 26% of hospitalized patients in Uruguay. 71.9% of all patients were at risk of VTE. Of all patients at risk of VTE, 58.6% received pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. The reasons for not receiving thromboprophylaxis were prescribing omissions in 16.1% of cases, contraindication in 15.9% and 9.4% of patients were already anticoagulated for other reasons. Overall, just 68% of patients were "protected" against VTE. Recommendations of major thromboprophylaxis guidelines were followed in 70.1% of patients at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the progress made in adherence to thromboprophylaxis indications, nonadherence remains a problem, affecting one in six patients at risk of VTE in Uruguay.

A multifaceted quality improvement intervention on venous thromboembolism prophylaxis compliance in hospitalized medical patients at a comprehensive cancer center

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies suggest that quality improvement initiatives focused on hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism have a positive impact on prescribing rates of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, especially those that incorporate computerized changes.

METHODS

We conducted a quality improvement project to determine whether education and computerized prescriber order entry system changes affect venous thromboembolism prophylaxis compliance rates in hospitalized medical patients at a Comprehensive Cancer Center. Between 1 January 2021 and 31 January 2023, 37,739 non-surgical, adult patient encounters with a length of stay > 48 h were analyzed in our study. From 18 December 2021 to 8 March 2022, provider education was delivered to the three largest admitting services, and computerized prescriber order entry changes were implemented incorporating a mandatory requirement to either order venous thromboembolism prophylaxis or document a contraindication for all patients at moderate venous thromboembolism risk.

RESULTS

Monthly venous thromboembolism prophylaxis compliance rates, as defined by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services VTE-1 metric, increased from a mean of 74% to 93% after the interventions. This change was driven primarily by an increased utilization of mechanical venous thromboembolism prophylaxis from 37% to 53%.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that a multi-faceted intervention incorporating provider education and computerized prescriber order entry system changes can significantly increase venous thromboembolism prophylaxis compliance rates in cancer patients.

An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Impact of Graduated Compression Stockings in Addition to Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Surgical Inpatients

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in surgical inpatients with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis and additional graduated compression stockings (GCSs) versus pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone.

BACKGROUND

Surgical inpatients have elevated VTE risk; recent studies cast doubt on whether GCS confers additional protection against VTE, compared with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone.

METHODS

The review followed "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" guidelines using a registered protocol (CRD42017062655). The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched up to November 2022. Randomized trials reporting VTE rate after surgical procedures, utilizing pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, with or without GCS, were included. The rates of deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, and VTE-related mortality were pooled through fixed and random effects.

RESULTS

In a head-to-head meta-analysis, the risk of DVT for GCS and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.54-1.36) versus for pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone (2 studies, 70 events, 2653 participants). The risk of DVT in pooled trial arms for GCS and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.23-1.25) versus pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone (33 trial arms, 1228 events, 14,108 participants). The risk of pulmonary embolism for GCS and pharmacological prophylaxis versus pharmacological prophylaxis alone was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.0-30.0) (27 trial arms, 32 events, 11,472 participants). There were no between-group differences in VTE-related mortality (27 trial arms, 3 events, 12,982 participants).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from head-to-head meta-analysis and pooled trial arms demonstrates no additional benefit for GCS in preventing VTE and VTE-related mortality. GCS confer a risk of skin complications and an economic burden; current evidence does not support their use for surgical inpatients.

An Electronic Medical Record Intervention to Increase Pharmacologic Prophylaxis for Venous Thromboembolism in Emergency Department Observation Patients

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The role of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis among patients receiving emergency department (ED) observation unit care is unclear. We investigated an electronic health record-based clinical decision support tool aimed at increasing pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis use among at-risk patients placed in ED observation units.

METHODS

We conducted an interrupted time-series study of an Epic-based best practice advisory implemented in May 2019 at a health care system comprising 2 academic medical centers and 4 community hospitals with dedicated ED observation units. The best practice advisory alerted staff at 24 hours to conduct a risk assessment and linked to a VTE prophylaxis order set. We used an interrupted time series, Bayesian structured time series, and a multivariable mixed-effect regression model to estimate the intervention effect.

RESULTS

Prior to the best practice advisory implementation, there were 8,895 ED observation unit patients with a length of stay more than or equal to 24 hours, and 0.9% received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis. Afterward, there were 12,664 ED observation unit patients with a length of stay more than or equal to 24 hours, and 4.8% received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis. The interrupted time series and causal impact analysis showed a statistically significant increase in VTE prophylaxis (eg, absolute percent difference 3.8%, 95% confidence interval 3.5 to 4.1). In a multivariable model, only the intervention was significantly associated with receiving VTE prophylaxis (odds ratio 4.56, 95% confidence interval 2.22 to 9.37).

CONCLUSION

An electronic health record-based alert helped to prompt staff caring for ED observation unit patients at risk for VTE with prolonged visits to order recommended pharmacologic prophylaxis. The best risk assessment model to use and the true incidence of VTE events in this population are unclear.

Comparison of different intervention methods to reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism: study protocol for a cluster-randomized, crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a priority challenge among orthopedic trauma patients. It is crucial to further improve the prophylaxis against VTE in routine orthopedic treatment. This study aims to compare the efficacy of two low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) regimens and additional intermittent pneumatic compression in preventing VTE among orthopedic trauma patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a cluster-randomized crossover clinical study conducted in four hospitals in Shanghai from December 2019 to December 2023. The unit of randomization is orthopedic wards, and each ward will define a cluster. All clusters will implement four diverse intervention measures and one control measure in a given random sequence. Perioperative orthopedic trauma patients aged ≥ 18 years with stable vital signs, Caprini score > 2, and no contraindication of anticoagulation or intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices will be eligible. The sample size will be determined to be 2590, considering cluster effect, period effect, and interactions. We will generally use the intention-to-treat (ITT) at the subject level for each outcome. For the primary outcome of the study, the incidence of VTE will be presented as risk ratio and 95% CIs. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) will be deployed to compare differences and adjust cluster effect, period effect, and interaction among interventions and periods if applicable.

DISCUSSION

VTE is a complication that cannot be underestimated after major orthopedic surgery. Early identification, early assessment, and early prevention can significantly reduce the incidence of VTE. Most guidelines recommend both medical and physical prevention, and we hope to demonstrate how they would affect the incidence among perioperative orthopedic patients. We want to explore if there is a difference between the two types of LWMH with or without an IPC device to provide more evidence for future guidelines and prevent more patients from the threat of VTE.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study received approval from the IRB of the coordinating center and all participating hospitals. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1900027659. Registered on 17 November 2019.

Padua prediction score may be inappropriate for VTE risk assessment in hospitalized patients with acute respiratory conditions: A Chinese single-center cohort study

Background

The Padua Prediction Score (PPS) recommended by the guidelines lacks effective external validation in a Chinese cohort. This study sought to assess the accuracy of the PPS to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in medical inpatients with acute respiratory conditions.

Methods

This consecutive cohort study included 1,574 inpatients from January to August 2019. The occurrence rate of VTE in patients classified at high-risk and low-risk groups according to PPS and Caprini risk assessment model (RAM) was compared. The discriminatory capability of the RAMs was evaluated in all the patients and the subgroup without pharmacological prophylaxis. Reclassification parameters were also used to assess the clinical utility.

Results

170 (10.8%) patients were objectively confirmed as having VTE during hospitalization. The incidence rate of VTE in low-risk patients was 6.3% by PPS, which was significantly higher than that by Caprini RAM (2.6%, p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) for PPS and Caprini RAM was 0.714 (95%CI, 0.672-0.756) and 0.760 (95%CI, 0.724-0.797), respectively (p = 0.003). The AUC of Caprini RAM was larger than PPS even in subgroups without pharmacological prophylaxis (0.774 vs 0.709, p = 0.002). Compared with Caprini RAM, the net reclassification index was estimated at 0.037 (p = 0.436), and integrated discrimination improvement was 0.015 (p = 0.495) by PPS.

Conclusions

According to our cohort study, PPS may not be appropriate to predict VTE risk in hospitalized patients with acute respiratory conditions. An accurate, widely applicable, validated RAM needs to be further constructed in Chinese medical inpatients.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Medical and Surgical Patients - What's Our Reality?

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) includes pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in lower limbs, and thrombosis in rare locations. VTE is a common cardiovascular disease, being the leading preventable cause of in-hospital death. Both surgical and acute medical patients have an elevated risk of developing VTE. VTE risk assessment is essential to identify patients who might benefit from VTE prophylaxis accurately. Clinical data on risk factors and prophylaxis in Portugal are scarce. We aimed to determine the proportion of at-risk patients who received prophylaxis and the incidence of bleeding events. We also intended to study the rate of VTE in a cohort of medical and surgical patients during the hospitalization period and three months after discharge.

METHODS

During one week in 2020, adults admitted for more than 72hr to a medical or surgical ward were included. The study excluded patients with a diagnosis of VTE three months before hospitalization and who were either chronically receiving anticoagulation therapy or had started it 48 hours after admission. Risk assessments were based on the Padua Prediction Score (PPS) for medical patients and the Caprini Risk Assessment Model (CRAM) for surgical patients. We used CHEST guidelines, 9th edition, to determine the adequacy of the prophylactic method.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients were analyzed, 18.7% of which tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. VTE risk in surgical patients was categorized as very low or low (16.6%), moderate (37.5%), and high (43.8%), according to the CRAM. Risk in medical patients was categorized as low (60.0%) or high (40.0%) according to the PPS. We estimated that VTE chemoprophylaxis was overused in about 30.0% of patients vs. 7.0% who were at risk and did not receive appropriate chemoprophylaxis. The rate of thromboembolic events was 4.1% (n=5), 2 of which happened after discharge. Two of these patients were under VTE prophylaxis during hospitalization. Major bleeding occurred in 2.4% of patients (n=3).

DISCUSSION

A significant number of hospitalized patients are deemed to be at risk for VTE, making appropriate prophylaxis essential. The results emphasize the insufficient management of VTE prophylaxis.

Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting the risk of immediate postoperative deep vein thrombosis after open wedge high tibial osteotomy

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify independent risk factors for immediate postoperative deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) and to develop and validate a predictive nomogram.

METHODS

Patients who underwent OWHTO for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) from June 2017 to December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline data and laboratory test results were collected, and the occurrence of DVT in the immediate postoperative period was regarded as the study outcome event. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent risk factors associated with a higher incidence of immediate postoperative DVT. The predictive nomogram was constructed based on the analysis results. The stability of the model was further assessed in this study using patients from January to September 2022 as an external validation set.

RESULTS

741 patients were enrolled in the study, of which 547 were used in the training cohort and the other 194 for the validation cohort. Multivariate analysis revealed a higher Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade (III vs. I-II OR 3.09, 95% CI 0.93-10.23. IV vs. I-II OR 5.23, 95% CI 1.27-21.48.), platelet to hemoglobin ratio (PHR) > 2.25 (OR 6.10, 95% CI 2.43-15.33), Low levels of albumin (ALB) (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.90), LDL-C > 3.40 (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.22-7.65), D-dimer > 1.26 (OR 2.83, 95% CI 1.16-6.87) and BMI ≥ 28 (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.02-6.50) were the independent risk factors of immediate postoperative DVT. The concordance index (C-index) and Brier score of the nomogram were 0.832 and 0.036 in the training set, and the corrected values after internal validation were 0.795 and 0.038, respectively. The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the calibration curve, the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, and the decision curve analysis (DCA) performed well in both the training and validation cohorts.

CONCLUSION

This study developed a personalized predictive nomogram with six predictors, which allows surgeons to stratify risk and recommended immediate ultrasound scans for patients with any of these factors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Contemporary adequacy of thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients in Switzerland: a bi-centric prospective cohort

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism is a dreaded complication of hospitalised patients, with associated morbidity, mortality and increased healthcare costs. Previous studies have shown that pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, though effective, is inadequately administered in a large proportion of medical inpatients.

STUDY AIMS

Our primary aim was to evaluate the contemporary adequacy of thromboprophylaxis in medical inpatients admitted to two Swiss hospitals (a university hospital and a regional hospital). The secondary aim was to estimate the 90-day incidence of relevant thrombotic and bleeding events.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort, patients were recruited at the University Hospital of Geneva and the Regional Hospital of Lugano between September 2020 and February 2021 and followed for 90 days for venous thromboembolism and bleeding events. The adequacy of thromboprophylaxis (pharmacological and/or mechanical) at 24h after hospital admission was evaluated according to the simplified Geneva risk score for hospital-associated venous thromboembolism.

RESULTS

Among 200 participants (100 at each site, mean age of 65 years), 57.5% were deemed at high risk of venous thromboembolism at admission. Thromboprophylaxis was adequate in 59.5% (95% CI 52.3-66.4%). Among high-risk and low-risk inpatients, thromboprophylaxis was adequate in 71.3% and 43.5%, respectively, with differences between sites. At 90 days, risks of adjudicated venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and mortality were 1.5%, 1.5% and 6.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Despite the extensive literature on thromboprophylaxis, the adequacy of thromboprophylaxis has not improved and remains insufficient among medical inpatients. Implementation and evaluation of clinical decision support systems are critically needed in this field.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov number: NCT05306821.

A systematic review of venous thromboembolism mechanical prophylaxis devices during surgery

PURPOSE

Hospitalisation and surgery are major risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) and graduated compression stockings (GCS) are common mechanical prophylaxis devices used to prevent VTE. This review compares the safety and efficacy of IPC and GCS used singularly and in combination for surgical patients.

METHODS

Ovid Medline and Pubmed were searched in a systematic review of the literature, and relevant articles were assessed against eligibility criteria for inclusion along PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

This review is a narrative description and critical analysis of available evidence. Fourteen articles were included in this review after meeting the criteria. Results of seven studies comparing the efficacy of IPC versus GCS had high heterogeneity but overall suggested IPC was superior to GCS. A further seven studies compared the combination of IPC and GCS versus GCS alone, the results of which suggest that combination mechanical prophylaxis may be superior to GCS alone in high-risk patients. No studies compared combination therapy to IPC alone. IPC appeared to have a superior safety profile, although it had a worse compliance rate and the quality of evidence was poor. The addition of pharmacological prophylaxis may make mechanical prophylaxis superfluous in the post-operative setting.

CONCLUSION

IPC may be superior to GCS when used as a single prophylactic device. A combination of IPC and GCS may be more efficacious than GCS alone for high-risk patients. Further high-quality research is needed focusing on clinical relevance, safety and comparing combination mechanical prophylaxis to IPC alone, particularly in high-risk surgical settings when pharmacological prophylaxis is contraindicated.

Effectiveness of an artificial intelligence clinical assistant decision support system to improve the incidence of hospital-associated venous thromboembolism: a prospective, randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Thromboprophylaxis has been determined to be safe, effective and cost-effective for hospitalised patients at venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. However, Chinese medical institutions have not yet fully used or improperly used thromboprophylaxis. The effectiveness of information technology applied to thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised patients has been proved in many retrospective studies, lacking of prospective research evidence.

METHODS

All hospitalised patients aged >18 years not discharged within 24 hours from 1 September 2020 to 31 May 2021 were prospectively enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to the control (9890 patients) or intervention group (9895 patients). The control group implemented conventional VTE prevention programmes; the intervention group implemented an Artificial Intelligence Clinical Assistant Decision Support System (AI-CDSS) on the basis of conventional prevention. Intergroup demographics, disease status, hospital length of stay (LOS), VTE risk assessment and VTE prophylaxis were compared using the χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to explore the risk factor of VTE.

RESULTS

The control and intervention groups had similar baseline characteristics. The mean age was 58.32±15.41 years, and mean LOS was 7.82±7.07 days. In total, 5027 (25.40%) and 2707 (13.67%) patients were assessed as having intermediate-to-high VTE risk and high bleeding risk, respectively. The incidence of hospital-associated VTE (HA-VTE) was 0.38%, of which 86.84% had deep vein thrombosis. Compared with the control group, the incidence of HA-VTE decreased by 46.00%, mechanical prophylaxis rate increased by 24.00% and intensity of drug use increased by 9.72% in the intervention group. However, AI-CDSS use did not increase the number of clinical diagnostic tests, prophylaxis rate or appropriate prophylaxis rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Thromboprophylaxis is inadequate in hospitalised patients with VTE risk. The role of AI-CDSS in VTE risk management is unknown and needs further in-depth study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2000035452.

Prescribing pattern of anticoagulants in patients with cancer associated thrombosis: Results of a survey among MITO group and AIOM society

INTRODUCTION

Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has been the backbone of the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT). Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have shown efficacy and safety not inferior to LMWH and guidelines included DOACs as an option for CAT treatment. Nevertheless, DOACs are still poorly prescribed in patients with cancer. The aim of this survey was to better understand prescription patterns of anticoagulants, in particular of DOACs, especially in gynecological cancers (GCs).

METHODS

Our survey was made up of 21 questions, the last four questions addressed to medical doctors (MDs) involved in GCs. An invitation to complete the survey was sent by e-mail to 691 MITO (Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynaecologic malignancies) and 2093 AIOM (Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica) members.

RESULTS

Overall, 113 MDs completed the questionnaire, 69 involved in GCs. Most respondents (46, 41%) were aged 30-40 years old, worked in public hospitals (59, 52.2%), were medical oncologists (86, 76.1%). LMWH was the preferred choice for the treatment of CAT (104, 92%). However, 89 respondents (78.8%) prescribed or asked to prescribe a DOAC for CAT. The major concern about DOACs was the difficulty in verifying the therapeutic effect and the absence of antidotes in case of bleeding (37.9%). In patients with GCs, DOACs were used with niraparib, olaparib, rucaparib and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in less than 10 patients by 23%, 20%, 9% and 10.2% of respondents, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The responders are aware of the Direct-acting oral anticoagulants option and would like to use them.

Establishment of risk nomogram prediction model for venous catheter thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Venous catheters are widely used in clinical practice, but a drawback of their usage is the increased risk of thrombosis.

AIMS

The current study explored the risk factors affecting the formation of thrombosis following venous catheterization and establishes a risk nomogram prediction model for catheter-related thrombosis.

METHODS

Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were carried out to identify the independent factors involved in venous catheter thrombosis. These factors were included in the construction of a nomogram. Finally, the C-index and calibration curves were used to validate the nomogram.

RESULT

A total of 146 cases were included in the sample, of which 36 were cases of thrombosis. The results of the univariate logistic regression analysis showed that the following were significant factors: age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scoring system (APACHE II) score, white blood cell (WBC), hematocrit (HCT), international normalized ratio (INR), fibrinogen (FIB), and D-dimer. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed, which confirmed that the factors of age (AUC: 0.677, 95% CI: 0.564-0.790), APACHE II score (AUC: 0.746, 95% CI: 0.656-0.837), INR (AUC: 0.743, 95% CI: 0.636-0.849), and D-dimer (AUC: 0.826, 95% CI: 0.750-0.902) were independent variables. Next, a nomogram was constructed using these independent variables for predicting venous catheter thrombosis. Favorable results with C-indexes (0.816; 95% CI: 0.780-0.882) and calibration curves closer to ideal curves indicated the accurate predictive ability of this nomogram.

CONCLUSION

The individualized nomogram demonstrated effective prognostic prediction for patients with venous thrombosis.

Prediction of in-hospital bleeding in acutely ill medical patients: External validation of the IMPROVE bleeding risk score

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis slightly increases bleeding risk. The only risk assessment model to predict bleeding in medical inpatients, the IMPROVE bleeding risk score, has never been validated using prospectively collected outcome data.

METHODS

We validated the IMPROVE bleeding risk score in a prospective multicenter cohort of medical inpatients. Primary outcome was in-hospital clinically relevant bleeding (CRB) within 14 days of admission, a secondary outcome was major bleeding (MB). We classified patients according to the score in high or low bleeding risk. We assessed the score's predictive performance by calculating subhazard ratios (sHRs) adjusted for thromboprophylaxis use, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC).

RESULTS

Of 1155 patients, 8 % were classified as high bleeding risk. CRB and MB within 14 days occurred in 0.94 % and 0.47 % of low-risk and in 5.6 % and 3.4 % of high-risk patients, respectively. Adjusted for thromboprophylaxis, classification in the high-risk group was associated with an increased risk of 14-day CRB (sHR 4.7, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.5-14.5) and MB (sHR 4.9, 95%CI 1.0-23.4). PPV was 5.6 % and 3.4 %, while NPV was 99.1 % and 99.5 % for CRB and MB, respectively. The AUC was 0.68 (95%CI 0.66-0.71) for CRB and 0.73 (95%CI 0.71-0.76) for MB.

CONCLUSION

The IMPROVE bleeding risk score showed moderate to good discriminatory power to predict bleeding in medical inpatients. The score may help identify patients at high risk of in-hospital bleeding, in whom careful assessment of the risk-benefit ratio of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is warranted.

Incidence, prevention, risk factors, and prediction of venous thromboembolism in Chinese patients after colorectal cancer surgery: a prospective, multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common and serious complication after colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. Few large-sample studies have reported VTE incidence and management status after CRC surgery in China. This study aimed to investigate the incidence and prevention of VTE in Chinese patients after CRC surgery, identify risk factors for developing VTE, and construct a new scoring system for clinical decision-making and care planning.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from 46 centers in 17 provinces in China. Patients were followed up for 1 month postoperatively. The study period was from May 2021 to May 2022. The Caprini score risk stratification and VTE prevention and incidence were recorded. The predictors of the occurrence of VTE after surgery were identified by multivariate logistic regression analysis, and a prediction model (CRC-VTE score) was developed.

RESULTS

A total of 1836 patients were analyzed. The postoperative Caprini scores ranged from 1 to 16 points, with a median of 6 points. Of these, 10.1% were classified as low risk (0-2 points), 7.4% as moderate risk (3-4 points), and 82.5% as high risk (≥5 points). Among these patients, 1210 (65.9%) received pharmacological prophylaxis, and 1061 (57.8%) received mechanical prophylaxis. The incidence of short-term VTE events after CRC surgery was 11.2% (95% CI 9.8-12.7), including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (11.0%, 95% CI 9.6-12.5) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (0.2%, 95% CI 0-0.5). Multifactorial analysis showed that age (≥70 years), history of varicose veins in the lower extremities, cardiac insufficiency, female sex, preoperative bowel obstruction, preoperative bloody/tarry stool, and anesthesia time at least 180 min were independent risk factors for postoperative VTE. The CRC-VTE model was developed from these seven factors and had good VTE predictive performance ( C -statistic 0.72, 95% CI 0.68-0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided a national perspective on the incidence and prevention of VTE after CRC surgery in China. The study offers guidance for VTE prevention in patients after CRC surgery. A practical CRC-VTE risk predictive model was proposed.

Thromboprophylaxis in Patients Admitted to the Surgical Ward: Clinical Audit

Background

Hospital-acquired thrombosis (HAT) is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and financial burden globally. Following trusted guidelines for VTE prevention has shown effective, safe, and satisfactory results. This prompts national collaborative efforts to maintain a consensus approach for the safe risk assessment of inpatients and the prescription of thromboprophylaxis.

Objective

This study aimed to detect and estimate deviations from international thromboprophylaxis protocols. The study also aimed to raise the quality of practice and adherence to evidence-based protocols in Alshuhada Teaching Hospital.

Methods

A cross-sectional audit of general surgical inpatients was performed from October 2021 to May 2022. The first cycle was from 1/10/2021 to 21/10/2021, and the second cycle was from 13/5/2022 to 31/5/2022. The target population was adults aged >18 years. Data were collected via an online checklist on two separate occasions. The criteria were based on the NICE guideline for venous thromboembolism in individuals aged over 16 years: "Reducing the risk of hospital-acquired deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism NG89".

Results

Forty-five surgical inpatients were included in this study: 20 in the first cycle and 25 in the second cycle. The first-cycle report showed that only 25% of VTE candidates received this regimen. In the second cycle, practice significantly improved, with 92% of admitted patients having their risk assessment tool completed within 24 h of admission. 79% of VTE prophylaxis candidates were prescribed adequate pharmacological prophylaxis within 14 h of admission.

Conclusion

The rate of adequate thromboprophylaxis for inpatients undergoing surgery was very low before clinicians received education on VTE prevention, whereas was evidently high after they had received them. The cause of non-adherence in the pre-intervention phase was a lack of adequate knowledge regarding the magnitude and burden of HAT and the importance of thromboprophylaxis, which has a potential role in preventing the majority of HAT.

Caprini assessment utilization and impact on patient safety in gynecologic surgery

PURPOSE

Postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) can potentially be associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. The aim of this study was to determine the utilization of Caprini guideline indicated VTE in elective gynecologic surgery patients and its impact on postoperative VTE and bleeding complications.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of elective gynecologic surgical procedures performed between January 1, 2016, and May 31, 2021. Two study cohorts were generated: (1) those who received and (2) those who did not receive VTE prophylaxis based on Caprini score risk stratification. Outcome measures were then compared between the study cohorts and included the development of a VTE up to 90-days postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures included postoperative bleeding events.

RESULTS

A total of 5471 patients met inclusion criteria and the incidence of VTE up to 90 days postoperatively was 1.04%. Overall, 29.6% of gynecologic surgery patients received Caprini score-based guideline VTE prophylaxis. 39.2% of patients that met high-risk VTE criteria (Caprini > 5) received appropriate Caprini score-based prophylaxis. In multivariate regression analysis, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (OR 2.37, CI 1.27-4.45, p < 0.0001) and Caprini score (OR 1.13, CI 1.03-1.24, p = 0.008) predicted postoperatively VTE occurrence. Increasing Charlson comorbidity score (OR 1.39, CI 1.31-1.47, P < 0.001) ASA score (OR 1.36, CI 1.19-1.55, P < 0.001) and Caprini score (OR 1.10, CI 1.08-1.13, P < 0.001) were associated with increased odds of receiving appropriate inpatient VTE prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

While the overall incidence of VTE was low in this cohort, enhanced adherence to risk-based practice guidelines may provide more patient benefit than harm to postoperative gynecologic patients.

Psoriatic inflammation-induced atypically located venous thromboembolism: A case of immuno-thrombosis

The immune and hemostatic systems share a common evolutionary origin, both defend against threats to organisms, and inflammation can cause venous thromboembolism. We would like to report a patient with a history of psoriasis, a chronic inflammatory disease, who has been admitted to our clinic with a swollen right arm and collateral veins visible throughout the right upper arm and right pectoral region, which have been present for almost 2 years. Investigations revealed a thrombus extending from the proximal basilic vein into the axillary and subclavian veins but sparing the superior vena cava. Further investigation was performed to reveal any likely cause other than psoriasis, including malignancy, rheumatological disease, or genetic thrombophilia, but none were revealed. This report illustrates that psoriasis-related inflammation can cause atypically located venous thromboembolic events.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Major Orthopedic Surgeries and Factor XIa Inhibitors

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT), poses a significant risk during and after hospitalization, particularly for surgical patients. Among various patient groups, those undergoing major orthopedic surgeries are considered to have a higher susceptibility to PE and DVT. Major lower-extremity orthopedic procedures carry a higher risk of symptomatic VTE compared to most other surgeries, with an estimated incidence of ~4%. The greatest risk period occurs within the first 7-14 days following surgery. Major bleeding is also more prevalent in these surgeries compared to others, with rates estimated between 2% and 4%. For patients undergoing major lower-extremity orthopedic surgery who have a low bleeding risk, it is recommended to use pharmacological thromboprophylaxis with or without mechanical devices. The choice of the initial agent depends on the specific surgery and patient comorbidities. First-line options include low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), direct oral anticoagulants, and aspirin. Second-line options consist of unfractionated heparin (UFH), fondaparinux, and warfarin. For most patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty, the initial agents recommended for the early perioperative period are LMWHs (enoxaparin or dalteparin) or direct oral anticoagulants (rivaroxaban or apixaban). In the case of hip fracture surgery, LMWH is recommended as the preferred agent for the entire duration of prophylaxis. However, emerging factor XI(a) inhibitors, as revealed by a recent meta-analysis, have shown a substantial decrease in the occurrence of VTE and bleeding events among patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery. This discovery poses a challenge to the existing paradigm of anticoagulant therapy in this specific patient population and indicates that factor XI(a) inhibitors hold great promise as a potential strategy to be taken into serious consideration.

Education and clinical pharmacist-led management strategies for the risk and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in general surgery

BACKGROUND

Despite the risks of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in surgical patients are well defined, primary thromboprophylaxis (TP) can be neglected. The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of VTE and appropriateness of TP and to assess the effects of education and clinical pharmacy (CP) services.

METHODS

This study was conducted in a total of 3 periods (n = 800): pre-education (n = 340), post-education (n = 269) and CP intervention period (n = 191) and the risk of VTE and the appropriateness of TP were evaluated. At the end of pre-education period, patients were re-evaluated after education was given about the guidelines on TP and an educative poster was posted in the services (post-education period). During the CP intervention period, the CP made recommendations in terms of optimal TP use to the physicians in charge.

RESULTS

While there was no significant difference in the optimal TP rate administered to the patients before and after education (138/340, 40.6% vs. 122/269, 45.4%; p = 0.238); this rate was increased to 113/191 (59.2%) in the CP intervention period (p = 0.004). High-risk patients who received one type of TP constituted the majority of patients who did not receive optimal TP. While the ratio of high-risk patients undergoing a single type of TP in the pre- and post-education periods (104/340, 30.6% vs. 83/269, 30.9%), was similar (p = 0.819); with the CP interventions, this rate was reduced to 35/191 (18.3%) (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Even though education has positive influence on surgeons, the implementation of CP practices is more effective especially in terms of maintaining optimal TP.

Evidence-based pharmacological prophylaxis recommendations for venous thromboembolism in hospitalized acutely ill medical patients: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines

Venous thromboembolism is a complex multifactorial disease considered the most common cause of preventable deaths in hospitalized patients. Recommendations about pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in adult hospitalized patients are available in clinical practice guidelines for optimization of healthcare delivery and improvement of patient outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines using ADAPTE to synthesize recommendations for pharmacological prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized medical patients at a medium complexity university hospital. Recommendations for pharmacological prophylaxis were extracted from seven clinical practice guidelines considered of high quality after assessment with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. These recommendations will support discussion with specialists and implementation of practices in the setting of the hospital studied.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for hospitalized adult patients: a survey of US health care providers on attitudes and practices

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of preventable mortality among hospitalized patients, but appropriate risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis remain underutilized or misapplied.

Objectives

We conducted an electronic survey of US health care providers to explore attitudes, practices, and barriers related to thromboprophylaxis in adult hospitalized patients and at discharge.

Results

A total of 607 US respondents completed the survey: 63.1% reported working in an academic hospital, 70.7% identified as physicians, and hospital medicine was the most frequent specialty (52.1%). The majority of respondents agreed that VTE prophylaxis is important (98.8%; 95% CI: 97.6%-99.5%) and that current measures are safe (92.6%; 95% CI: 90.2%-94.5%) and effective (93.8%; 95% CI: 91.6%-95.6%), but only half (52.0%; 95% CI: 47.9%-56.0%) believed that hospitalized patients at their institution are on appropriate VTE prophylaxis almost all the time. One-third (35.4%) reported using a risk assessment model (RAM) to determine VTE prophylaxis need; 44.9% reported unfamiliarity with RAMs. The most common recommendation for improving rates of appropriate thromboprophylaxis was to leverage technology. A majority of respondents (84.5%) do not reassess a patient's need for VTE prophylaxis at discharge, and a minority educates patients about the risk (16.2%) or symptoms (18.9%) of VTE at discharge.

Conclusion

Despite guideline recommendations to use RAMs, the majority of providers in our survey do not use them. A majority of respondents believed that technology could help improve VTE prophylaxis rates. A majority of respondents do not reassess the risk of VTE at discharge or educate patients about this risk of VTE at discharge.

Overuse and underuse of thromboprophylaxis in medical inpatients

Background

Thromboprophylaxis (TPX) prescription is recommended in medical inpatients categorized as high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) by validated risk assessment models (RAMs), but how various RAMs differ in categorizing patients in risk groups, and whether the choice of RAM influences estimates of appropriate TPX use is unknown.

Objectives

To determine the proportion of medical inpatients categorized as high or low risk according to validated RAMs, and to investigate the appropriateness of TPX prescription.

Methods

This is a prospective cohort study of acutely ill medical inpatients from 3 Swiss university hospitals. Participants were categorized as high or low risk of VTE by validated RAMs (ie, the Padua, the International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism, simplified, and original Geneva scores). We assessed prescription of any TPX at baseline. We considered TPX prescription in high-risk and no TPX prescription in low-risk patients as appropriate.

Results

Among 1352 medical inpatients, the proportion categorized as high risk ranged from 29.8% with the International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism score to 66.1% with the original Geneva score. Overall, 24.6% were consistently categorized as high risk, and 26.3% as low risk by all 4 RAMs. Depending on the RAM used, TPX prescription was appropriate in 58.7% to 63.3% of high-risk (ie, 36.7%-41.3% underuse) and 52.4% to 62.8% of low-risk patients (ie, 37.2%-47.6% overuse).

Conclusion

The proportion of medical inpatients considered as high or low VTE risk varied widely according to different RAMs. Only half of patients were consistently categorized in the same risk group by all RAMs. While TPX remains underused in high-risk patients, overuse in low-risk patients is even more pronounced.

Adequacy of venous thromboembolism risk stratification and prophylaxis in a tertiary university hospital

Background

Venous thromboembolism is the third most common cardiovascular disease and the main cause of preventable death in hospitalized patients. Prophylaxis is still underused, despite well-established guidelines in the literature. Studies show a worldwide prophylaxis adequacy rate close to 50%.

Objectives

To assess the adequacy of risk stratification and prophylactic measures for venous thromboembolism in a tertiary university hospital.

Methods

A cross-sectional observational study was carried out, collecting data from medical records. Adult patients hospitalized by different specialties were enrolled and divided into surgical and clinical groups. The risk stratification of venous thromboembolism performed by the attending physicians was compared with stratification based on recent guidelines performed by the research physicians. Prophylaxis measures prescribed by the attending physicians were compared with guideline recommendations, thus obtaining the prophylaxis adequacy rate.

Results

400 patients were analyzed, 169 (42.3%) surgical and 231 (57.7%) clinical. The overall stratification adequacy rate was 50.8%. Adequacy rates were 39.1% and 59.3% in the surgical and clinical groups respectively (P < 0.0001). The overall prophylaxis adequacy rate was 71.5%, with 78.1% in the surgical group and 66.7% in the clinical group (P=0.0137).

Conclusions

Risk stratification adequacy is low, demonstrating a low awareness among prescribing physicians of the need for adequate stratification for prescription of prophylaxis. However, the prophylaxis prescription adequacy rates are higher than those in global data.

Effectiveness, safety, and costs of thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin in inpatients with obesity

Background

Obesity is a frequent and significant risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE) among hospitalized adults. Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis can help prevent VTE, but real-world effectiveness, safety, and costs among inpatients with obesity are unknown.

Objective

This study aims to compare clinical and economic outcomes among adult medical inpatients with obesity who received thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed using the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database, which covers more than 850 hospitals in the United States. Patients included were ≥18 years old, had a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis of obesity [International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 diagnosis codes 278.01, 278.02, and 278.03; ICD-10 diagnosis codes E66.0x, E66.1, E66.2, E66.8, and E66.9], received ≥1 thromboprophylactic dose of enoxaparin (≤40 mg/day) or UFH (≤15,000 IU/day) during the index hospitalization, stayed ≥6 days in the hospital, and were discharged between 01 January 2010, and 30 September 2016. We excluded surgical patients, patients with pre-existing VTE, and those who received higher (treatment-level) doses or multiple types of anticoagulants. Multivariable regression models were constructed to compare enoxaparin with UFH based on the incidence of VTE, pulmonary embolism (PE)---------related mortality, overall in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, treatment costs, and total hospitalization costs during the index hospitalization and the 90 days after index discharge (readmission period).

Results

Among 67,193 inpatients who met the selection criteria, 44,367 (66%) and 22,826 (34%) received enoxaparin and UFH, respectively, during their index hospitalization. Demographic, visit-related, clinical, and hospital characteristics differed significantly between groups. Enoxaparin during index hospitalization was associated with 29%, 73%, 30%, and 39% decreases in the adjusted odds of VTE, PE-related mortality, in-hospital mortality, and major bleeding, respectively, compared with UFH (all p < 0.002). Compared with UFH, enoxaparin was associated with significantly lower total hospitalization costs during the index hospitalization and readmission periods.

Conclusions

Among adult inpatients with obesity, primary thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin compared with UFH was associated with significantly lower risks of in-hospital VTE, major bleeding, PE-related mortality, overall in-hospital mortality, and hospitalization costs.

Mortality data from omission of early thromboprophylaxis in critically ill patients highlights the importance of an individualised diagnosis-related approach

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is effective in reducing VTE events, however, its impact on mortality is unclear. We examined the association between omission of VTE prophylaxis within the first 24 h after intensive care unit (ICU) admission and hospital mortality.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Australian New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database. Data were obtained for adult admissions between 2009 and 2020. Mixed effects logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between omission of early VTE prophylaxis and hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 1,465,020 ICU admissions, 107,486 (7.3%) did not receive any form of VTE prophylaxis within the first 24 h after ICU admission without documented contraindication. Omission of early VTE prophylaxis was independently associated with 35% increased odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratios (OR): 1.35; 95% CI: 1.31-1.41). The associations between omission of early VTE prophylaxis and mortality varied by admission diagnosis. In patients diagnosed with stroke (OR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.05-1.52), cardiac arrest (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.65-2.07) or intracerebral haemorrhage (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.19-1.84), omission of VTE prophylaxis was associated with increased risk of mortality, but not in patients diagnosed with subarachnoid haemorrhage or head injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Omission of VTE prophylaxis within the first 24 h after ICU admission was independently associated with increased risk of mortality that varied by admission diagnosis. Consideration of early thromboprophylaxis may be required for patients with stroke, cardiac arrest and intracerebral haemorrhage but not in those with subarachnoid haemorrhage or head injury. The findings highlight the importance of individualised diagnosis-related thromboprophylaxis benefit-harm assessments.

Formal and informal venous thromboembolism risk assessment and impact on prescribing of thromboprophylaxis: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hospital-acquired thrombosis (HAT) is a leading cause of preventable death and disability worldwide. HAT includes any venous thromboembolic (VTE) event occurring in-hospital or within 90-days of hospitalisation. Despite availability of evidence-based guidelines for HAT risk assessment and prophylaxis, guidelines are still underutilised.

AIM

To determine the proportion of patients who developed HAT that could have been potentially prevented with appropriate VTE risk assessment and prophylaxis at a large public hospital in New Zealand. Additionally, the predictors of VTE risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis were examined.

METHOD

VTE patients admitted under general medicine, reablement, general surgery, or orthopaedic surgery service were identified using ICD-10-AM codes. Data were collected on patient characteristics, VTE risk factors, and the thromboprophylaxis regimen prescribed. The hospital VTE guidelines were used to determine rates of VTE risk assessment and the appropriateness of thromboprophylaxis.

RESULTS

Of 1302 VTE patients, 213 HATs were identified. Of these, 116 (54%) received VTE risk assessment, and 98 (46%) received thromboprophylaxis. Patients who received VTE risk assessment were 15 times more likely to receive thromboprophylaxis (odds ratio [OR] = 15.4; 95% CI 7.65-30.98) and 2.8 times more likely to receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis (OR = 2.79; 95% CI 1.59-4.89).

CONCLUSION

A large proportion of high-risk patients who were admitted to medical, general surgery and reablement services and who developed HAT did not receive VTE risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis during their index admission, demonstrating a significant gap between guideline recommendations and clinical practice. Implementing mandatory VTE risk assessment and adherence to guidelines to improve thromboprophylaxis prescription in hospitalised patients may help reduce the burden of HAT.

Unfractionated heparin versus enoxaparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in intensive care units: a propensity score adjusted analysis

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in hospitalized patients. Pharmacologic prophylaxis is used in order to reduce the risk of VTE events. The main purpose of this study is to compare the prevalence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) who received unfractionated heparin (UFH) versus enoxaparin as VTE prophylaxis. Mortality was evaluated as a secondary outcome. This was a Propensity Score Adjusted Analysis. Patients admitted to neurology, surgical, or medical ICUs and screened with venous doppler ultrasonography or computed tomography angiography for detection of VTE were included in the analysis. We identified 2228 patients in the cohort, 1836 (82.4%) patients received UFH and 392 (17.6%) patients received enoxaparin. Propensity score matching yielded a well-balanced cohort of 950 (74% UFH, 26% enoxaparin) patients. After matching, there was no difference in prevalence of DVT (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.67-1.64, p = 0.85) and PE (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.44-1.30, p = 0.31). No significant differences in location and severity of DVT and PE between the two groups were detected. Hospital and intensive care unit stay was similar between the two groups. Unfractionated heparin was associated with a higher rate of mortality, (HR 2.04; 95% CI, 1.13-3.70; p = 0.019). The use of UFH as VTE prophylaxis in ICU patients was associated with a similar prevalence of DVT and PE compared with enoxaparin, and the site and degree of occlusion were similar. However, a higher mortality rate was seen in the UFH group.

Association between thyroid dysfunction and venous thromboembolism: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Thyroid dysfunction plays an important role in the development of cardiovascular disease. However, its relationship with venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis of published cohort and case-control studies to investigate the association between thyroid dysfunction and VTE comprehensively.

METHODS

Three reviewers independently searched EMbase, PubMed, China national knowledge infrastructure, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant articles from the time of database establishment to 01 October 2022 and identified all studies on thyroid dysfunction and VTE as studies of interest. Of the 2418 publications retrieved, we identified 10 articles with 15 studies that met our selection criteria. Pooled ORs and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using fixed- or random-effect models.

RESULTS

We pooled 8 studies by a fixed-effect model, which suggested an increased risk of VTE in patients with (subclinical) hyperthyroidism (OR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.29-1.38). In the other 7 studies on patients with (subclinical) hypothyroidism, the risk was similarly increased when pooled by a random-effect model (OR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.23-1.89). After sensitivity analysis and risk of bias analysis, the risk of VTE was still increased in both (subclinical) hyperthyroidism (OR 1.322, 95% CI: 1.278-1.368) and (subclinical) hypothyroidism (OR 1.74, 95% CI: 1.41-2.16).

CONCLUSION

Patients with thyroid dysfunction have an increased risk of VTE. Therefore, it is recommended to perform thyroid function screening routinely in patients at high risk of VTE.

Improving thromboprophylaxis in the medical inpatients: The role of the resident in an academic hospital

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is one of the main causes of preventable in-hospital death. It is recommended for hospitals to have an appropriate thromboprophylaxis (TP) protocol to avoid VTE complications.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of the resident physician feedback to the staff physician in TP appropriateness after the Caprini RAM score implementation.

METHODS

Caprini RAM was implemented by the residents in medical patients. Patients were divided in low, moderate, high, and highest-risk groups, with TP recommendation accordingly. In cases with inadequate TP, the resident provided feedback to the staff physician for adjustment. Change to appropriate TP was assessed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 265 records were included. Before intervention, 193 (72.8%) patients had appropriate TP and post-intervention, 207 (78.1%) patients received adequate TP (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Feedback from the internal medicine resident to staff physician improves appropriate TP in medical inpatients as a quality of care strategy.

Right needle, right patient, right time? A national flash-mob audit of thromboprophylaxis in palliative care

BACKGROUND

The prevention of hospital associated thrombosis in palliative care remains controversial yet many countries recommend the documented risk assessment and where appropriate pharmacological prophylaxis of inpatients with advanced cancer.

AIM

To audit adherence to national guidelines which require hospitalised patients to be risk assessed and receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis.

DESIGN

A one day "flash-mob" audit across multiple clinical inpatient sites across the United Kingdom.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Inpatients receiving palliative care within hospitals, hospices and specialist palliative care units across the United Kingdom.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 1125 patients (514 hospital and 611 hospice/specialist palliative care units). Appropriate thromboprophylaxis was observed in 90 % of hospital and 90 % hospice/specialist palliative care units. Documented risk assessment was only found in 79 % and 71 % of patient notes respectively. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was contraindicated in 88 % of hospice/specialist palliative care unit patients due to bleeding risk or receiving end-of-life care. Twenty-four percent of patients in hospital had contraindications due to receiving end of life care, bleeding risk and thrombocytopenia. Patients in hospice/specialist palliative care units were of poorer performance status prior to admission with a history of gradual deterioration. Hospitalised patients were more likely to have been admitted following an acute deterioration of previous good performance status.

CONCLUSION

Thromboprophylaxis guidelines were followed correctly for the majority of patients. There were considerable differences in the demographics of patients according to place of admission. Patients admitted to hospice/specialist palliative care units were sicker and had more contraindications to prophylaxis than those admitted to hospital. Thromboprophylaxis focused research data conducted in hospices is unlikely to be applicable to the care of palliative care patients admitted acutely to hospital.

Prescription appropriateness of anticoagulant drugs for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized multimorbid older patients

The aims were to assess: the prescription prevalence of anticoagulant drugs for thromboprophylaxis (TP) in hospitalized older patients; the appropriateness of their prescription or non-prescription; the in-hospital mortality in appropriately versus non-appropriately prescribed or not prescribed patients. 4836 patients aged 65 or older, admitted to the Italian internal medicine and geriatric wards participating to the REPOSI register from 2012 to 2019 were assessed for prescription of anticoagulant drugs for TP at admission and/or during hospital stay. The Padua Prediction Score (PPS) and the IMPROVE score were used to assess the thrombotic and bleeding risk. Patients were considered to be appropriately prescribed when had PPS ≥ 4 and IMPROVE < 7, and appropriately not prescribed when PPS < 4. Logistic regression model was used to assess whether appropriateness was associated with in-hospital mortality. Among 4836 patients included, anticoagulants were prescribed for TP in 1233 (25.5%). In all, 4461 patients were assessable for appropriateness: 3136 (70.3%) were appropriately prescribed or non-prescribed according to their thrombotic and bleeding risk. Among 1138 patients receiving prophylaxis, only 360 (31.7%) were appropriately prescribed, while among 3323 non-prescribed patients, 2776 (83.5%) were appropriately non-prescribed. The in-hospital mortality rate was lower in patients appropriately prescribed or non-prescribed than in those inappropriately prescribed or non-prescribed (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.46-0.83). In conclusion, a high prevalence of multimorbid hospitalized patients were appropriately prescribed or non-prescribed for TP with anticoagulants, appropriate non-prescription being mainly driven by a high bleeding risk. The appropriateness of prescription or non-prescription was associated with lower in-hospital mortality.

VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM - PECULIARITIES OF COURSE IN EMERGENCY SURGERY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC

OBJECTIVE

The aim: To perform a comparative analysis of VTE in patients with acute surgical abdominal pathology before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: Retrospective study covered 53062 patients operated in the surgical clinic (Lviv city emergency hospital) in 2000-2019. Prospective analysis was based on the results of treatment of 546 patients operated at the same surgical clinic from April 2020 (1st surgical patient with COVID-19) till December 2021. The study analyzed 48 (8.8%) patients operated for acute abdominal pathology and confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19.

RESULTS

Results: In the 1st group, heparin prophylaxis was used in 42.3% of patients, of which non-fractionated heparin were used in 58.6% and low molecular weight heparin - in the remaining patients. From 2020 to 2021, pharmacoprophylaxis was used in 84.5% of cases, of which 67.2% - low molecular weight heparins, 20.1% - non-fractionated heparins and 12.7% - modern oral anticoagulants. The results were unexpected: with a significant increase in the ve¬nous thromboembolism prevention in the 2nd group, a decrease in the number of episodes of thromboembolic complications was not observed. In contrast, pulmonary artery embolism was recorded in 10.6% of patients in the 1st group and 23.5% - in 2nd group, which is a 2.2-fold increase in fatal cases of venous thrombosis (p<0.05) in patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: Increase of mortality due to pulmonary artery embolism more than twicefold in patients with COVID-19 operated for acute surgical abdominal pathology is an objective evidence of a potentiated, uncontrolled risk of venous thromboembolism and requires further in-depth study.

A systematic approach to venous thromboembolism prevention: a focus on UK experience

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality associated with hospitalization. Despite evidence that providing appropriate thromboprophylaxis to those at risk of VTE in hospital, recent data suggest that the delivery of thromboprophylaxis remains suboptimal across the globe, with a lack of standardization in approach to VTE prevention. This review considers the role of VTE risk assessment and interventions to improve the implementation of the VTE prevention pathway and highlights the systematic approach to VTE prevention adopted in England and its impact. Finally, the critical areas for further research and the emerging data presented during the 2022 ISTH annual congress in London, UK, are summarized.

Thromboembolic Disease in Haemophilic Patients Undergoing Major Orthopaedic Surgery: Is Thromboprophylaxis Mandatory?

Haemophilia is a rare genetic disorder, that results from various degrees of deficiency of coagulation factor VIII (haemophilia A), or factor IX (haemophilia B), with an X-linked transmission. The patients affected are in the majority of cases males (who inherit the affected X-chromosome from the maternal side), with rare cases of females with haemophilia (FVIII or FIX < 40 IU/dL), situations in which both X-chromosomes are affected, or one is affected, and the other one is inactive (known as carrier). The hypocoagulable state due to the deficiency of clotting factors, manifests as an excessive, recurrent tendency to bleeding, which positively correlates with plasmatic levels. Severe haemophilia results in hemarthrosis, although recent data have shown that moderate or even mild disease can lead to joint bleeding. Recurrent episodes of haemorrhages, usually affecting large joints such as knees, elbows, or ankles, lead to joint remodelling and subsequent haemophilic arthropathy, which may require arthroplasty as a last therapeutic option. Orthopaedic patients have the highest risk among all for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) with morbid and potentially fatal consequences. While for the rest of the population thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery is efficient, relatively safe, and widely used, for patients with haemophilia who are considered to have a low thromboembolic risk, there is great controversy. The great heterogeneity of this particular population, and the lack of clinical trials, with only case reports or observational studies, makes thromboprophylaxis in major orthopaedic surgery a tool to be used by every clinician based on experience and case particularities. This review aims to briefly summarise the latest clinical data and to offer an insight into the current recommendations that readers would find useful in daily practice.

Modern thromboprophylaxis protocol based on guidelines applied in a respiratory intensive care unit: a single-center prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This study aimed to explore the prophylaxis effect under a guideline-based thromboprophylaxis protocol among critically ill patients in a respiratory ICU.

METHODS

For this single-center prospective cohort study, we followed the thromboprophylaxis protocol, which was drawn up based on relevant guidelines and Chinese experts' advice. Clinical data were entered into an electronic case report form and analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to explore independent risk factors of VTE event under this protocol.

RESULTS

From August 1, 2014, to December 31, 2020, 884 patients underwent thromboprophylaxis according to this protocol; 10.5% of them received mechanical prophylaxis, 43.8% received pharmacological prophylaxis, and 45.7% received pharmacological combined with mechanical prophylaxis. The proportion of VTE events was 14.3% for patients who received the thromboprophylaxis protocol, of which 0.1% had pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE), 2.0% had proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and 12.1% had isolated distal DVT. There was no significant difference between different thromboprophylaxis measures. Cirrhosis (OR 5.789, 95% CI [1.402, 23.894], P = 0.015), acute asthma exacerbation (OR 39.999, 95% CI [4.704, 340.083], P = 0.001), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation treatment (OR 22.237, 95%CI [4.824, 102.502], P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for proximal DVT under thromboprophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

The thromboprophylaxis protocol based on guidelines applied in the ICU was practicable and could help decrease the proportion of PTE and proximal DVT events. The risk factors of VTE events happening under the thromboprophylaxis protocol require more attention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02213978.

Complications of Vascular Disease

Vascular diseases and their sequelae increase perioperative risk for noncardiac surgical patients. In this review, the authors discuss vascular diseases, their epidemiology and pathophysiology, risk stratification, and management strategies to reduce adverse perioperative outcomes.