Intermittent pneumatic compression versus additional prophylaxis with enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after laparoscopic surgery for gastric and colorectal malignancies: multicentre randomized clinical trial

Low pneumoperitoneum pressure on venous thromboembolism in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: A randomized controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) poses a significant risk in colorectal cancer surgeries due to hypercoagulability and the anatomical challenges of the pelvic cavity. With the advancement of minimally invasive techniques, intraoperative strategies for preventing VTE may prove to be effective. This study explores the effects of intraoperative pneumoperitoneum pressures on VTE incidence following colorectal cancer surgeries.

METHODS

This single center parallel randomized controlled double-blind, trial involved 302 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic or robotic colorectal surgery. Patients were randomized to either a standard pneumoperitoneum pressure group (SP: 15 mmHg) or a low-pressure group (LP: 10 mmHg). Primary outcomes measured were the incidence of VTE, including symptomatic and asymptomatic DVT and PE. Secondary outcomes included postoperative D-dimer levels, surgery duration, blood loss, surgeon satisfaction, and oncological quality.

RESULTS

Out of 302 randomized patients, 275 were evaluable post exclusions, with 138 in the SP group and 137 in the LP group. The incidence of VTE was 10.9 % in the SP and 13.9 % in the LP group, with no significant difference between the two (P = 0.450). Secondary outcomes such as D-dimer levels, surgery duration, and blood loss showed no significant differences between two groups. Surgeon satisfaction and oncological outcomes were similarly comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial demonstrated no significant difference in the incidence of VTE between standard and low pneumoperitoneum pressures. This suggests that lower pressures may not necessarily provide a benefit in reducing postoperative VTE in colorectal cancer surgeries.

Transformative Deep Vein Thrombosis Prophylaxis With Sequential Compression Devices in the Care of Hospitalized Patients

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a critical complication and concern in hospitalized patients due to its significant morbidity and mortality. Given the complex and multifaceted pathophysiology surrounding DVT formation, patients who have had surgical interventions faced acute or chronic trauma and prolonged immobility are at substantially high risk. Identifying these risk factors early is essential for early intervention and prophylaxis. Current standard-of-care prophylaxis for DVT includes pharmacological agents such as anticoagulants, and recently, there has been an increase in the use of mechanical medical devices such as sequential compression devices (SCDs). Pharmacological prophylaxis, while shown to be effective in some patients, carries certain risks of complications such as bleeding. SCDs offer a safer and more effective approach for these patients. SCDs function by artificially replicating the "pumping mechanism" present in the soleus muscle to enhance venous return and reduce stasis. Various types of SCDs, namely intermittent pneumatic compression and graduated compression stockings, have demonstrated clinical efficacy when used as an adjunctive intervention with anticoagulant medications. This narrative review explores the pathophysiology, risk factors, and prophylactic measures for DVT, focusing on the use of SCDs as a non-pharmacological intervention. Through synthesizing evidence from various studies obtained from PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library and evaluating the benefits and limitations of SCD use, this review highlights the need for tailored prophylactic strategies, considering patient-specific risk factors and preferences.

Observation on the effect of intraoperative risk management combined with comfort nursing in gynecological laparoscopic surgery

To explore the effect of intraoperative risk management combined with comfort nursing in gynecological laparoscopic surgery. A retrospective analysis of 384 cases of laparoscopic surgery subjects admitted from February 2019 to June 2022 in the department of gynecology in our hospital were performed and divided into the control group (n = 192) and observation group (n = 192) according to the difference care that they received. Comfort nursing was taken in the control group, and intraoperative risk management combined with comfort nursing was given in the observation group. The coagulation indexes (activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin time, and thrombin time), immune inflammation indexes (monocytes and neutrophils), the incidence of lower limb deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and the satisfaction of nursing care were compared between the 2 groups. After care, activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin time, and thrombin time in the observation group were significantly longer than those in the control group, and the counts of monocytes and neutrophils in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < .05). The incidence of DVT in the observation group was notablely lower than those in the control group (P = .008). The nursing satisfaction in the observation group was notablely higher than those in the control group (P < .001). Intraoperative risk management combined with comfort nursing intervention can improve the level of coagulation indicators and immune inflammation indicators after gynecological laparoscopic surgery, reduce the incidence of DVT, and improve subject nursing satisfaction.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis and Treatment in Patients With Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To conduct an update of the ASCO venous thromboembolism (VTE) guideline.

METHODS

After publication of potentially practice-changing clinical trials, identified through ASCO's signals approach to updating, an updated systematic review was performed for two guideline questions: perioperative thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between November 1, 2018, and June 6, 2022.

RESULTS

Five RCTs provided information that contributed to changes to the 2019 recommendations. Two RCTs addressed direct factor Xa inhibitors (either rivaroxaban or apixaban) for extended thromboprophylaxis after surgery. Each of these postoperative trials had important limitations but suggested that these two oral anticoagulants are safe and effective in the settings studied. An additional three RCTs addressed apixaban in the setting of VTE treatment. Apixaban was effective in reducing the risk of recurrent VTE, with a low risk of major bleeding.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Apixaban and rivaroxaban were added as options for extended pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after cancer surgery, with a weak strength of recommendation. Apixaban was also added as an option for the treatment of VTE, with high quality of evidence and a strong recommendation.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Impact of Antithrombotic Therapy on the Outcome of Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Literature Review

In recent years, many operations have been performed as laparoscopic surgeries in the field of gastrointestinal surgery, but the effect of antithrombotic therapy (ATT) on hemorrhagic complications in patients who have undergone laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery remains unknown. In addition, the efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) have not yet been concluded. The purpose of this systematic review study is to clarify the effect of ATT on hemorrhagic complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. Articles published between 2013 and 2020 were searched on Google Scholar and PubMed, and research regarding ATT and laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery was included after a thorough examination of each study. Each study yielded information on the study's design, type of surgical procedures, antithrombotic medications used, and surgical outcomes (both thromboembolic and hemorrhagic consequences). This systematic review comprised 20 published papers, including a total of 12,751 patients who received laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. Four studies on thrombosis prevention in VTE were randomized clinical trials, and the other 16 were cohort or case-control studies. For the effects of prolonged use of ATT on hemorrhagic complications, most studies demonstrated that laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery with continued preoperative aspirin could be safely conducted without an increase in the frequency of bleeding complications. On the other hand, most included papers have shown that patients receiving VTE pharmacoprophylaxis may be at an increased risk of bleeding complications, but its effectiveness has not been statistically proven, especially in the Asian patient population. Laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in patients on prolonged ATT can be safely conducted with no increase in the incidence of hemorrhagic or thrombotic complications. The efficacy and safety of VTE pharmacoprophylaxis in laparoscopic colorectal surgery is still at issue. It is necessary to establish available protocols or guidelines by validating reliable studies.

Combined intermittent pneumatic leg compression and pharmacological prophylaxis for prevention of venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

It is generally assumed by practitioners and guideline authors that combined modalities (methods of treatment) are more effective than single modalities in preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE), defined as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), or both. This is the second update of the review first published in 2008.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to assess the efficacy of combined intermittent pneumatic leg compression (IPC) and pharmacological prophylaxis compared to single modalities in preventing VTE.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and AMED databases, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 18 January 2021. We searched the reference lists of relevant articles for additional studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of combined IPC and pharmacological interventions used to prevent VTE compared to either intervention individually.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected studies, applied Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by discussion. We performed fixed-effect model meta-analyses with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model when there was heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The outcomes of interest were PE, DVT, bleeding and major bleeding.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 34 studies involving 14,931 participants, mainly undergoing surgery or admitted with trauma. Twenty-five studies were RCTs (12,672 participants) and nine were CCTs (2259 participants). Overall, the risk of bias was mostly unclear or high. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence and this was downgraded due to the risk of bias, imprecision or indirectness. The addition of pharmacological prophylaxis to IPC compared with IPC alone reduced the incidence of symptomatic PE from 1.34% (34/2530) in the IPC group to 0.65% (19/2932) in the combined group (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.91; 19 studies, 5462 participants, low-certainty evidence). The incidence of DVT was 3.81% in the IPC group and 2.03% in the combined group showing a reduced incidence of DVT in favour of the combined group (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.72; 18 studies, 5394 participants, low-certainty evidence). The addition of pharmacological prophylaxis to IPC, however, increased the risk of any bleeding compared to IPC alone: 0.95% (22/2304) in the IPC group and 5.88% (137/2330) in the combined group (OR 6.02, 95% CI 3.88 to 9.35; 13 studies, 4634 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Major bleeding followed a similar pattern: 0.34% (7/2054) in the IPC group compared to 2.21% (46/2079) in the combined group (OR 5.77, 95% CI 2.81 to 11.83; 12 studies, 4133 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Tests for subgroup differences between orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic surgery participants were not possible for PE incidence as no PE events were reported in the orthopaedic subgroup. No difference was detected between orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic surgery participants for DVT incidence (test for subgroup difference P = 0.19).  The use of combined IPC and pharmacological prophylaxis modalities compared with pharmacological prophylaxis alone reduced the incidence of PE from 1.84% (61/3318) in the pharmacological prophylaxis group to 0.91% (31/3419) in the combined group (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.71; 15 studies, 6737 participants, low-certainty evidence). The incidence of DVT was 9.28% (288/3105) in the pharmacological prophylaxis group and 5.48% (167/3046) in the combined group (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.70; 17 studies; 6151 participants, high-certainty evidence). Increased bleeding side effects were not observed for IPC when it was added to anticoagulation (any bleeding: OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.35, 6 studies, 1314 participants, very low-certainty evidence; major bleeding: OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.18, 5 studies, 908 participants, very low-certainty evidence). No difference was detected between the orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic surgery participants for PE incidence (test for subgroup difference P = 0.82) or for DVT incidence (test for subgroup difference P = 0.69).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that combining IPC with pharmacological prophylaxis, compared to IPC alone reduces the incidence of both PE and DVT (low-certainty evidence). Combining IPC with pharmacological prophylaxis, compared to pharmacological prophylaxis alone, reduces the incidence of both PE (low-certainty evidence) and DVT (high-certainty evidence). We downgraded due to risk of bias in study methodology and imprecision. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that the addition of pharmacological prophylaxis to IPC increased the risk of bleeding compared to IPC alone, a side effect not observed when IPC is added to pharmacological prophylaxis (very low-certainty evidence), as expected for a physical method of thromboprophylaxis. The certainty of the evidence for bleeding was downgraded to very low due to risk of bias in study methodology, imprecision and indirectness. The results of this update agree with current guideline recommendations, which support the use of combined modalities in hospitalised people (limited to those with trauma or undergoing surgery) at risk of developing VTE. More studies on the role of combined modalities in VTE prevention are needed to provide evidence for specific patient groups and to increase our certainty in the evidence.

A Review of Current and Future Antithrombotic Strategies in Surgical Patients-Leaving the Graduated Compression Stockings Behind?

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains an important consideration within surgery, with recent evidence looking to refine clinical guidance. This review provides a contemporary update of existing clinical evidence for antithrombotic regimens for surgical patients, providing future directions for prophylaxis regimens and research. For moderate to high VTE risk patients, existing evidence supports the use of heparins for prophylaxis. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been validated within orthopaedic surgery, although there remain few completed randomised controlled trials in other surgical specialties. Recent trials have also cast doubt on the efficacy of mechanical prophylaxis, especially when adjuvant to pharmacological prophylaxis. Despite the ongoing uncertainty in higher VTE risk patients, there remains a lack of evidence for mechanical prophylaxis in low VTE risk patients, with a recent systematic search failing to identify high-quality evidence. Future research on rigorously developed and validated risk assessment models will allow the better stratification of patients for clinical and academic use. Mechanical prophylaxis' role in modern practice remains uncertain, requiring high-quality trials to investigate select populations in which it may hold benefit and to explore whether intermittent pneumatic compression is more effective. The validation of DOACs and aspirin in wider specialties may permit pharmacological thromboprophylactic regimens that are easier to administer.

Accreditation as a qualified surgeon improves surgical outcomes in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy

PURPOSE

The Endoscopic Surgical Skill Quantification System for qualified surgeons (QSs) was introduced in Japan to improve surgical outcomes. This study reviewed the surgical outcomes after initial experience performing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) and evaluated the improvement in surgical outcomes following accreditation as a QS.

METHODS

Eighty-seven consecutive patients who underwent LDG for gastric cancer by a single surgeon were enrolled in this study. The cumulative sum method was used to analyze the learning curve for LDG. The surgical outcomes were evaluated according to the two phases of the learning curve (learning period vs. mastery period) and accreditation (non-QS period vs. QS period).

RESULTS

The learning period for LDG was 48 cases. Accreditation was approved at the 67th case. The operation time and estimated blood loss were significantly reduced in the QS period compared to the non-QS period (230 vs. 270 min, p < 0.001; 20.5 vs. 59.8 ml, p = 0.024, respectively). Furthermore, the major complication rate was significantly lower in the QS period than in the non-QS period (0 vs. 10.6%, p = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Experience performing approximately 50 cases is required to reach proficiency in LDG. After receiving accreditation as a QS, the surgical outcomes, including the complication rate, were improved.