Patient Adherence and Experience with Extended Use of Prophylactic Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Following Pancreas and Liver Resection

Persistent underuse of extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing major abdominal cancer operations

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend extended venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis for high-risk populations undergoing major abdominal cancer operations. Few studies have evaluated extended VTE prophylaxis in the Medicare population who are at higher risk due to age.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study using a 20% random sample of Medicare claims, 2012-2017. Patients ≥65 years with an abdominal cancer undergoing resection were included. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving new extended VTE prophylaxis prescriptions at discharge. Secondary outcomes included postdischarge VTE and hemorrhagic events.

RESULTS

The study included 72 983 patients with a mean age of 75. Overall, 8.9% of patients received extended VTE prophylaxis. This proportion increased (7.2% in 2012, 10.6% in 2017; p < 0.001). Incidence of postdischarge hemorrhagic events was 1.0% in patients receiving extended VTE prophylaxis and 0.8% in those who did not. The incidence of postdischarge VTE events was 5.2% in patients receiving extended VTE prophylaxis and 2.4% in those who did not.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to guideline-recommended extended VTE prophylaxis in high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal cancer operations is low. The higher rate of VTE in the prophylaxis group may suggest we captured some therapeutic anticoagulation, which would mean the actual rate of thromboprophylaxis is lower than reported herein.

Assessing the use of Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis on the Rates of Venous Thromboembolism and Postpancreatectomy Hemorrhage Following Pancreatectomy for Malignancy

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) in patients with pancreatic or periampullary malignancy preimplementation and postimplementation of routine extended VTE prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend up to 28 days of VTE prophylaxis following major abdominal cancer operations. There is a paucity of data examining rates of VTE and PPH in patients who receive extended VTE prophylaxis following pancreatectomy.

METHODS

Single-institution analysis of patients who underwent pancreatectomy for malignancy (2004-2021). VTE and PPH rates within 90 days of discharge were compared based on receipt of extended VTE prophylaxis with enoxaparin.

RESULTS

A total of 478 patients were included. Twenty-two (4.6%) patients developed a postoperative VTE, 12 (2.5%) of which occurred postdischarge. Twenty-five (5.2%) patients experienced PPH, 13 (2.7%) of which occurred postdischarge. There was no associated difference in the development of postdischarge VTE between patients who received extended VTE prophylaxis and those who did not (2.3% vs 2.8%, P =0.99). There was no associated difference in the rate of postdischarge PPH between patients who received extended VTE prophylaxis and those who did not (3.4% vs 1.9%, P =0.43). In the subset of patients on antiplatelet agents, the addition of enoxaparin did not appear to be associated with higher VTE (3.9 vs. 0%, P =0.31) or PPH (3.0 vs. 4.5%, P =0.64) rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended VTE prophylaxis following pancreatectomy for malignancy was not associated with differences in postdischarge VTE and PPH rates. These data suggest extended VTE prophylaxis is safe but may not be necessary for all patients following pancreatectomy.

Extended postoperative thromboprophylaxis after pancreatic resection for pancreatic cancer is associated with decreased risk of venous thromboembolism in the minimally invasive approach

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with increased venous thromboembolism (VTE). We sought to compare rates of bleeding complications and VTE in patients receiving extended postoperative thromboprophylaxis (EPT) to those who did not, and identify risk factors for VTE after pancreatectomy for PDAC.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of pancreatectomies for PDAC. EPT was defined as 28 days of low molecular weight heparin. Multivariable analysis (MVA) was performed to identify independent risk factors of VTE.

RESULTS

Of 269 patients included, 142 (52.8%) received EPT. Of those who received EPT, 7 (4.9%) suffered bleeding complications, compared to 6 (4.7%) of those who did not (p = 0.938). There was no significant difference in VTE rate at 90 days (2.8% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.728) or at 1 year (6.3% vs. 7.9%, p = 0.624). On MVA, risk factors for VTE included worse performance status, lower preoperative hematocrit, R1/R2 resection, and minimally invasive (MIS) approach. Among those who received EPT, there was no difference in VTE rate between MIS and open approach.

CONCLUSIONS

EPT was not associated with a difference in VTE risk or bleeding complications. MIS approach was associated with a higher risk of VTE; however, this was significantly lower among those who received EPT.

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Enoxaparin & Rivaroxaban for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Orthopaedic Trauma

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether there is a difference in orthopaedic trauma patient medication satisfaction and adherence using an oral versus subcutaneous injectable anticoagulant for venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Single academic Level 1 trauma center.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred twenty adult orthopaedic trauma patients with operative pelvic or lower extremity fractures were randomized and completed the study.

INTERVENTION

Three weeks of either the service standard 40 mg once daily enoxaparin versus trial medication 10 mg once daily rivaroxaban postoperatively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient satisfaction as measured by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9). Medication adherence as measured by the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8).

RESULTS

Medication adherence was similar in both groups. Medication satisfaction was significantly higher in the oral rivaroxaban group based on the TSQM-9 and patient-reported data. Secondary outcomes found no significant difference in the incidence of bleeding events or clinically relevant venous thromboembolism. The enoxaparin group experienced more adverse medication-related events. The rivaroxaban medication regimen costs 7.5-10× less out of pocket for uninsured patients.

CONCLUSION

The results of this randomized controlled trial demonstrate that patients with surgical orthopaedic trauma prefer an oral anticoagulant for postoperative venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis and suggest that rivaroxaban may be a viable option. Furthermore, large-scale studies are needed to confirm safety and efficacy for rivaroxaban in this population as a potential alternative to enoxaparin and aspirin.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Post-hepatectomy venous thromboembolism: a systematic review with meta-analysis exploring the role of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing hepatectomy are at moderate-to-high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This study critically examines the efficacy of combining pharmacological (PTP) and mechanical thromboprophylaxis (MTP) versus only MTP in reducing VTE events against the risk of hemorrhagic complications.

METHODS

A systematic review of major reference databases was undertaken, and a meta-analysis was performed using common-effects model. Risk of bias assessment was performed using Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to assess the precision and conclusiveness of the results.

RESULTS

8 studies (n = 4238 patients) meeting inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. Use of PTP + MTP was found to be associated with significantly lower VTE rates compared to only MTP (2.5% vs 5.3%; pooled RR 0.50, p = 0.03, I² = 46%) with minimal type I error. PTP + MTP was not associated with an increased risk of hemorrhagic complications (3.04% vs 1.9%; pooled RR 1.54, p = 0.11, I² = 0%) and had no significant impact on post-operative length of stay (12.1 vs 10.8 days; pooled MD - 0.66, p = 0.98, I² = 0%) and mortality (2.9% vs 3.7%; pooled RR 0.73, p = 0.33, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Despite differences in the baseline patient characteristics, extent of hepatectomy, PTP regimens, and heterogeneity in the pooled analysis, the current study supports the use of PTP in post-hepatectomy patients (grade of recommendation: strong) as the combination of PTP + MTP is associated with a significantly lower incidence of VTE (level of evidence, moderate), without an increased risk of post-hepatectomy hemorrhage (level of evidence, low).

Do Cost Limitations of Extended Prophylaxis After Surgery Apply to Ulcerative Colitis Patients?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal surgery patients with ulcerative colitis are at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Extended prophylaxis for thromboembolism prevention has been used in colorectal surgery patients, but it has been criticized for its lack of cost-effectiveness. However, the cost-effectiveness of extended prophylaxis for postoperative ulcerative colitis patients may be unique.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of extended prophylaxis in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients.

DESIGN

A decision analysis compared costs and benefits in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients with and without extended prophylaxis over a lifetime horizon.

SETTING

Assumptions for decision analysis were identified from available literature for a typical ulcerative colitis patient's risk of thrombosis, age at surgery, type of thrombosis, prophylaxis risk reduction, bleeding complications, and mortality.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Costs ($) and benefits (quality-adjusted life year) reflected a societal perspective and were time-discounted at 3%. Costs and benefits were combined to produce the main outcome measure, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($ per quality-adjusted life year). Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analysis modeled uncertainty in probabilities, costs, and disutilities.

RESULTS

Using reference parameters, the individual expected societal total cost of care was $957 without and $1775 with prophylaxis (not cost-effective; $257,280 per quality-adjusted life year). Preventing a single mortality with prophylaxis would cost $5 million (number needed to treat: 6134 individuals). Adjusting across a range of scenarios upheld these conclusions 77% of the time. With further sensitivity testing, venous thromboembolism cumulative risk (>1.5%) and ePpx regimen pricing (<$299) were the 2 parameters most sensitive to uncertainty.

LIMITATIONS

Recommendations of decision analysis methodology are limited to group decision-making, not an individual risk profile.

CONCLUSION

Routine ePpx in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients is not cost-effective. This finding is sensitive to higher-than-average rates of venous thromboembolism and low-cost prophylaxis opportunities. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B818.

SE APLICAN LAS LIMITACIONES DE COSTOS DE LA PROFILAXIS PROLONGADA DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA A LOS PACIENTES CON COLITIS ULCEROSA

ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes de cirugía colorrectal con colitis ulcerosa tienen un mayor riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso posoperatorio. La profilaxis extendida para la prevención de la tromboembolia se ha utilizado en pacientes con cirugía colorrectal, aunque ha sido criticada por su falta de rentabilidad. Sin embargo, la rentabilidad de la profilaxis prolongada para los pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa puede ser aceptable.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la rentabilidad de la profilaxis prolongada en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa.DISEÑO:Un análisis de decisiones comparó los costos y beneficios en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa con y sin profilaxis prolongada de por vida.AJUSTE:Los supuestos para el análisis de decisiones se identificaron a partir de la literatura disponible para el riesgo de trombosis de un paciente con colitis ulcerosa típica, la edad al momento de la cirugía, el tipo de trombosis, la reducción del riesgo con profilaxis, las complicaciones hemorrágicas y la mortalidad.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los costos ($) y los beneficios (año de vida ajustado por calidad) reflejaron una perspectiva social y se descontaron en el tiempo al 3%. Los costos y los beneficios se combinaron para producir la principal medida de resultado, la relación costo-efectividad incremental ($ por año de vida ajustado por calidad). El análisis de sensibilidad probabilística multivariable modeló la incertidumbre en probabilidades, costos y desutilidades.RESULTADOS:Utilizando parámetros de referencia, el costo total de atención social esperado individual fue de $957 sin profilaxis y $1775 con profilaxis (no rentable; $257,280 por año de vida ajustado por calidad). La prevención de una sola mortalidad con profilaxis costaría $5.0 millones (número necesario a tratar: 6.134 personas). El ajuste en una variedad de escenarios mantuvo estas conclusiones el 77% de las veces. Con más pruebas de sensibilidad, el riesgo acumulado de TEV (>1,5%) y el precio del régimen de ePpx (<$299) fueron los dos parámetros más sensibles a la incertidumbre.LIMITACIONES:Las recomendaciones de la metodología de análisis de decisiones se limitan a la toma de decisiones en grupo, no a un perfil de riesgo individual.CONCLUSIÓN:La profilaxis extendida de rutina en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa no es rentable. Este hallazgo es sensible a tasas de TEV superiores al promedio y oportunidades de profilaxis de bajo costo. Consulted Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B818. (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio).

Adherence to apixaban for extended thromboprophylaxis after major abdominal or pelvic surgery for cancer: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Due to lack of data, direct oral anticoagulants are not considered by guidelines for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after cancer surgery. Adherence to low-molecular-weight heparin injections in this setting is sometimes poor.

AIM

Analysis of adherence to oral apixaban for extended thromboprophylaxis.

METHODS

Consecutive patients discharged after major surgery for abdominal/pelvic cancer and considered eligible for extended prophylaxis were offered apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily. Primary outcomes were adherence metrics-proportion of prescriptions filled, persistence (not prematurely discontinued), proportion of days covered (PDC) based on apixaban pill counts, and modified Morisky medication adherence scale at Days 28-30. Secondary outcomes were bleeding, VTE, and serious adverse events until Day 90.

RESULTS

We included 53 patients, 51 were analyzed. Of 45 patients with prescriptions all had it filled (95% confidence interval [CI], 92%-100%). Persistence was 98% (95% CI, 90%-100%). PDC was ≥80% for 48 patients (94%; 95% CI, 84%-99%). We found good adherence (0/6 answers "yes") in 75% and moderate (1/6 answers "yes") in 25%. No major bleed or VTE occurred while on apixaban.

CONCLUSION

Our results support good adherence with apixaban for VTE prophylaxis up to 28 days after major abdominal or pelvic cancer surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in the Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Hemihepatectomy

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing hemihepatectomy.

METHODS

From January 2017 to June 2019, 54 and 56 patients were enrolled into the control and ERAS group, retrospectively. All the indicators related to operation, liver functions, and postoperative outcomes were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis identified 72 patients for further analysis.

RESULTS

The clinicopathological characteristics were well-matched after PSM, and there were no significant differences in the operative duration, blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital costs, and most postoperative indicators in these 2 groups. In the ERAS group, D-dimer and fibrin degradation product values were significantly reduced (3.57 (2.874.60) μg/ml vs 4.81 (3.948.29) μg/ml and 11.90 (10.0418.02) μg/ml vs 15.80 (11.5529.24) μg/ml; P = .002 and P = .023, respectively). The days that semiliquid diet was allowed after surgery (2.00 (2.003.00) days vs 5.00 (4.006.00) days, P < .001), abdominal drainage tube indwelling duration (5.00 (4.005.00) days vs 5.00 (4.756.25) days, P = .004), and hospital stay after surgery (6.00 (6.007.00) days vs 8.00 (7.0010.00) days, P < .001) were also significantly shorter. The proportion of patients requiring analgesic treatment was significantly lower in the postoperative day 2 and day 4 (P < .001 and P = .025, respectively). The morbidity was significantly less (36.11% vs 69.44%, P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS programs are feasible and safe in HCC patients undergoing hemihepatectomy. Postoperative anticoagulant therapy may be one of the necessary steps.

A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism Rate After Pancreatoduodenectomy Based on Operative Approach

BACKGROUND

The use of minimally invasive approaches for pancreatoduodenectomy has increased in recent years, but the risk of postoperative VTE is undefined. We aimed to compare venous thromboembolism (VTE) rates after open and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy using an administrative dataset.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy within the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted pancreatectomy database (2016-2018) were identified. VTE was compared between patients who underwent open or minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy directly and after propensity score matching 1:1 for demographics, comorbidities, and peri-/intra-operative factors.

RESULTS

A total of 12,227 patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy during the study period (open: n = 11,217; minimally invasive: n = 1010). Before matching, the VTE rate was higher among patients who underwent minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (5.2% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.033), and minimally invasive resection was independently associated with VTE (OR = 1.46, 95%CI = 1.09-2.06). After matching, there were 916 patients per group without differences in demographics or comorbidities. Patients who underwent minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy had longer median operative times (422 vs. 348 min). The VTE rate remained higher following minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy after matching (5.1% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.018), mainly driven by a higher DVT rate (3.9% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy is associated with a higher postoperative VTE rate compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy.

Association Between Operative Approach and Venous Thromboembolism Rate Following Hepatectomy: a Propensity-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of minimally invasive approaches to hepatectomy has increased in recent years, but the risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) is undefined. We aimed to compare VTE rates after open hepatectomy and minimally invasive hepatectomy using an administrative dataset.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients with primary or metastatic liver tumors were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-targeted hepatectomy database (2016-2018). VTE was compared between patients who underwent open or minimally invasive hepatectomy after a propensity score matching of 1:1 for demographics, comorbidities, and operative factors.

RESULTS

A total of 6935 patients underwent open hepatectomy and 2237 underwent minimally invasive hepatectomy. After matching, there were 1968 patients per group without differences in demographics, comorbidities, or operative variables. Prior to matching, the VTE rate was higher among patients who underwent open hepatectomy (2.8% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.001), and open hepatectomy was independently associated with VTE (OR = 1.90, p = 0.006). The VTE rate remained higher among open hepatectomy compared to minimally invasive hepatectomy after matching (2.4% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.003). Open hepatectomy was associated with a higher VTE rate in patients undergoing minor (1.9 vs. 1.0%, p = 0.028) and major hepatectomy (5.0 vs. 1.9%, p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Patients who undergo an open hepatectomy for malignancy have a higher incidence of postoperative VTE compared to minimally invasive hepatectomy for both minor and major hepatectomy.

Posthospital discharge venous thromboembolism prophylaxis among colorectal and hepatobiliary surgeons: A practice survey

BACKGROUND

Recent practice guidelines recommend venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for 28 days after cancer surgery. We sought to characterize and compare awareness, agreement, adoption, and adherence to these guidelines among surgeons.

METHODS

We electronically surveyed Canadian hepatobiliary surgeons registered with the Canadian Hepatopancreatobiliary Association, general and colorectal surgeons registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and the Canadian Society of Colorectal Surgeons who provide colorectal cancer care with a pilot-tested questionnaire. Attitudes to relevant guideline recommendations and perceived barriers to postdischarge venous thromboembolism prophylaxis were assessed on a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

There were 128 responses (response rate 60%, 128 of 213), including 60 general/colorectal and 68 hepatobiliary surgeons. Most surgeons were aware (122 of 128, 95%), agreed (101 of 122, 83%), adopted (78 of 101, 77%), and adhered (74 of 78, 95%) with guidelines. Preexisting venous thromboembolism-prophylaxis hospital programs, hepatobiliary surgeons, and geographical region were associated with increased likelihood of adherence. Among respondents that did not agree, insufficient evidence (median Likert: 4, interquartile range 3-5) and low incidence of venous thromboembolism (median Likert: 4, interquartile range 3-4) were cited as the strongest barriers. Surgeons who agreed but did not adopt these programs reported that the most significant barriers were "drug cost" (median Likert: 4, interquartile range 3-4) and "subcutaneous injections" (median Likert: 4, interquartile range 3-4). Surgeons that adhered additionally reported "logistical challenges of prescribing" as the greatest implementation barrier.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons who remain apprehensive about postdischarge venous thromboembolism prophylaxis cite poor evidence and cost of the medication as the major barriers. Adherence was higher among hepatobiliary surgeons and at hospitals with existing venous thromboembolism-prophylaxis programs.

Patient's compliance is a contributor to failure of extended antithrombotic prophylaxis in colorectal surgery: prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) continue to be a major source of morbidity following colorectal surgery. Selective extended VTE prophylaxis for high-risk patients is recommended; however, provider compliance is low. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether the "global" extended use of enoxaparin in all colorectal patients is feasible and safe.

METHODS

This is a prospective study conducted at a tertiary care center. All Patients undergoing elective colorectal procedures from November 1, 2017 to October 31, 2018 were discharged on 30 days of enoxaparin. Safety of use and patient compliance were examined.

RESULTS

Total of 270 patients received extended prophylaxis during the study period (100% of intended patients) with five VTE recorded (1.85%). There was no significant difference in rates of VTE or complications when compared to years of selective prophylaxis (1.26% for 2016, 2.32% for 2017). Only 64% of patients reported full compliance.

CONCLUSION

Global use of extended enoxaparin prophylaxis is safe, but does not decrease rates of VTE when compared to selective use. Patient's non-adherence is likely a significant contributing factor.

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism and the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants: a review of clinical outcomes and patient perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism remains an important but challenging aspect in the treatment of patients with cancer. Recently, alternatives to injection of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) have been introduced, the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which could potentially alleviate patients from burdensome daily injections.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the available evidence exploring the role of NOACs in the treatment and secondary prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, from randomized trials, observational data, contemporary guideline recommendations, and patient perspectives.

EXPERT OPINION

Edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and apixaban have proven attractive alternatives to LMWH for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. Contemporary guidelines have promptly endorsed the use of NOACs in patients with most cancer types. Nonetheless, issues remain regarding bleeding risk, interactions with medical cancer treatment, and the effectiveness and safety for extended treatment periods. There are head-to-head comparisons of the NOACs, and therefore no data favoring the use of one NOAC over the others. Patient's preferences are highly diverse and should be part of routine considerations when weighing risks and benefits associated with various available anticoagulant drugs.

Post-discharge venous thromboembolism after pancreatectomy for malignancy: Predicting risk based on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Extended chemoprophylaxis is recommended for high-risk patients following pancreatectomy for malignancy. However, quantifying risk remains difficult. We sought to (a) identify factors associated with post-discharge venous thromboembolism (VTE) following pancreatectomy for malignancy and (b) develop a post-discharge VTE risk calculator to identify high-risk patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreatectomy for malignant histology from 2014 to 2018 were identified from the ACS NSQIP pancreatectomy procedure targeted dataset. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors known at hospital discharge were evaluated for association with post-discharge VTE via multivariable logistic regression. A post-discharge VTE risk calculator was developed and validated.

RESULTS

Of 19 340 analyzed patients, 280 (1.5%) developed post-discharge VTE. Post-discharge VTE was associated with increasing body mass index (BMI; eg, morbidly obese BMI odds ratio [OR]: 1.99 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.30-3.02] vs normal BMI), procedure type (distal pancreatectomy OR: 1.47 [95% CI: 1.02-2.12] vs pancreaticoduodenectomy), pancreatic fistula (OR: 1.59 [95% CI: 1.19-2.13]) and delayed gastric emptying (OR: 1.81 [95% CI: 1.29-2.52]). Patients' predicted probability of post-discharge VTE ranged from 0.7% to 9.0%. Twenty iterations of 10-fold cross-validation demonstrated internal validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors were associated with post-discharge VTE following pancreatectomy for malignancy. This post-discharge VTE risk calculator allows for quantification of individual post-discharge VTE risk, which ranged from 0.7% to 9.0%.

Is Extended-Duration (Post-Hospital Discharge) Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis Safe and Efficacious in High-Risk Surgery Patients? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) persists beyond hospitalization in surgical patients, yet post-hospital discharge chemoprophylaxis regimens are not common. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature regarding extended-duration (post-hospital discharge) venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis and to determine whether it is warranted in high-risk surgical patients, as determined by its safety and efficacy.

METHOD

We searched four online databases for articles evaluating extended-duration (post-hospital discharge) VTE chemoprophylaxis regimens in surgical patients between the years January 2000 and February 2020. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used. GRADE methodology and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials were used to grade the quality of evidence and assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies with 10,544 patients were analyzed. The duration for extended-duration VTE chemoprophylaxis ranged from 7 to 42 days. In our study cohort, high-risk patients not prescribed extended-duration VTE chemoprophylaxis had a mean VTE incidence rate of 12.23%, while patients receiving 28-30 days of chemoprophylaxis had a mean VTE incidence rate of 4.37% (p = 0.006). The risk of bleeding events did not correlate with the duration of chemoprophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

Extended-duration VTE chemoprophylaxis in high-risk surgical patients decreased the incidence of thrombotic complications without increasing the risk of bleeding events. Further research is needed to establish guidelines for the optimal duration of VTE chemoprophylaxis in high-risk surgical patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Patient values and preferences regarding VTE disease: a systematic review to inform American Society of Hematology guidelines

Values and preferences relate to the importance that patients place on health outcomes (eg, bleeding, having a deep venous thrombosis) and are essential when weighing benefits and harms in guideline recommendations. To inform the American Society of Hematology guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) disease, we conducted a systematic review of patients' values and preferences related to VTE. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception to April of 2018 (PROSPERO-CRD42018094003). We included quantitative and qualitative studies. We followed Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidance for rating the certainty and presenting findings for quantitative research about the relative importance of health outcomes and a grounded theory approach for qualitative thematic synthesis. We identified 14 quantitative studies (2465 participants) describing the relative importance of VTE-related health states in a widely diverse population of patients, showing overall small to important impact on patients' lives (certainty of the evidence from low to moderate). Additionally, evidence from 34 quantitative studies (6424 participants) and 15 qualitative studies (570 participants) revealed that patients put higher value on VTE risk reduction than on the potential harms of the treatment (certainty of evidence from low to moderate). Studies also suggested a clear preference for oral medication over subcutaneous medication (moderate certainty). The observed variability in health state values may be a result of differences in the approaches used to elicit them and the diversity of included populations rather than true variability in values. This finding highlights the necessity to explore the variability induced by different approaches to ascertain values.

Dabigatran (Pradaxa) Is Safe for Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

The American College of Chest Physicians and American Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association recommend using low-molecular-weight heparin for 28 days postoperatively for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after cancer surgery. Dabigatran is a once daily oral anticoagulant that is FDA approved for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after orthopedic surgery, uses fixed dosing, and has an antidote.

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgery for malignant pancreatic tumors (neuroendocrine excluded) from January 2017 to January 2018 were converted to dabigatran 220 mg daily on discharge until postoperative day 28; patients with medical or insurance contraindications were converted to enoxaparin or another direct oral anticoagulant. The primary endpoint was bleeding complications through 90 days.

RESULTS

A total of 134 patients were considered for this study (median age 67 ± 10; 58.9% male). Eighty-seven (82.9%) patients received dabigatran and 18 (17.1%) received another form of anticoagulation. There were 19 (4.2%) patients not prescribed dabigatran due to medical or inpatient contraindications. Four patients experienced bleeding complications after discharge while on dabigatran. Two (2%) were major bleeds (Clavien-Dindo IV and V), and 2 (2%) were minor (Clavien-Dindo I). Patient compliance was excellent, with 93% of prescribed patients fully completing their prophylaxis. There were 2 patients that developed symptomatic deep vein thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

The use of a direct oral anticoagulant as extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after major gastrointestinal surgery has not been studied to date. These results show dabigatran to be a safe alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin for extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with regard to bleeding complications.

Patients' experience and compliance with extended low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis post-surgery for gynecological cancer: a prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

Gynaecological cancer patients have a high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). There is limited information on patient experience and compliance with an extended low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis in this setting. The aim of this study was to assess patient compliance, satisfaction and experience with the extended low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis after major surgery for gynaecological cancer.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study conducted in a large tertiary center for gynaecological cancer between July 2017-March 2018. Consecutive patients undergoing surgery for gynaecological cancer who received low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis for four weeks following surgery were recruited. All participants received a log book to record all injections, side effects, and questionnaire to be completed at the end of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients completed and returned the VTE prophylaxis logbook and questionnaire. Sixty-six (62%) patients received low molecular weight heparin for 28 days, twenty-five (24%) for 26-27 days, and 15 (14%) for less than 26 days. The median number of days of therapy was 28 days (range; 12-28 days). Reasons for missed or stopped injections included: forgetfulness(n=12), medical procedures (n=6), pain (n=5), incorrect prescription (n=4), patient choice (n=3), cost (n=2), physician request (n=2), non-availability of person administering the injections (n=1) or unknown (n=5). Sixty-one (58%) patients self-administered the injections. Patients who had the injection performed by a third person were twice as likely to experience pain compared to patients who self-administered (OR 2.81, p=0.003). Eighty-nine (84%) patients self-reported side effects during low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis including: bruising (75%), pain after injections (49%), itchiness (9%), swelling (9%) or other (8%). Although 83 (78%) patients were satisfied with injections, 91 (86%) admitted they would much prefer a tablet form.

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance with standard recommended regimen of 28-days prophylaxis was completed by 62% of patients. Majority of patients (86%) reported a preference for a tablet form, if one was available.

Tinzaparin for Long-Term Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding. Thus, long-term treatment with anticoagulants for secondary prevention is challenging. The objective of this review was to evaluate current evidence on the safety and efficacy of tinzaparin compared with other anticoagulants for long-term VTE treatment in patients with cancer. Based on a preregistered protocol, we identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long-term tinzaparin (therapeutic dose: 175 IU/kg) versus other anticoagulants for at least 3 months after an acute episode of VTE that included adult patients with underlying malignancy. We extracted predefined, clinically relevant outcomes of patients with cancer and, using standard methodology, pooled available data and assessed risk of bias and quality of evidence for each study. Three open-label RCTs evaluating 1169 patients with cancer were included in the analysis. Tinzaparin was associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent VTE at the end of treatment (relative risk [RR], [95% confidence interval] 0.67 [0.46-0.99]) and at longest follow-up (RR: 0.58 [0.39-0.88]) and showed a lower risk of clinically relevant non-major bleeding at the end of treatment (RR: 0.71 [0.51-1.00]). No significant between-treatment differences were found for all-cause mortality (RR: 1.09 [0.91-1.30]) or fatal and non-fatal major bleeding events (RR: 1.06 [0.56-1.99]). The overall quality of evidence was deemed moderate, mainly due to small sample size in 2 of the studies and limited number of events in the meta-analyses. In conclusion, both short- and long-term treatments with tinzaparin were found to be superior to vitamin K antagonists for avoiding recurrences of VTE.