Incidence of venous thromboembolism after robotic-assisted hysterectomy in obese patients with endometrial cancer: do we need extended prophylaxis?

Is pharmacologic venous Thromboprophylaxis necessary for patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for endometrial Cancer? A systematic review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Given the low incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in endometrial cancer patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery, coupled with the existing uncertainties within guidelines regarding pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in this area, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive literature review. This review aims to evaluate the necessity of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in these patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched from inception to March 10, 2024. The analysis was performed using R version 4.2.3.

RESULTS

Seven studies involving 3931 endometrial cancer patients were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis results revealed that within 30 days postoperatively, the incidence of VTE was 0.51% (5 out of 990) in the pharmacologic prophylaxis group and 0.70% (7 out of 995) in the mechanical prophylaxis group, with a relative risk (RR) of 1.14 (95% CI 0.19-6.95), indicating no significant difference between the groups. Additionally, within the same timeframe, the incidence of VTE was 0.37% (4 out of 1083) in the extended pharmacologic prophylaxis group and 1.14% (4 out of 352) in the non-extended pharmacologic prophylaxis group, yielding an RR of 0.41 (95% CI 0.11-1.54), again showing no significant difference between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that routine pharmacological VTE prophylaxis may not be imperative for endometrial cancer patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery, as mechanical prophylaxis alone seems to be efficacious. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that a subset of high-risk patients may derive benefit from pharmacological prophylaxis or even extended regimens. Nonetheless, the absence of a validated risk prediction model for identifying such patients underscores the need for further research in this area.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

CRD 42024516595.

Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis after Robotic Staging for Endometrial Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to estimate the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after robotic staging for endometrial cancer and to compare the incidence of VTE in patients who received a single dose of preoperative prophylaxis of enoxaparin with those who received extended postoperative prophylaxis.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent robot-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Patients were categorized into two groups: preoperative prophylaxis (PP), patients who received a single dose of enoxaparin preoperatively, and extended prophylaxis (EP), patients who received 28 days of enoxaparin postoperatively.

RESULTS

In total, 148 patients were included, with 117 patients in the PP group and 31 patients in the EP group. The overall incidence of VTE within 30 days postoperatively was 0.67%. No significant difference was found between the PP and the EP groups (0.9% and 0%, respectively; P = 1.00). Most patients in the cohort had endometrioid adenocarcinoma (78%) with low-grade disease (70%), although there were a greater number of patients in the PP group with uterine serous carcinoma compared with the EP group (17% vs 10%; P = 0.034). The PP group had higher estimated blood loss (106 vs 81 mL; P = 0.009) and longer operative times (178 vs 151 min; P = 0.028) compared with the EP group. Significantly more patients in the PP group underwent lymph node dissection compared with the EP group (32% vs 7%; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of VTE following robot-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer in this study was 0.67%. No significant difference was found in VTE incidence between the PP group compared with the EP group. Mechanical prophylaxis plus a single dose of preoperative pharmacologic prophylaxis may suffice for low-risk patients following robotic surgical staging for endometrial cancer.

Association of Prophylaxis and Length of Stay With Venous Thromboembolism in Abdominopelvic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (eVTEp) is recommended for select patients who have undergone major abdominopelvic surgery to prevent postdischarge venous thromboembolism (pdVTE). Criteria for selection of these patients are untested for this purpose and may be ineffective. To address this gap, we investigated the effectiveness of eVTEp on pdVTE rates.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing abdominopelvic surgery from January 2016 to February 2020 was performed using data from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. pdVTE was the main outcome. Our exposure variable, eVTEp, was compared dichotomously. Length of stay (LOS) was compared categorically using clinically relevant groups. Age, race, cancer occurrence, inflammatory bowel disease, surgical approach, and surgical time were covariates among other variables. Descriptive statistics, propensity score matching, and multivariable logistic regression were performed to compare pdVTE rates.

RESULTS

A total of 45,637 patients underwent abdominopelvic surgery. Of which, 3063 (6.71%) were prescribed eVTEp. Two hundred eighty-five (0.62%) had pdVTE. Of the 285, 59 (21%) patients received eVTEp, while 226 (79%) patients did not. After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression analysis showed pdVTE was associated with eVTEp and LOS of 5 d or more (P < 0.001). eVTEp was not associated with LOS. Further analysis showed increased risk of pdVTE with increasing LOS independent of prescription of eVTEp based on known risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

pdVTE was associated with increasing LOS but not with other VTE risk factors after propensity score matching. Current guidelines for eVTEp do not include LOS. Our findings suggest that LOS >5 d should be added to the criteria for eVTEp.

Extended thromboprophylaxis post gynaecological cancer surgery; the effect of weight adjusted and fixed dose LMWH (Tinzaparin)

OBJECTIVE

Gynaecological cancer surgery is associated with high rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE) despite recommended prophylaxis. We sought to investigate the impact of extended prophylaxis with fixed dose and weight based LMWH in patients undergoing gynaecological cancer surgery.

METHODS

VTE rates were recorded in patients who received LMWH prophylaxis (4500 IU Tinzaparin once daily) for the duration of hospital stay (2006-2012) (n = 610) and were compared with VTE rates in patients who underwent surgery after the introduction of extended prophylaxis (3500/4500 IU Tinzaparin for patients with BMI < 40kg/m2 and 75 IU/kg for BMI > 40 kg/m2) (2012-2017) (n = 651). Peak (4 h) anti-Xa levels in a subset of patients were also evaluated.

RESULTS

73 (5.7%) cases of VTE were recorded during 1 year of follow-up. 20 cases occurred during hospital stay. There was no significant difference in the rate of VTE between the extended prophylaxis cohort and the standard prophylaxis cohort. 23/24 patients who developed VTE in the extended prophylaxis cohort received a fixed (4500 units) dose of Tinzaparin. 63% of patients who received a fixed LMWH dose had peak anti-Xa levels below the target range (0.2-0.4 IU/ml). Peak anti-Xa was lower in patients who subsequently developed VTE compared with those who received either fixed dose (P = 0.041) and weight adjusted Tinzaparin (P = 0.0006).

CONCLUSIONS

Extended prophylaxis with Tinzaparin does not significantly reduce VTE rates in gynaecological cancer patients post surgery. Peak anti-Xa levels may be suboptimal in many patients receiving a fixed LMWH dose. Further studies are required to determine whether weight adjusted doses of Tinzaparin may provide more effective prophylaxis following gynaecological cancer surgery.

Incidence and risk of venous thromboembolism according to primary treatment type in women with endometrial cancer: a population-based study

Background

Current prophylaxes and treatments for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in women with gynecologic cancer are mainly guided by studies on solid cancers because studies in gynecologic cancer did not provide sufficient data. Large-scale studies evaluating the incidence and risk of VTE according to therapeutic modality may guide prophylaxis and treatment of VTE in gynecologic cancer. This study was performed to determine the incidence and risk of VTE according to primary treatment type in Korean women with endometrial cancer.

Methods

We selected 26,256 women newly diagnosed with endometrial cancer between 2009 and 2018 from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database. During the total follow-up period and first six months after primary treatments initiation, the incidence and risk of VTE were evaluated according to primary treatment type, that is, no treatment, surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or hormone therapy.

Results

VTE occurred in 136 per 10,000 women during the total follow-up period and in 54 per 10,000 women during the first six months with the highest frequency in women that underwent chemotherapy. During the first year, the monthly incidence of VTE decreased with time among women that underwent no treatment, surgery, or hormone therapy and remained unchanged in those that received radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Compared with women that received no treatment, VTE risk, especially of PE significantly increased in women that underwent chemotherapy (VTE: hazard ratio (HR), 2.334; 95% CI, 1.38–3.949; P = 0.002) (PE: HR, 2.742; 95% CI, 1.424–5.278; P = 0.003) or hormone therapy (VTE: HR, 2.073; 95% CI, 1.356–3.17; P = 0.001) (PE: HR, 2.086; 95% CI, 1.19–3.657; P = 0.01) during the total follow-up period and women that underwent only chemotherapy during the first six months (VTE: HR, 2.532; 95% CI, 1.291–4.966; P = 0.007) (PE: HR, 3.366; 95% CI, 1.496–7.576; P = 0.003).

Conclusions

In this cohort study, the incidence and risk of VTE were highest in women with endometrial cancer that underwent chemotherapy as a primary treatment. Notably, the incidence of VTE decreased over time in women that received no treatment, surgery, or hormone therapy. This study can help guide therapies for prophylaxis and treatment of VTE in women with endometrial cancer.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08853-x.

Robotic platforms for endometrial cancer treatment: review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The cornerstone in the management of endometrial cancer (EC) is surgical staging. Over the last few decades, minimally invasive surgery has been widely accepted as a mainstay in the treatment of endometrial cancer. The first robotic-assisted gynecological surgery was performed in 1998.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and PUBMED databases from January 1998 to September 2020.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Several studies have reported the advantages of robotic-assisted surgery over laparoscopy in the management of EC. These are most pronounced in obese patients. Robotic-assisted surgery is also associated with a shorter learning curve, particularly for lymphadenectomy, which enables more surgeons to perform minimally invasive surgery for EC.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness and oncological results of robotic surgery for EC appear to be similar to those of other surgical methods, but fewer intraoperative complications occur than with other methods.