Adjunctive Intermittent Pneumatic Compression for Venous Thromboprophylaxis

Prevention of symptomatic pulmonary embolism for gynecologic malignancies with preoperative asymptomatic venous thromboembolism: GOTIC-VTE trial

OBJECTIVE

In Japan, perioperative prophylaxis of pulmonary embolism (PE) in gynecologic cancer patients with preoperative asymptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) has not been well established yet. The GOTIC-VTE trial was a prospective, multi-center, single-arm clinical trial to investigate the prevention of postoperative symptomatic PE onset by seamless anticoagulant therapy from the preoperative period to 4 weeks after surgery instead of using intermittent pneumatic compression.

METHODS

Anticoagulant therapy was started immediately after asymptomatic VTE diagnosis and stopped preoperatively according to the rules of each institution. Unfractionated heparin administration was resumed within 12 hours postoperatively, and this was followed by the switch to low-molecular-weight heparin and subsequently, edoxaban; this cycle was continued for 28 days. Primary outcome was the occurrence of symptomatic PE in 28 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of VTE-related events in 28 days and 6 months postoperatively and protocol-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Between February 2018 and September 2020, 99 patients were enrolled; of these, 82 patients were assessed as the full analysis set, including 58 for ovarian cancer, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer; 21 for endometrial cancer; and 3 for cervical cancer. No symptomatic PE was observed within 28 days postoperatively; two patients had bleeding events (major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding) and three had grade 3 adverse events (increased alanine transaminase, aspartate aminotransferase, or gamma-glutamyl transferase).

CONCLUSION

The multifaceted perioperative management for gynecologic malignancies with asymptomatic VTE effectively prevented postoperative symptomatic PE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

JRCT Identifier: jRCTs031180124.

Neurocritical Care for Patients With Ischemic Stroke

OBJECTIVE

Management of stroke due to large vessel occlusion (LVO) has undergone unprecedented change in the past decade. Effective treatment with thrombectomy has galvanized the field and led to advancements in all aspects of care. This article provides a comprehensive examination of neurologic intensive care unit (ICU) management of patients with stroke due to LVO. The role of the neurocritical care team in stroke systems of care and the importance of prompt diagnosis, initiation of treatment, and continued monitoring of patients with stroke due to LVO is highlighted.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

The management of complications commonly associated with stroke due to LVO, including malignant cerebral edema and respiratory failure, are addressed, stressing the importance of early identification and aggressive treatment in mitigating negative effects on patients' prognoses. In the realm of medical management, this article discusses various medical therapies, including antithrombotic therapy, blood pressure management, and glucose control, outlining evidence-based strategies for optimizing patient outcomes. It further emphasizes the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to provide a comprehensive care model. Lastly, the critical aspect of family communication and prognostication in the neurologic ICU is addressed.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

This article emphasizes the multidimensional aspects of neurocritical care in treating patients with stroke due to LVO.

Venous thromboembolism chemical prophylaxis after skull base surgery

PURPOSE

There is no guidance surrounding postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis using pharmacological agents (chemoprophylaxis) in patients undergoing skull base surgery. The aim of this study was to compare VTE and intracranial haematoma rates after skull base surgery in patients treated with/without chemoprophylaxis.

METHODS

Review of prospective quaternary centre database including adults undergoing first-time skull base surgery (2009-2020). VTE was defined as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) within 6 months of surgery. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine factors predictive of postoperative intracranial haematoma/VTE. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used in group comparisons.

RESULTS

One thousand five hundred fifty-one patients were included with a median age of 52 years (range 16-89 years) and female predominance (62%). Postoperative chemoprophylaxis was used in 81% of patients at a median of 1 day postoperatively. There were 12 VTE events (1.2%), and the use of chemoprophylaxis did not negate the risk of VTE entirely (p > 0.99) and was highest on/after postoperative day 6 (9/12 VTE events). There were 18 intracranial haematomas (0.8%), and after PSM, chemoprophylaxis did not significantly increase the risk of an intracranial haematoma (p > 0.99). Patients administered chemoprophylaxis from postoperative days 1 and 2 had similar rates of intracranial haematomas (p = 0.60) and VTE (p = 0.60), affirmed in PSM.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative chemoprophylaxis represents a relatively safe strategy in patients undergoing skull base surgery. We advocate a personalised approach to chemoprophylaxis and recommend it on postoperative days 1 or 2 when indicated.

A case of endovascular treatment for iatrogenic left vertebral artery injury due to central line catheter placement

We describe a case of endovascular treatment for an iatrogenic left vertebral artery injury after central line catheter placement in a 68-year-old male patient. The patient had a massive pulmonary embolism, and a Swan-Ganz catheter was required to monitor the patient's circulatory condition. However, the catheter was inserted into the left vertebral artery and passed through the left internal jugular vein. Endovascular treatment was indicated due to the patient's poor general health. Complete hemostasis was achieved, and the postoperative course was uneventful without neurologic deficits.

Thrombosis prophylaxis following trauma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review explores the persistent occurrence of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) in major trauma patients despite standard thrombosis prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH). It investigates the inadequacies of standard pharmacologic prophylaxis and proposes alternative approaches not covered in current trauma guidelines.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies highlight the effectiveness of monitoring and adjusting subcutaneous LMWH doses based on anti-Xa levels for the purpose of reducing VTE in trauma patients. The need for dose adaptation arises due to factors like fluctuating organ function, varying antithrombin levels, interaction with plasma proteins, and altered bioavailability influenced by oedema or vasopressor use. Additionally, promising alternatives such as intravenous LMWH, UFH, and argatroban have shown success in intensive care settings.

SUMMARY

The standard dosing of subcutaneous LMWH is often insufficient for effective thrombosis prophylaxis in trauma patients. A more personalised approach, adjusting doses based on specific effect levels like anti-Xa or choosing an alternative mode of anticoagulation, could reduce the risk of insufficient prophylaxis and subsequent VTE.

High and intermediate risk pulmonary embolism in the ICU

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common and important medical emergency, encountered by clinicians across all acute care specialties. PE is a relatively uncommon cause of direct admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), but these patients are at high risk of death. More commonly, patients admitted to ICU develop PE as a complication of an unrelated acute illness. This paper reviews the epidemiology, diagnosis, risk stratification, and particularly the management of PE from a critical care perspective. Issues around prevention, anticoagulation, fibrinolysis, catheter-based techniques, surgical embolectomy, and extracorporeal support are discussed.

Venous thromboembolism in critically ill adult patients with hematologic malignancy: a population-based cohort study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding among hospitalized patients with hematologic malignancy, assessing its association with critical illness and other baseline characteristics.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study of hospitalized adults with a new diagnosis of hematologic malignancy in Ontario, Canada, between 2006 and 2017. The primary outcome was VTE (pulmonary embolism or deep venous thrombosis). Secondary outcomes were major bleeding and in-hospital mortality. We compared the incidence of VTE between intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients and described the association of other baseline characteristics and VTE.

RESULTS

Among 76,803 eligible patients (mean age 67 years [standard deviation, SD, 15]), 20,524 had at least one ICU admission. The incidence of VTE was 3.7% in ICU patients compared to 1.2% in non-ICU patients (odds ratio [OR] 3.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.77-3.42). The incidence of major bleeding was 7.6% and 2.4% (OR 3.33; 95% CI 3.09-3.58), respectively. The association of critical illness and VTE remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders (OR 2.92; 95% CI 2.62-3.25). We observed a higher incidence of VTE among specific subtypes of hematologic malignancy and patients with prior VTE (OR 6.64; 95% CI 5.42-8.14). Admission more than 1 year after diagnosis of hematologic malignancy (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.56-0.74) and platelet count ≤ 50 × 109/L at the time of hospitalization (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.48-0.84) were associated with a lower incidence of VTE.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with hematologic malignancy, critical illness and certain baseline characteristics were associated with a higher incidence of VTE.

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.

Go Big or Go Home: Obesity and Total Joint Arthroplasty

Obesity is highly prevalent, and it is expected to grow considerably in the United States. The association between obesity and an increased risk of complications following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is widely accepted. Many believe that patients with body mass index (BMI) >40 have complications rates that may outweigh the benefits of surgery and should consider delaying it. However, the current literature on obesity and outcomes following TJA is observational, very heterogeneous, and full of confounding variables. BMI in isolation has several flaws and recent literature suggests shifting from an exclusively BMI <40 cutoff to considering 5 to 10% preoperative weight loss. BMI cutoffs to TJA may also restrict access to care to our most vulnerable, marginalized populations. Moreover, only roughly 20% of patients instructed to lose weight for surgery are successful and the practice of demanding mandatory weight loss needs to be reconsidered until convincing evidence exists that supports risk reduction as a result of preoperative weight loss. Obese patients can benefit greatly from this life-changing procedure. When addressing the potential difficulties and by optimizing preoperative assessment and intraoperative management, the surgery can be conducted safely. A multidisciplinary patient-centered approach with patient engagement, shared decision-making, and informed consent is recommended.

Application Areas of Intermittent Pneumatic Compression in the Prevention of Deep Vein Thrombosis During Dixon Surgery: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is common in the lithotomy position after laparoscopic surgery. Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) plays an important role in DVT prevention. However, few studies have compared the different compression areas of IPC application. It was hypothesized that the location of the compression sleeves could have an impact on the effects of thromboprophylaxis.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled trial performed from August 2020 to March 2021, 164 patients scheduled to undergo laparoscopic Dixon surgery were randomly assigned to one of four groups, based on the bilateral placement of compression sleeves during surgery: feet, calves, thighs, or control (no IPC). Both lower extremities were monitored for DVT on days 1 and 7 after surgery, using ultrasonographic assessment of mean blood velocity, blood flow volume, and diameter of the common femoral veins. Thrombosis-related hematologic analysis was performed.

FINDINGS

On day 1 after surgery, IPC of the feet or calves was associated with a reduced prevalence of DVT compared with controls (both: P = 0.024; OR = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.72), while IPC of the thighs had no significant benefit (P = 0.781; OR = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.29-2.55). The prevalence of DVT in the left extremity was lower with IPC of the feet and calves compared with controls (both, P = 0.048). The mean blood velocity in the common femoral vein was significantly increased after surgery with IPC of the left and right feet (P = 0.006 and 0.007, respectively) and calves (P = 0.011 and P = 0.026, respectively) compared with controls. Similarly, the volume of blood flow in the left common femoral vein was greater with IPC of the feet and calves (P = 0.03 and 0.027, respectively). However, on day 7 after surgery, the between-group differences in the prevalences of DVT and hematologic indicators of thrombosis were not significant.

IMPLICATIONS

On day 1 after surgery, IPC application at the feet or calves facilitated venous return and, hence, reduced the prevalence of DVT, especially in the left extremities. However, there were no significant differences in the prevalences of DVT or thrombosis-related hematologic indicators among the four groups on the day 7 after surgery. Chinese Clinical Trial Registration identifier: ChiCTR2000035325.

Saudi Critical Care Society clinical practice guidelines on the prevention of venous thromboembolism in adults with trauma: reviewed for evidence-based integrity and endorsed by the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine

BACKGROUND

To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in adults with trauma in inpatient settings.

METHODS

The Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) sponsored guidelines development and included 22 multidisciplinary panel members who completed conflict-of-interest forms. The panel developed and answered structured guidelines questions. For each question, the literature was searched for relevant studies. To summarize treatment effects, meta-analyses were conducted or updated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then the evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework was used to generate recommendations. Recommendations covered the following prioritized domains: timing of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis initiation in non-operative blunt solid organ injuries; isolated blunt traumatic brain injury (TBI); isolated blunt spine trauma or fracture and/or spinal cord injury (SCI); type and dose of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis; mechanical VTE prophylaxis; routine duplex ultrasonography (US) surveillance; and inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs).

RESULTS

The panel issued 12 clinical practice recommendations-one, a strong recommendation, 10 weak, and one with no recommendation due to insufficient evidence. The panel suggests starting early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis for non-operative blunt solid organ injuries, isolated blunt TBIs, and SCIs. The panel suggests using low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) over unfractionated heparin (UFH) and suggests either intermediate-high dose LMWH or conventional dosing LMWH. For adults with trauma who are not pharmacologic candidates, the panel strongly recommends using mechanical VTE prophylaxis with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC). The panel suggests using either combined VTE prophylaxis with mechanical and pharmacologic methods or pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis alone. Additionally, the panel suggests routine bilateral lower extremity US in adults with trauma with elevated risk of VTE who are ineligible for pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis and suggests against the routine placement of prophylactic IVCFs. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue any recommendation on the use of early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in adults with isolated blunt TBI requiring neurosurgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

The SCCS guidelines for VTE prevention in adults with trauma were based on the best available evidence and identified areas for further research. The framework may facilitate adaptation of recommendations by national/international guideline policymakers.

2023 Update on Sepsis and Septic Shock in Adult Patients: Management in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Sepsis/septic shock is a life-threatening and time-dependent condition that requires timely management to reduce mortality. This review aims to update physicians with regard to the main pillars of treatment for this insidious condition.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE were searched from inception with special attention paid to November 2021-January 2023.

RESULTS

The management of sepsis/septic shock is challenging and involves different pathophysiological aspects, encompassing empirical antimicrobial treatment (which is promptly administered after microbial tests), fluid (crystalloids) replacement (to be established according to fluid tolerance and fluid responsiveness), and vasoactive agents (e.g., norepinephrine (NE)), which are employed to maintain mean arterial pressure above 65 mmHg and reduce the risk of fluid overload. In cases of refractory shock, vasopressin (rather than epinephrine) should be combined with NE to reach an acceptable level of pressure control. If mechanical ventilation is indicated, the tidal volume should be reduced from 10 to 6 mL/kg. Heparin is administered to prevent venous thromboembolism, and glycemic control is recommended. The efficacy of other treatments (e.g., proton-pump inhibitors, sodium bicarbonate, etc.) is largely debated, and such treatments might be used on a case-to-case basis.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of sepsis/septic shock has significantly progressed in the last few years. Improving knowledge of the main therapeutic cornerstones of this challenging condition is crucial to achieve better patient outcomes.

Association of early mobility with the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and mortality among critically ill patients: a post hoc analysis of PREVENT trial

BACKGROUND

This study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4-7 (at least active standing), 1-3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables.

RESULTS

Of 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4-7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1-3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4-7 and 1-3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4-7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1-3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).

Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients with Cancer: When and How?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cancer-associated thrombosis is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. Historically, thromboprophylaxis efforts have focused on the highest risk patients with cancer, including post-operative patients and hospitalized patients. This review covers not only thromboprophylaxis for these groups but also emerging data supporting prophylaxis in ambulatory medical oncology patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several leading guidelines, backed by clinical trial data, now support the use of direct oral anticoagulants for select high-risk outpatients for primary thromboprophylaxis. However, uptake of these findings remains low. Pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis strategies continue to improve. However, it remains challenging to balance competing risks of bleeding and thrombosis. The morbidity and mortality associated with cancer associated thrombosis may be preventable. Understanding advancements in risk prediction, anticoagulant options, and implementation of existing data, is critical to provide optimal patient care.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2023 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2022 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. The American Heart Association strives to further understand and help heal health problems inflicted by structural racism, a public health crisis that can significantly damage physical and mental health and perpetuate disparities in access to health care, education, income, housing, and several other factors vital to healthy lives. This year's edition includes additional COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) publications, as well as data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, with an enhanced focus on health equity across several key domains.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Using early health economic modeling to inform medical innovation development: a soft robotic sock in poststroke patients in Singapore

OBJECTIVES

Based on a real-world collaboration with innovators in applying early health economic modeling, we aimed to offer practical steps that health technology assessment (HTA) researchers and innovators can follow and promote the usage of early HTA among research and development (R&D) communities.

METHODS

The HTA researcher was approached by the innovator to carry out an early HTA ahead of the first clinical trial of the technology, a soft robotic sock for poststroke patients. Early health economic modeling was selected to understand the potential value of the technology and to help uncover the information gap. Threshold analysis was used to identify the target product profiles. Value-of-information analysis was conducted to understand the uncertainties and the need for further research.

RESULTS

Based on the expected price and clinical effectiveness by the innovator, the new technology was found to be cost-saving compared to the current practice. Risk reduction in deep vein thrombosis and ankle contracture, the incidence rate of ankle contracture, the compliance rate of the new technology, and utility scores were found to have high impacts on the value-for-money of the new technology. The value of information was low if the new technology can achieve the expected clinical effectiveness. A list of parameters was recommended for data collection in the impending clinical trial.

CONCLUSIONS

This work, based on a real-world collaboration, has illustrated that early health economic modeling can inform medical innovation development. We provided practical steps in order to achieve more efficient R&D investment in medical innovation moving forward.

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.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Patients with Severe COVID-19 and the Association between the Dose of Anticoagulants and Outcomes

Introduction

COVID-19 is characterized by a procoagulant state that increases the risk of venous and arterial thrombosis. The dose of anticoagulants in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia without suspected or confirmed thrombosis has been debated.

Aim of the study

We evaluated the prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in critically ill COVID-19 patients and assessed the association between the dose of anticoagulants and outcomes.

Materials and methods

This retrospective cohort included patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to the ICU between March and July 2020. Patients with clinically suspected and confirmed VTE were compared to those not diagnosed to have VTE.

Results

The study enrolled 310 consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: age 60.0±15.1 years, 67.1% required mechanical ventilation and 44.7% vasopressors. Most (97.1%) patients received anticoagulants during ICU stay: prophylactic unfractionated heparin (N=106), standard-dose enoxaparin (N=104) and intermediate-dose enoxaparin (N=57). Limb Doppler ultrasound was performed for 49 (15.8%) patients and chest computed tomographic angiography for 62 (20%). VTE was diagnosed in 41 (13.2%) patients; 20 patients had deep vein thrombosis and 23 had acute pulmonary embolism. Patients with VTE had significantly higher D-dimer on ICU admission. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, intermediate-dose enoxaparin versus standard-dose unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin was associated with lower VTE risk (hazard ratio, 0.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.74) and lower risk of the composite outcome of VTE or hospital mortality (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.78; p=0.006). Major bleeding was not different between the intermediate- and prophylactic-dose heparin groups.

Conclusions

In our study, clinically suspected and confirmed VTE was diagnosed in 13.2% of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Intermediate-dose enoxaparin versus standard-dose unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin was associated with decreased risk of VTE or hospital mortality.

Effect of Intermittent Pneumatic Compression in Addition to Pharmacologic Prophylaxis for Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are frequent complications in hospitalized patients and a leading cause of preventable death in hospital. Pharmacologic prophylaxis is a standard of care to prevent VTE in patients at risk, the additional value of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) is uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of adding IPC to pharmacologic prophylaxis to prevent VTE in hospitalized adults.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to July 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials comparing the use of IPC in addition to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alone in hospitalized adults.

DATA EXTRACTION

Meta-analyses were performed to calculate risk ratio (RR) of VTE, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials, Version 2 and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 17 trials enrolling 8,796 participants. The IPC was mostly applied up to the thigh and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis was primarily low-molecular-weight heparin. Adjunctive IPC was associated with a decreased risk of VTE (15 trials, RR = 0.53; 95% CI [0.35-0.81]) and DVT (14 trials, RR = 0.52; 95% CI [0.33-0.81]) but not PE (seven trials, RR = 0.73; 95% CI [0.32-1.68]). The quality of evidence was graded low, downgraded by risk of bias and inconsistency. Moderate and very low-quality evidence, respectively, suggests that adjunctive IPC is unlikely to change the risk of all-cause mortality or adverse events. Subgroup analyses indicate a more evident apparent benefit in industry-funded trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate low-quality evidence underpinning the additional use of IPC to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for prevention of VTE and DVT. Further large high-quality randomized trials are warranted to support its use and to identify patient subgroups for whom it could be beneficial.

Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Statement for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in the Critical Care Unit

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a preventable complication of critical illness, and this guideline aims to convey a pragmatic approach to the problem. Guidelines have multiplied over the last decade, and their utility has become increasingly conflicted as the reader interprets all suggestions or recommendations as something that must be followed. The nuances of grade of recommendation vs level of evidence are often ignored, and the difference between a "we suggest" vs a "we recommend" is overlooked. There is a general unease among clinicians that failure to follow the guidelines translates to poor medical practice and legal culpability. We attempt to overcome these limitations by highlighting ambiguity when it occurs and refraining from dogmatic recommendations in the absence of robust evidence. Readers and practitioners may find the lack of specific recommendations unsatisfactory, but we believe that true ambiguity is better than inaccurate certainty. We have attempted to comply with the guidelines on how to create guidelines.1 And to overcome the poor compliance with these guidelines.2 Some observers have expressed concern that DVT prophylaxis guidelines may cause more harm than good.3 We have placed greater emphasis on large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with clinical end point and de-emphasized RCTs with surrogate end points and also de-emphasized hypothesis generating studies (observational studies, small RCTs, and meta-analysis of these studies). We have de-emphasized RCTs in non-intensive care unit populations like postoperative patients or those with cancer and stroke. We have also considered resource limitation settings and have avoided recommending costly and poorly proven therapeutic options.

How to cite this article

Jagiasi BG, Chhallani AA, Dixit SB, Kumar R, Pandit RA, Govil D, et al. Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Statement for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in the Critical Care Unit. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(S2):S51-S65.

Prognostic Significance of Plasma Insulin Level for Deep Venous Thrombosis in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in Critical Care

BACKGROUND

Whether insulin resistance underlies deep venous thrombosis (DVT) development in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is unclear. In this study, the association between plasma insulin levels and DVT was analyzed in patients with severe TBI.

METHODS

A prospective observational study of 73 patients measured insulin, glucose, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), inflammatory factors, and hematological profiles within four preset times during the first 14 days after TBI. Ultrasonic surveillance of DVT was tracked. Two-way analysis of variance was used to determine the factors that discriminated between patients with and without DVT or with and without insulin therapy. Partial correlations of insulin level with all the variables were conducted separately in patients with DVT or patients without DVT. Factors associated with DVT were analyzed by multivariable logistic regression. Neurological outcomes 6 months after TBI were assessed.

RESULTS

Among patients with a mean (± standard deviation) age of 53 (± 16 years), DVT developed in 20 patients (27%) on median 10.4 days (range 4-22), with higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores but similar Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and TBI severity. Patients with DVT were more likely to receive insulin therapy than patients without DVT (60% vs. 28%; P = 0.012); hence, they had higher 14-day insulin levels. However, insulin levels were comparable between patients with DVT and patients without DVT in the subgroups of patients with insulin therapy (n = 27) and patients without insulin therapy (n = 46). The platelet profile significantly discriminated between patients with and without DVT. Surprisingly, none of the coagulation profiles, blood cell counts, or inflammatory mediators differed between the two groups. Patients with insulin therapy had significantly higher insulin (P = 0.006), glucose (P < 0.001), and GLP-1 (P = 0.01) levels and were more likely to develop DVT (60% vs. 15%; P < 0.001) along with concomitant platelet depletion. Insulin levels correlated with glucose, GLP-1 levels, and platelet count exclusively in patients without DVT. Conversely, in patients with DVT, insulin correlated negatively with GLP-1 levels (P = 0.016). Age (P = 0.01) and elevated insulin levels at days 4-7 (P = 0.04) were independently associated with DVT. Patients with insulin therapy also showed worse Glasgow Outcome Scale scores (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated insulin levels in the first 14 days after TBI may indicate insulin resistance, which is associated with platelet hyperactivity, and thus increasing the risk of DVT.

Influences of Antithrombotic Elastic Socks Combined with Air Pressure in Reducing Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis for Patients Undergoing Cardiothoracic Surgery

This study was designed to investigate the application and therapeutic effect of antithrombotic elastic socks combined with air pressure in the prevention of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery. Sixty patients in cardiothoracic surgery of our hospital from January 2019 to December 2020 were randomly divided into a study group and control group. The control group was treated with routine treatment intervention. Based on routine treatment intervention, the study group was treated with antithrombotic elastic socks combined with pneumatic treatment intervention. The activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), thrombin time (TT), femoral venous blood flow velocity of both lower limbs, and the incidence of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LEDVT), postoperative lower extremity swelling, inflammatory factors, and satisfaction were measured. After intervention, APTT (31.74 ± 1.15 s) and TT (14.58 ± 0.24 s) in the study group were higher than those in the control group APTT (25.13 ± 1.14 s) and TT (12.14 ± 0.23 s) (P < 0.05). The left lower limb femoral vein blood flow velocity and the right lower limb femoral vein blood flow velocity in the study group were better than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative lower limb swelling and deep vein in the study group was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). Serum tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin-6 concentrations in the study group were lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The satisfaction rate of patients in the study group (93.33%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (70.00%) (P < 0.05). In conclusion, after cardiothoracic surgery, antithrombotic elastic socks combined with air pressure can significantly reduce the incidence of LEDVT by improving patients' coagulation function, reducing inflammatory reaction. It is worthy of popularization and application in relevant surgery.

Nursing Implications of the Updated 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines

Sepsis is a life-threatening illness that affects millions of people worldwide. Early recognition and timely treatment are essential for decreasing mortality from sepsis. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021, the fifth iteration of the guidelines, was released in October 2021 and includes 93 recommendations for the management of sepsis. The evidence-based guidelines include recommendations and rationales for screening and early treatment, initial resuscitation, mean arterial pressure targets, admission to intensive care, management of infection, hemodynamic monitoring, ventilation, and additional therapies. A new section addresses long-term outcomes and goals of care. This article presents several recommendations, changes, and updates in the 2021 guidelines and highlights the important contributions nurses have in delivering timely and evidence-based care to patients with sepsis. Recommendations may be for or against an intervention, according to the evidence. Although many recommendations are unchanged, several new recommendations directly affect nursing care and may require specialized training (eg, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). The newest section, long-term outcomes and goals of care, is aimed at using available resources to provide care that is aligned with the patient and the patient's family through goals-of-care discussions and shared decision-making. Interventions aimed at improving recovery across the continuum of care should include attention to long-term outcomes. Nurses are essential in identifying patients with sepsis, administering and assessing response to treatment, supporting the patient and family, and limiting sequelae from sepsis. This article highlights the 2021 recommendations that influence nursing care for patients with sepsis.

Modeling current practices in critical care comparative effectiveness research

Objective: To determine whether contemporaneous practices are adequately represented in recent critical care comparative effectiveness research studies. Design: All critical care comparative effectiveness research trials published in the New England Journal of Medicine from April 2019 to March 2020 were identified. To examine studies published in other high impact medical journals during the same period, such trials were subsequently also identified in the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet. All cited sources were reviewed, and the medical literature was searched to find studies describing contemporary practices. Then, the designated control group or the comparable therapies studied were examined to determine if they represented contemporaneous critical care practices as described in the medical literature. Results: Twenty-five of 332 randomised clinical trials published in these three journals during this 1-year period described critical care comparative effectiveness research that met our inclusion criteria. Seventeen characterised current practices before enrolment (using surveys, observational studies and guidelines) and then incorporated current practices into one or more study arm. In the other eight, usual care arms appeared insufficient. Four of these trials randomly assigned patients to one of two fixed approaches at either end of a range of usually titrated care. However, due to randomisation, different subgroups within each arm received care that was inappropriate for their specific clinical conditions. In the other four of these trials, common practices influencing treatment choice were not reflected in the trial design, despite a prior effort to characterise usual care. Conclusion: One-third of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials published in widely read medical journals during a recent year did not include a designated control arm or comparable therapies representative of contemporary practices. Failure to incorporate contemporary practices into critical care comparative effectiveness trials appears to be a widespread design weakness.

The effect of intermittent pneumatic compression on deep-vein thrombosis and ventilation-free days in critically ill patients with heart failure

There are contradictory data regarding the effect of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) on the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and heart failure (HF) decompensation in critically ill patients. This study evaluated the effect of adjunctive use of IPC on the rate of incident DVT and ventilation-free days among critically ill patients with HF. In this pre-specified secondary analysis of the PREVENT trial (N = 2003), we compared the effect of adjunctive IPC added to pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (IPC group), with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control group) in critically ill patients with HF. The presence of HF was determined by the treating teams according to local practices. Patients were stratified according to preserved (≥ 40%) versus reduced (< 40%) left ventricular ejection fraction, and by the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification. The primary outcome was incident proximal lower-limb DVT, determined with twice weekly venous Doppler ultrasonography. As a co-primary outcome, we evaluated ventilation-free days as a surrogate for clinically important HF decompensation. Among 275 patients with HF, 18 (6.5%) patients had prevalent proximal lower-limb DVT (detected on trial day 1 to 3). Of 257 patients with no prevalent DVT, 11/125 (8.8%) patients in the IPC group developed incident proximal lower-limb DVT compared to 6/132 (4.5%) patients in the control group (relative risk, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.74–5.08, p = 0.17). There was no significant difference in ventilator-free days between the IPC and control groups (median 21 days versus 25 days respectively, p = 0.17). The incidence of DVT with IPC versus control was not different across NYHA classes (p value for interaction = 0.18), nor across patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction (p value for interaction = 0.15). Ventilator-free days with IPC versus control were also not different across NYHA classes nor across patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction. In conclsuion, the use of adjunctive IPC compared with control was associated with similar rate of incident proximal lower-limb DVT and ventilator-free days in critically ill patients with HF.

Trial registration: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02040103) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).

Venous thromboembolism chemical prophylaxis after endoscopic trans-sphenoidal pituitary surgery

PURPOSE

There is no compelling outcome data or clear guidance surrounding postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis using low molecular weight heparin (chemoprophylaxis) in patients undergoing pituitary surgery. Here we describe our experience of early chemoprophylaxis (post-operative day 1) following trans-sphenoidal pituitary surgery.

METHODS

Single-centre review of a prospective surgical database and VTE records. Adults undergoing first time trans-sphenoidal pituitary surgery were included (2009-2018). VTE was defined as either deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism within 3 months of surgery. Postoperative haematomas were those associated with a clinical deterioration together with radiological evidence.

RESULTS

651 Patients included with a median age of 55 years (range 16-86 years). Most (99%) patients underwent trans-sphenoidal surgery using a standard endoscopic single nostril or bi-nostril trans-sphenoidal technique. More than three quarters had pituitary adenomas (n = 520, 80%). Postoperative chemoprophylaxis to prevent VTE was administered in 478 patients (73%). Chemoprophylaxis was initiated at a median of 1 day post-procedure (range 1-5 days postoperatively; 92% on postoperative day 1). Tinzaparin was used in 465/478 patients (97%) and enoxaparin was used in 14/478 (3%). There were no cases of VTE, even in 78 ACTH-dependent Cushing's disease patients. Six patients (1%) developed postoperative haematomas. Chemoprophylaxis was not associated with a significantly higher rate of postoperative haematoma formation (Fisher's Exact, p = 0.99) or epistaxis (Fisher's Exact, p > 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Chemoprophylaxis after trans-sphenoidal pituitary surgery on post-operative day 1 is a safe strategy to reduce the risk of VTE without significantly increasing the risk of postoperative bleeding events.

Trauma-induced pulmonary thromboembolism: What's update?

Trauma-induced pulmonary thromboembolism is the second leading cause of death in severe trauma patients. Primary fibrinolytic hyperactivity combined with hemorrhage and consequential hypercoagulability in severe trauma patients create a huge challenge for clinicians. It is crucial to ensure a safe anticoagulant therapy for trauma patients, but a series of clinical issues need to be answered first, for example, what are the risk factors for traumatic venous thromboembolism? How to assess and determine the status of coagulation dysfunction of patients? When is the optimal timing to initiate pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism? What types of prophylactic agents should be used? How to manage the anticoagulation-related hemorrhage and to determine the optimal timing of restarting chemoprophylaxis? The present review attempts to answer the above questions.

Incidence of proximal deep vein thrombosis in medical critical care patients

Background

Approximately 13-31% of medical critical care patients develop deep vein thrombosis (DVT). However, there are very few reports regarding the incidence of DVT among Asian patients without routine prophylaxis. The objectives of this study were to assess the prevalence and incidence proportion of proximal DVT in Thai medical critical care patients not receiving thrombosis prophylaxis.

Methods

We conducted a prospective cohort study in medical critical care patients admitted to Siriraj Hospital, Thailand between November 2008 and November 2009. Patients were screened for proximal DVT by duplex ultrasonography performed 48 h, 7, 14 and 28 days after admission. Primary outcomes were prevalence and incidence proportion of DVT. Factors associated with the development of proximal DVT were evaluated by multivariate analysis.

Results

Of the 158 patients enrolled in the study, 25 had proximal DVT (15.8%). Nine patients (5.7%) had DVT on the first test at 48 h, while 10 (6.3%), 2 (1.3%) and 4 (2.5%) patients had developed DVT on days 7, 14, and 28, respectively. Thus, the prevalence at the beginning of the study was 5.7% (95%CI 2.6-10.5) and the incidence proportion was 10.1% (95%CI 5.9-15.9). The multivariate analysis showed that age (odds ratio [OR] per 1-year increase was 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.07), female gender (OR 4.05, 95%CI 1.51-12.03), femoral venous catheter (OR 11.18, 95%CI 3.19-44.83), and the absence of platelet transfusion (OR 0.07, 95%CI 0.003-0.43) were associated with the development of proximal DVT. Patients with proximal DVT had a longer hospital length of stay (22 days [IQR 11-60] vs. 14 days [7-23], p = 0.03) and spent more time on mechanical ventilation (10 days (3.3-57) vs. 6 days (3-12), p = 0.053) than patients without DVT. Patient mortality was not affected by the presence of DVT (52% vs. 38.3%, p = 0.29).

Conclusions

Routine thromboprophylaxis is not used in our institution and the prevalence and incidence proportion of proximal DVT in Asian medical critical care patients were both substantial. Patients with older age, female gender, an intravenous femoral catheter, and the absence of platelet transfusion all had a higher chance of developing proximal DVT.

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.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2022 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population and an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, adverse pregnancy outcomes, vascular contributions to brain health, and the global burden of cardiovascular disease and healthy life expectancy.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Multidisciplinary Bundle Approach in Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Patients with Non-Traumatic Subarachnoid Hemorrhage

Background

A venous thromboembolism (VTE) bundle was launched in 2016 at the University of Illinois Hospital aiming to reduce the rate of VTE in the neurosurgical ICU. Main elements of the bundle included correct and early use of intermittent pneumatic compression and subcutaneous heparin.

Methods

Patients with SAH were retrospectively identified from 2014 until 2018. VTE events were diagnosed using twice weekly lower-extremity venous Duplex ultrasound and chest computerized tomography when appropriate.

Results

A total of 133 patients was included in each group. The incidence of VTE was not significantly different before and after the bundle (15% vs. 12%, p = 0.47). No difference was found regarding new episode of intracranial hemorrhage secondary to SQH (1.5% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.65). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that longer ICU LOS, higher Caprini score, and presence of baseline lung diseases were associated with VTE development.

Conclusions

With a median Caprini score of 9, our patient population was found to be at high risk for developing VTE. The implementation of the VTE bundle did not significantly reduce the rate of VTE in patients with non-traumatic SAH at UIH.

Coagulopathies in Intensive Care Medicine: Balancing Act between Thrombosis and Bleeding

Patient Blood Management advocates an individualized treatment approach, tailored to each patient's needs, in order to reduce unnecessary exposure to allogeneic blood products. The optimization of hemostasis and minimization of blood loss is of high importance when it comes to critical care patients, as coagulopathies are a common phenomenon among them and may significantly impact morbidity and mortality. Treating coagulopathies is complex as thrombotic and hemorrhagic conditions may coexist and the medications at hand to modulate hemostasis can be powerful. The cornerstones of coagulation management are an appropriate patient evaluation, including the individual risk of bleeding weighed against the risk of thrombosis, a proper diagnostic work-up of the coagulopathy's etiology, treatment with targeted therapies, and transfusion of blood product components when clinically indicated in a goal-directed manner. In this article, we will outline various reasons for coagulopathy in critical care patients to highlight the aspects that need special consideration. The treatment options outlined in this article include anticoagulation, anticoagulant reversal, clotting factor concentrates, antifibrinolytic agents, desmopressin, fresh frozen plasma, and platelets. This article outlines concepts with the aim of the minimization of complications associated with coagulopathies in critically ill patients. Hereditary coagulopathies will be omitted in this review.

Low Incidence of Symptomatic Thrombotic Events in Adult Patients Hospitalized with Coronavirus 19: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Since the beginning of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) pandemic, there have been many reports of increased incidence of venous thromboembolism and arterial events as a complication.

Objective

To determine the incidence of symptomatic thrombotic events (TEs) in patients hospitalized for SARS-CoV2 disease (coronavirus 19 [Covid-19]).

Methods

A retrospective single-center cohort study with adult patients with a positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR) for SARS-CoV2, included from the date of diagnosis of Covid-19 and followed for 90 days or until death.

Results

A total of 1621 patients were included in this study. The median age was 73 years (interquartile range_25th-75th [IQR] 53-87 years) and 57% (913) were female. Overall mortality was 21.6% (348). The overall incidence of symptomatic TEs within 90 days of diagnosis was 1.8% (30 of 1621) occurring in 28 patients, including an incidence of pulmonary embolism of 0.9% (15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60%-1.6%), deep venous thrombosis of 0.61% (10, 95% CI 0.2%-1%), ischemic stroke of 0.25% (4, 95% CI 0.09%-0.65%), and ischemic arterial events of 0.06% (1, 95% CI 0.008%-0.43%). No acute coronary syndrome events were recorded. The incidence of symptomatic TEs was significantly lower in the general ward than in intensive care units (1.2% vs 5.7%; p < .001). The median time since positive rt-PCR for SARS-CoV2 to symptomatic TE was 22.5 days (IQR 19-43 days). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients receiving (53.6%) and not receiving thromboprophylaxis (66.5%) and the development of TEs.

Conclusion

The overall incidence of symptomatic TEs among these patients was lower than the incidence previously reported.

American Society of Hematology living guidelines on the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19: May 2021 update on the use of intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

COVID-19-related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in making decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 3 patient representatives and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Centre supported the guideline development process by performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 5 March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the GRADE approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update on guidelines published in February 2021.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 1 additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of prophylactic-intensity over intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE.

CONCLUSIONS

This recommendation was based on low certainty in the evidence, which underscores the need for additional high-quality, randomized, controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in critically ill patients. Other key research priorities include better evidence regarding predictors of thrombosis and bleeding risk in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and the impact of nonanticoagulant therapies (eg, antiviral agents, corticosteroids) on thrombotic risk.

The story of critical care in Asia: a narrative review

Background

Asia has more critically ill people than any other part of our planet. The aim of this article is to review the development of critical care as a specialty, critical care societies and education and research, the epidemiology of critical illness as well as epidemics and pandemics, accessibility and cost and quality of critical care, culture and end-of-life care, and future directions for critical care in Asia.

Main body

Although the first Asian intensive care units (ICUs) surfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s and specialisation started in the 1990s, multiple challenges still exist, including the lack of intensivists, critical care nurses, and respiratory therapists in many countries. This is aggravated by the brain drain of skilled ICU staff to high-income countries. Critical care societies have been integral to the development of the discipline and have increasingly contributed to critical care education, although critical care research is only just starting to take off through collaboration across groups. Sepsis, increasingly aggravated by multidrug resistance, contributes to a significant burden of critical illness, while epidemics and pandemics continue to haunt the continent intermittently. In particular, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has highlighted the central role of critical care in pandemic response. Accessibility to critical care is affected by lack of ICU beds and high costs, and quality of critical care is affected by limited capability for investigations and treatment in low- and middle-income countries. Meanwhile, there are clear cultural differences across countries, with considerable variations in end-of-life care. Demand for critical care will rise across the continent due to ageing populations and rising comorbidity burdens. Even as countries respond by increasing critical care capacity, the critical care community must continue to focus on training for ICU healthcare workers, processes anchored on evidence-based medicine, technology guided by feasibility and impact, research applicable to Asian and local settings, and rallying of governments for support for the specialty.

Conclusions

Critical care in Asia has progressed through the years, but multiple challenges remain. These challenges should be addressed through a collaborative approach across disciplines, ICUs, hospitals, societies, governments, and countries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-021-00574-4.

Anticoagulation for COVID-19 Patients: A Bird's-Eye View

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a systemic disease that can be life-threatening involving immune and inflammatory responses, and that can result in potentially lethal complications, including venous thrombo-embolism (VTE). Forming an integrative approach to thrombo-prophylaxis and coagulation treatment for COVID-19 patients ensues. We aim at reviewing the literature for anticoagulation in the setting of COVID-19 infection to provide a summary on anticoagulation for this patient population. COVID-19 infection is associated with a state of continuous inflammation, which results in macrophage activation syndrome and an increased rate of thrombosis. Risk assessment models to predict the risk of thrombosis in critically ill patients have not yet been validated. Currently published guidelines suggest the use of prophylactic intensity over intermediate intensity or therapeutic intensity anticoagulant for patients with critical illness or acute illness related to COVID-19 infection. Critically ill COVID-19 patients who are diagnosed with acute VTE are considered to have a provoking factor, and, therefore, treatment duration should be at least 3 months. Patients with proximal deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism should receive parenteral over oral anticoagulants with low-molecular-weight heparin or fondaparinux preferred over unfractionated heparin. In patients with impending hemodynamic compromise due to PE, and who are not at increased risk for bleeding, reperfusion may be necessary. Internists should remain updated on new emerging evidence regarding anticoagulation for COVID-19 patients. Awaiting these findings, we invite internists to perform individualized decisions that are unique for every patient and to base them on clinical judgment for risk assessment.

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.