Thromboprophylaxis After Hospitalization for Joint Replacement Surgery

Effect of venous foot pump intervention on prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with major orthopedic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication after major orthopedic surgery. The venous foot pump (VFP) is an effective mechanical preventive measure against VTE in patients. However, the differences in effectiveness based on varying usage times of VFP remain unclear.

Objective

To explore the effectiveness of VFP with different usage times in preventing VTE in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery.

Methods

Nine databases (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, CBM, VIP, CNKI, and Wanfang) were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating VFP interventions for VTE prevention in major orthopedic surgery patients. The risk of bias in each study was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3.

Results

A total of 36 RCTs involving 3,791 patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery were included. Meta-analysis revealed significant differences in VTE incidence between the VFP and blank control groups (RR = 0.27, 95% confidence interval CI: 0.19-0.38, P < 0.001) and between the VFP plus chemoprophylaxis and chemoprophylaxis alone groups (RR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.29-0.53, P < 0.001). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the VFP and the LMWH groups (RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.54-1.61, P = 0.8). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in effectiveness based on different VFP usage durations (VFP vs. Blank: Chi-square = 0.54, P = 0.46, I2 = 0%; VFP Plus chemoprophylaxis vs. chemoprophylaxis alone: Chi-square = 1.93, P = 0.86, I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

The current evidence indicates that VFP significantly reduces the incidence of postoperative VTE in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery. VFP can be considered an add-on strategy to LMWH for patients at low risk of bleeding and an alternative strategy to LMWH in patients at high risk of bleeding. This study found no significant difference in effectiveness between various VFP usage interventions. Future research should focus on economic cost-effectiveness and patient acceptance to help policymakers determine the most efficient usage duration, providing practical guidance for thromboprophylaxis.

Compliance status and influencing factors of anticoagulation therapy in outpatient undergoing major orthopedic surgery

PURPOSE

This study was designed to investigate influencing factors of out-of-hospital anticoagulation therapy compliance among patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgeries.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted from July 2022 to February 2023 among outpatients who underwent major orthopedic surgery in our hospital. Patients (n = 200) were surveyed using the General Information Questionnaire, the General Self-Efficacy Scale, the Specificity of Medication-Taking Beliefs Scale, and the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale. Factors that influenced patient compliance were also determined using univariate and multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-three valid questionnaires were returned, the compliance with outpatient anticoagulation therapy among patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgeries was good in 56.3% (103/183) of all cases and poor in 43.7% (80/183). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that medication duration, adverse effects, self-efficacy and medication beliefs influenced adherence to out-of-hospital anticoagulation therapy in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Poor compliance with out-of-hospital anticoagulation therapy in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery is mainly associated with a long course of medication, adverse reactions, low self-efficacy and low medication beliefs. Healthcare staff should strengthen post-discharge anticoagulation management based on relevant influencing factors to enhance patient compliance.

Anticoagulation Treatment in Venous Thromboembolism: Options and Optimal Duration

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), clinically presenting as deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), constitutes a major global healthcare concern with severe complications, long-term morbidity and mortality. Although several clinical, genetic and acquired risk factors for VTE have been identified, the molecular pathophysiology and mechanisms of disease progression remain poorly understood. Anticoagulation has been the cornerstone of therapy for decades, but there still are uncertainties regarding primary and secondary VTE prevention, as well as optimal therapy duration. In this review we discuss the role of factor Xa in coagulation cascade and the different choices of anticoagulation therapy based on patients' predisposing risk factors and risk of event recurrence. Further, we compare newer agents to traditional anticoagulation treatment, based on most recent studies and guidelines.

Comparison of a nonpneumatic device to four currently available intermittent pneumatic compression devices on common femoral blood flow dynamics

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to compare common femoral vein blood flow enhancement during external mechanical compression using the novel, nonpneumatic Recovery Force Health Movement and Compressions (MAC) System (Recovery Force USA, Fishers, Ind), and four currently available intermittent pneumatic compression devices.

METHODS

The MAC device was compared with the Kendall SCD 700 (Cardinal Health, Dublin, Ohio), Arjo Huntleigh Flowtron ACS900 (Arjo, Malmö, Sweden), ActiveCare+S.F.T. (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Ind), and Circul8 (Ortho8, Rocklin, Calif). Doppler ultrasound measurements for each device were directly obtained from the right common femoral vein by a registered vascular technologist. The peak flow velocity and the time taken to reach the peak were calculated. For the MAC system only, the subjects were asked to walk a minimum of 500 steps while wearing the system, which was then checked for slippage. Leg size measurements were obtained using the noncontact Sigvaris Legreader XT5 (Vialis Ortopedia, Turin, Italy). The MAC device is not yet commercially available, and the present study was a prequel to clinical studies of venous thromboembolism prevention.

RESULTS

We recruited a broad range of 20 subjects who varied in age (mean ± standard deviation [SD], 50.5 ± 16.2 years), body mass index (mean ± SD, 26 ± 5.5 kg/m²), gender (male, 25%; female, 75%), and right calf circumference (mean ± SD, 37.2 ± 5.5 cm). The peak flow velocity compared with the baseline measurements was significantly greater for the Recovery Force Health MAC System for three (Kendall SCD 700, P = .02; ActiveCare+S.F.T., P = .003; Circul8, P < .001) of the four comparisons. Although the difference was not significant, the Arjo Huntleigh Flowtron ACS900 (SD, 3.4 cm/s) had more measurement variability in the peak flow velocity compared with baseline than did the MAC System (SD, 1.9 cm/s). The MAC had a significantly (P < .001) faster rise time to peak flow compared with the comparison devices. It was the only device to achieve the target peak flow velocity over baseline of at least three times in every body mass index group. Finally, the MAC System met the goal of <2.5 cm of movement after ambulation in 100% of the measurements, with 75% of the measurements showing no movement.

CONCLUSIONS

The MAC System is a mobile device that remained in place during ambulation and provided more consistent external mechanical compression in the desired range compared with the other three devices included in the present study.