Timing of thromboprophylaxis in patients with blunt abdominal solid organ injuries undergoing nonoperative management

Association of prolonged emergency department length of stay and venous thrombo-embolism prophylaxis and outcomes in trauma: A nation-wide secondary analysis

INTRODUCTION

The impact of prolonged emergency department length of stay (EDLOS) on appropriately timed pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (VTEp) and VTE outcomes is unknown in trauma.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to civilian trauma centers participating in the American College of Surgeons' TQIP (2019-2021). Patients with severe solid organ, head, or spine injury, early hemorrhage control intervention, pre-existing home anticoagulation or bleeding disorder, inter-facility transfer or early discharge, and injury severity score ≤9 were excluded. Primary exposure was prolonged EDLOS ≥12 h from ED arrival to physical transfer to the wards. Primary outcome was time to first pharmacological VTEp, censored at 24 and 48 h.

RESULTS

A total of 191,031 patients were included, 3,827 remained in the ED ≥12 h. The median time to VTEp was 25 h (IQR 12-43). Prolonged EDLOS was associated with a 34 % and 21 % decrease in timely administration of VTEp at 24 (aHR 0.66, 95 % CI 0.61-0.72, P < 0.001) and 48 h (aHR 0.79, 95 % CI 0.74-0.84, P < 0.001), respectively. After propensity score matching, associations persisted at 24 (aHR 0.69, 95 % CI 0.61-0.77, P < 0.001) and 48 h (aHR 0.80, 95 % CI 0.74-0.86, P < 0.001). Absent VTEp by 24 h was associated with increased VTE odds (aOR 1.84, 95 % CI 1.62-2.08, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged EDLOS delayed pharmacological VTEp in a nation-wide cohort of trauma patients. Absent VTEp, consequently, increased risk of in-hospital VTE, although future study is needed to validate these findings. Timely transfer of stable trauma patients to the floor may improve outcomes by facilitating appropriately timed VTEp administration and decreasing ED overcrowding.

A comparison of adult and pediatric guidelines for the management of blunt splenic trauma

The management of blunt splenic trauma varies between children and adults, with disparate rates of splenectomy and angioembolization. This practice variation can be explained by some of the most recently published guidelines by the American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) and the Western Trauma Association (WTA). This narrative review compares these guidelines, and the evidence behind them. A comparison of the guidelines published in 2023 by WTA and APSA was undertaken, supplemented by recommendations in the 2016 WTA & 2015 ATOMAC guidelines. The publications that underpinned the guidelines were also examined. The recommendations from each guideline were summarized and similarities & differences noted, focusing on initial evaluation and resuscitation, the role of imaging, management strategies, hospitalization and follow up. While both guidelines highlight standardized initial resuscitation, subsequent management of both stable and unstable patients is different: guided by CT findings and hemodynamic status in adults and hemodynamic status alone in children. In stable adults, the grade of injury dictates the use of angioembolization, a therapeutic intervention rarely used in children. Differences with regards to ICU admission, follow up investigations and the use of thromoprophylaxis, also underscore the different management strategies in each cohort. It is hoped that this comparison lays the foundation for further exploration of how a unified guideline may be developed, acknowledging the need for nuanced care and resource optimization.

Optimal Timing for Initiation of Thromboprophylaxis After Hepatic Angioembolization

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the optimal timing of thromboprophylaxis (TPX) initiation after hepatic angioembolization in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND

TPX after hepatic trauma is complicated by the risk of bleeding, but the relative risk after hepatic angioembolization is unknown.

METHODS

Patients who underwent hepatic angioembolization within 24 hours were retrospectively identified from the 2017 to 2019 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Project data sets. Cases with <24-hour length of stay and other serious injuries were excluded. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) included deep venous thrombosis and PE. Bleeding complications included hepatic surgery, additional angioembolization, or blood transfusion after TPX initiation. Differences were tested with univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Of 1550 patients, 1370 had initial angioembolization. Bleeding complications were higher in those with TPX initiation within 24 hours (20.0% vs 8.9%, P <0.001) and 48 hours (13.2% vs 8.4%, P =0.013). However, VTE was higher in those with TPX initiation after 48 hours (6.3% vs 3.3%, P =0.025). In the 180 patients with hepatic surgery before angioembolization, bleeding complications were higher in those with TPX initiation within 24 hours (72% vs 20%, P <0.001), 48 hours (50% vs 17%, P <0.001), and 72 hours (37% vs 14%, P =0.001). Moreover, deep venous thrombosis was higher in those with TPX initiation after 96 hours (14.3% vs 3.1%, P =0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to address the timing of TPX after hepatic angioembolization in a national sample of trauma patients. For these patients, initiation of TPX at 48 to 72 hours achieves the safest balance in minimizing bleeding while reducing the risk of VTE.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-retrospective cohort study.

When is it safe to start thromboprophylaxis after splenic angioembolization?

BACKGROUND

Thromboprophylaxis after blunt splenic trauma is complicated by the risk of bleeding, but the risk after angioembolization is unknown. We hypothesized that earlier thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with increased bleeding complications without mitigating venous thromboembolism events.

METHODS

All blunt trauma patients who underwent splenic angioembolization within 24 hours of arrival were identified from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program datasets from 2017 to 2019. Cases with <24-hour length of stay, other serious injuries, and surgery before angioembolization were excluded. Venous thromboembolism was defined as deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Bleeding complications were defined as splenic surgery, additional embolization, or blood transfusion after thromboprophylaxis initiation. Data were compared with χ2 analysis and multivariate logistic regression at P < .05.

RESULTS

In 1,102 patients, 84% had American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade III to V splenic injuries, and 73% received thromboprophylaxis. Splenic surgery after angioembolization was more common in those with thromboprophylaxis initiation within the first 24 hours (5.7% vs 1.7%, P = .007), whereas those with the initiation of thromboprophylaxis after 72 hours were more likely to have a pulmonary embolism (2.3% vs 0.2%, P = .001). Overall, venous thromboembolism increased considerably when thromboprophylaxis was initiated after day 3. In multivariate analysis, time to thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with bleeding (odds ratio 0.74 [95% confidence interval 0.58-0.94]) and venous thromboembolism complications (odds ratio 1.5 [95% confidence interval 1.20-1.81]).

CONCLUSION

This national study evaluates bleeding and thromboembolic risk to elucidate the specific timing of thromboprophylaxis after splenic angioembolization. Initiation of thromboprophylaxis between 24 and 72 hours achieves the safest balance in minimizing bleeding and venous thromboembolism risk, with 48 hours particularly serving as the ideal time for protocolized administration.

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.

Thromboprophylaxis Timing After Blunt Solid Organ Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Trauma patients with blunt abdominal solid organ injuries are at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE), but the optimal time to safely administer chemical thromboprophylaxis is controversial, especially for patients who are managed nonoperatively due to increased risk of hemorrhage. We sought to compare failure of nonoperative management (NOM) and VTE events based on timing of chemical thromboprophylaxis initiation.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in PubMed and Embase databases. Studies were included if they evaluated timing of initiation of chemical thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients who underwent NOM of blunt solid organ injuries. Outcomes included failure of NOM and incidence of VTE. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed comparing patients who received late (>48 h) versus early thromboprophylaxis initiation.

RESULTS

Twelve retrospective cohort studies, comprising 21,909 patients, were included. Three studies, including 6375 patients, provided data on adjusted outcomes. Pooled adjusted analysis demonstrated no difference in failure of NOM in patients receiving late versus early thromboprophylaxis (odds ratio [OR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.4-2.14). When including all unadjusted studies, even those at high risk of bias, there remained no difference in failure of NOM (OR 1.16, 95% CI:0.72-1.86). In the adjusted analysis for VTE events, which had 6259 patients between two studies, patients receiving late chemical thromboprophylaxis had a higher risk of VTE compared with those who received early thromboprophylaxis (OR 1.89, 95% CI:1.15-3.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current observational evidence, initiation of prophylaxis before 48 h is associated with lower VTE rates without higher risk of failure of NOM.

Follow-up strategies for patients with splenic trauma managed non-operatively: the 2022 World Society of Emergency Surgery consensus document

Background

In 2017, the World Society of Emergency Surgery published its guidelines for the management of adult and pediatric patients with splenic trauma. Several issues regarding the follow-up of patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM remained unsolved.

Methods

Using a modified Delphi method, we sought to explore ongoing areas of controversy in the NOM of splenic trauma and reach a consensus among a group of 48 international experts from five continents (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, America) concerning optimal follow-up strategies in patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM.

Results

Consensus was reached on eleven clinical research questions and 28 recommendations with an agreement rate ≥ 80%. Mobilization after 24 h in low-grade splenic trauma patients (WSES Class I, AAST Grades I–II) was suggested, while in patients with high-grade splenic injuries (WSES Classes II–III, AAST Grades III–V), if no other contraindications to early mobilization exist, safe mobilization of the patient when three successive hemoglobins 8 h apart after the first are within 10% of each other was considered safe according to the panel. The panel suggests adult patients to be admitted to hospital for 1 day (for low-grade splenic injuries—WSES Class I, AAST Grades I–II) to 3 days (for high-grade splenic injuries—WSES Classes II–III, AAST Grades III–V), with those with high-grade injuries requiring admission to a monitored setting. In the absence of specific complications, the panel suggests DVT and VTE prophylaxis with LMWH to be started within 48–72 h from hospital admission. The panel suggests splenic artery embolization (SAE) as the first-line intervention in patients with hemodynamic stability and arterial blush on CT scan, irrespective of injury grade. Regarding patients with WSES Class II blunt splenic injuries (AAST Grade III) without contrast extravasation, a low threshold for SAE has been suggested in the presence of risk factors for NOM failure. The panel also suggested angiography and eventual SAE in all hemodynamically stable adult patients with WSES Class III injuries (AAST Grades IV–V), even in the absence of CT blush, especially when concomitant surgery that requires change of position is needed. Follow-up imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound/CT scan in 48–72 h post-admission of trauma in splenic injuries WSES Class II (AAST Grade III) or higher treated with NOM was considered the best strategy for timely detection of vascular complications.

Conclusion

This consensus document could help guide future prospective studies aiming at validating the suggested strategies through the implementation of prospective trauma databases and the subsequent production of internationally endorsed guidelines on the issue.

Timing of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis initiation for trauma patients with nonoperatively managed blunt abdominal solid organ injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Blunt abdominal solid organ injury is common and is often managed nonoperatively. Clinicians must balance risk of both hemorrhage and thrombosis. The optimal timing of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (VTEp) initiation in this population is unclear. The objective was to evaluate early (< 48 h) compared to late initiation of VTEp in adult trauma patients with blunt abdominal solid organ injury managed nonoperatively.

Methods

Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to March 2021. Studies comparing timeframes of VTEp initiation were considered. The primary outcome was failure of nonoperative management (NOM) after VTEp initiation. Secondary outcomes included risk of transfusion, other bleeding complications, risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism, and mortality.

Results

Ten cohort studies met inclusion criteria, with a total of 4642 patients. Meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in the risk of failure of NOM among patients receiving early VTEp (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.01–3.05, p = 0.05). There was no significant difference in risk of transfusion. Odds of DVT were significantly lower in the early group (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22–0.59, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in mortality (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.82–2.75, p = 0.19). All studies were at serious risk of bias due to confounding.

Conclusions

Initiation of VTEp earlier than 48 h following hospitalization is associated with an increased risk of failure of NOM but a decreased risk of DVT. Absolute failure rates of NOM are low. Initiation of VTEp at 48 h may balance the risks of bleeding and VTE.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-022-00423-1.

Efficacy and Safety of Low Molecular Weight Heparin Versus Unfractionated Heparin for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Trauma patients are at high risk of VTE. We summarize the efficacy and safety of LMWH versus UFH for the prevention of VTE in trauma patients.

METHODS

We searched 6 databases from inception through March 12, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies comparing LMWH versus UFH for thromboprophylaxis in adult trauma patients. We pooled effect estimates across RCTs and observational studies separately, using random-effects model and inverse variance weighting. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool for RCTs and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies (ROBINS)-I tool for observational studies and assessed certainty of findings using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology.

RESULTS

We included 4 RCTs (879 patients) and 8 observational studies (306,747 patients). Based on pooled RCT data, compared to UFH, LMWH reduces deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.88, moderate certainty) and VTE (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.90, moderate certainty). As compared to UFH, LMWH may reduce pulmonary embolism [adjusted odds ratio from pooled observational studies 0.56 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.62)] and mortality (adjusted odds ratio from pooled observational studies 0.54, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.65), though based on low certainty evidence. There was an uncertain effect on adverse events (RR from pooled RCTs 0.80, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.33, very low certainty) and heparin induced thrombocytopenia [RR from pooled RCTs 0.26 (95% CI 0.03 to 2.38, very low certainty)].

CONCLUSIONS

Among adult trauma patients, LMWH is superior to UFH for deep vein thrombosis and VTE prevention and may additionally reduce pulmonary embolism and mortality. The impact on adverse events and heparin induced thrombocytopenia is uncertain.