Dataset Information

Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in adult patients undergoing neurosurgical interventions for preventing venous thromboembolism.

ABSTRACT: The impact of pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing neurosurgical intervention remains uncertain. We reviewed the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic compared with nonpharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in neurosurgical patients. Three databases were searched through April 2018, including those for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and for nonrandomized controlled studies (NRSs). Independent reviewers assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Seven RCTs and 3 NRSs proved eligible. No studies reported on symptomatic proximal and distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Two RCTs reported on screening-detected proximal and distal DVTs. We used the findings of these 2 RCTs as the closest surrogate outcomes to inform the proximal and distal DVT outcomes. These 2 RCTs suggest that pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis may decrease the risk of developing asymptomatic proximal DVT (relative risk [RR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.84; low certainty). Findings were uncertain for mortality (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.57-2.86; low certainty), symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.03-27.42; very low certainty), asymptomatic distal DVT (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.27-1.08; very low certainty), and reoperation (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.06-2.84; very low certainty) outcomes. NRSs also reported uncertain findings for whether pharmacologic prophylaxis affects mortality (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.13; low certainty) and PE (RR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.01-3.76). For risk of bleeding, findings were uncertain in both RCTs (RR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.70-3.50; low certainty) and NRSs (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.30-7.12; very low certainty). In patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures, low certainty of evidence suggests that pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis confers benefit for preventing asymptomatic (screening-detected) proximal DVT with very low certainty regarding its impact on patient-important outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Yepes-Nunez JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7322965 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in adult patients undergoing neurosurgical interventions for preventing venous thromboembolism.

Yepes-Nuñez Juan José JJ Rajasekhar Anita A Rahman Maryam M Dahm Philipp P Anderson David R DR Colunga-Lozano Luis Enrique LE Ross Stephanie S Bhatt Meha M Orozco Kelly Estrada KE Popoff Federico F Ventresca Matthew M Barbara Angela M AM Balduzzi Sara S Begum Housne H Agarwal Arnav A Wiercioch Wojtek W Nieuwlaat Robby R Morgano Gian Paolo GP Schünemann Holger J HJ

Blood advances 20200601 12

The impact of pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing neurosurgical intervention remains uncertain. We reviewed the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic compared with nonpharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in neurosurgical patients. Three databases were searched through April 2018, including those for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and for nonrandomized controlled studies (NRSs). Independent reviewers assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of R ...[more]

PMID: 32574367

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:The efficacy of factor XIa inhibition for thromboprophylaxis is unknown. Osocimab is a long-acting, fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits factor XIa. Objective:To compare different doses of osocimab with enoxaparin and apixaban for thromboprophylaxis in patients who have undergone knee arthroplasty. Design, Setting, and Participants:Randomized, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, phase 2 noninferiority trial with observer blinding for osocimab doses, conducted at 54 hospitals in 13 countries. Adult patients undergoing unilateral knee arthroplasty were randomized from October 2017 through August 2018 and followed up until January 2019. Interventions:Single intravenous osocimab postoperative doses of 0.3 mg/kg (n = 107), 0.6 mg/kg (n = 65), 1.2 mg/kg (n = 108), or 1.8 mg/kg (n = 106); preoperative doses of 0.3 mg/kg (n = 109) or 1.8 mg/kg (n = 108); or 40 mg of subcutaneous enoxaparin once daily (n = 105) or 2.5 mg of oral apixaban twice daily (n = 105) for at least 10 days or until venography. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was venous thromboembolism incidence between 10 and 13 days postoperatively (assessed by mandatory bilateral venography performed 10 to 13 days after surgery or confirmed symptomatic deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism). A 5% noninferiority margin compared with enoxaparin was chosen. The primary safety outcome of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was assessed until 10 to 13 days postoperatively. Results:Of 813 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 66.5 years [8.2 years]; body mass index, 32.7 [5.7]; and 74.2% women), 600 were included in the per-protocol population used for the primary analysis. The primary outcome occurred in 18 patients (23.7%) receiving 0.3 mg/kg, 8 (15.7%) receiving 0.6 mg/kg, 13 (16.5%) receiving 1.2 mg/kg, and 14 (17.9%) receiving 1.8 mg/kg of osocimab postoperatively; 23 (29.9%) receiving 0.3 mg/kg and 9 (11.3%) receiving 1.8 mg/kg of osocimab preoperatively; 20 (26.3%) receiving enoxaparin; and 12 (14.5%) receiving apixaban. Osocimab given postoperatively met criteria for noninferiority compared with enoxaparin with risk differences (1-sided 95% CIs) of 10.6% (95% CI, -1.2% to ∞) at the 0.6-mg/kg dose; 9.9% (95% CI, -0.9% to ∞) at the 1.2-mg/kg dose, and 8.4% (95% CI, -2.6 to ∞) at the 1.8-mg/kg dose. The preoperative dose of 1.8 mg/kg of osocimab met criteria for superiority compared with enoxaparin with a risk difference of 15.1%; 2-sided 90% CI, 4.9% to 25.2%). Postoperative and preoperative doses of 0.3 mg/kg of osocimab did not meet the prespecified criteria for noninferiority, with risk differences (1-sided 95% CIs) of 2.6% (95% CI, -8.9% to ∞) and -3.6% (95% CI, -15.5% to ∞), respectively. Major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was observed in up to 4.7% of those receiving osocimab, 5.9% receiving enoxaparin, and 2% receiving apixaban. Conclusions and Relevance:Among patients undergoing knee arthroplasty, postoperative osocimab 0.6 mg/kg, 1.2 mg/kg, and 1.8 mg/kg met criteria for noninferiority compared with enoxaparin, and the preoperative 1.8-mg/kg dose of osocimab met criteria for superiority compared with enoxaparin for the primary outcome of incidence of venous thromboembolism at 10 to 13 days postoperatively. Further studies are needed to establish efficacy and safety of osocimab relative to standard thromboprophylaxis. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03276143.

Project description:IntroductionVenous thromboembolism remains a significant complication following major gynecologic surgery. Evidence is lacking on whether it is beneficial to give pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis pre-operatively. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the role of pre-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in preventing post-operative venous thromboembolism.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials were searched to find randomized controlled, cohort, and case-control trials comparing pre-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis to no prophylaxis, mechanical prophylaxis, or only post-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis for open and minimally invasive major gynecologic surgery (benign and malignant conditions). Two authors independently assessed abstracts, full-text articles, and methodological quality. Data were extracted and pooled using ORs for random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was explored using forest plots, Q-statistic, and I2 statistics. Planned subgroup analysis of use of sequential compression devices, equivalent versus non-equivalent post-operative prophylaxis, cancer diagnosis, and methodological quality were performed.ResultsSome 503 unique studies were found, and 16 studies (28 806 patients) were included in the systematic review. Twelve studies (14 273 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The OR for incidence of post-operative venous thromboembolism was 0.59 (95% CI 0.39, 0.89), favoring pre-operative pharmacologic thromboembolism prophylaxis compared with no pre-operative pharmacologic prophylaxis (Q=13.80, I2=20.30). In studies where post-operative care was equivalent between groups, the OR for venous thromboembolism was 0.56 (95% CI 0.22, 1.40). Pre-operative pharmacologic prophylaxis demonstrated greatest benefit when utilized with both intra-operative and post-operative sequential compression devices (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.64) compared with when no sequential compression devices were utilized (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.63, 2.56). When looking at only studies determined to be of high quality, the results no longer reached significance (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.36, 1.46).ConclusionsPre-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis decreases the odds of venous thromboembolism in the peri-operative period for major gynecologic oncology surgery by approximately 40%. It remains unclear whether this benefit is present in benign and minor procedures. Adequately powered studies are needed.

Dataset Information

Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in adult patients undergoing neurosurgical interventions for preventing venous thromboembolism.

Publications

Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in adult patients undergoing neurosurgical interventions for preventing venous thromboembolism.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets